Frequently Asked Questions on the Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP) Program

Do registrations need to be complete before the concept paper email submission?

As stated in the FOA, the Registration requirements include several one-time actions that must be completed before submitting an application in response to the Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA).  It is vital that applicants address these items as soon as possible.  You do not however need to complete all of these actions prior to submitting a concept paper.  Consistent with Section III.C.i of the FOA Document, please ensure the concept paper is emailed to FOA2740@netl.doe.gov by the deadline stated in the FOA. 

The FOA p. 46 says to email the concept paper to FOA2740@netl.doe.gov but p. 48 reads as if it is to be submitted through Grants.gov (says to plan for an hour for submission of both the concept paper and full application). So, do we email the concept paper or submit via Grants.gov?

Consistent with Section III.C.i of the FOA Document, please ensure the concept paper package is emailed to FOA2740@netl.doe.gov by the deadline stated in the FOA. 

Will there be any extension or grace period for submitting concept papers?

No.

Where can I locate the teaming partner list for this FOA?

Updates to the Teaming Partner List will be available in the FedConnect (https://www.fedconnect.net/) website and on the Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP) Program web page: Grid Resilience Innovation Partnership Programs. The Teaming Partner List will be regularly updated to reflect new teaming partners who provide their organization’s information.  Applicants must register with FedConnect to have access to the Teaming Partner List (and any updates to it) in FedConnect.

How do applicants perform SAM registration?

Each applicant (unless the applicant is an individual or federal awarding agency that is excepted from those requirements under 2 CFR 25.110(b) or (c), or has an exception approved by the federal awarding agency under 2 CFR 25.110(d)) is required to: (1) Be registered in the SAM at https://www.sam.gov before submitting its application; (2) provide a valid UEI number in its application; and (3) continue to maintain an active SAM registration with current information at all times during which it has an active federal award or an application or plan under consideration by a federal awarding agency. Designating an Electronic Business Point of Contact (EBiz POC) and obtaining a special password called a Marketing Partner ID Number (MPIN) are important steps in SAM registration. DOE may not make a federal award to an applicant until the applicant has complied with all applicable UEI 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 will 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. Consistent with the Registration Requirements discussion in the FOA document, due to the high demand of SAM registrations and UEI requests, entity legal business name and address validations are taking longer than expected to process. Entities should start the SAM and UEI registration process as soon as possible. If entities have technical difficulties with the SAM registration or UEI validation process they should utilize the HELP feature on SAM.gov. SAM.gov will work entity service tickets in the order in which they are received and asks that entities not create multiple service tickets for the same request or technical issue. Additional entity validation resources can be found here: GSAFSD Tier 0 Knowledge Base - Validating your Entity. Please update your SAM registration annually.

Can anyone from the lead organization submit the concept paper when ready or DOE recommends that either the PI or the Business Point of Contact does the submission? In my experience it has always been the later but wondering if there is any issue if let’s say a Project manager makes the submission on behalf of the team.

Consistent with the Registration Requirements discussion in the FOA document, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR), designated by the EBiz POC, must submit the application with their signature. The key criteria for determining whether an individual can take on the AOR role is whether that individual can make legally binding commitments on behalf of the organization in that role.

Do I need to submit a Concept Paper in order to apply to this FOA? If so, how?

A Concept Paper must be submitted by the deadline before submitting a Full Application to this Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA). To submit a Concept Paper compliant with Section III.C.i of the FOA document, please ensure the Concept Paper is emailed to FOA2740@netl.doe.gov by the deadline stated in the FOA for the relevant Topic Area.

Note: Registration to SAM.gov and Grants.gov is not required to submit a Concept Paper. However, [It is still vital that] Applicants must address the required registrations as soon as possible as failure to complete registration could interfere with an applicant’s ability to submit a future application to this FOA.

Once registered in SAM.gov, how do we request the EBiz POC, and how is the MPIN received?

Applicants must register with SAM at https://www.sam.gov/ prior to submitting an application in response to this FOA. Designating an Electronic Business Point of Contact (EBiz POC) and obtaining a special password called an MPIN are important steps in SAM registration. An MPIN is a personal code you create on the Business Information page of your entity registration. If you do not know your MPIN, please contact your Entity Administrator. If you are the Entity Administrator and do not remember your company’s MPIN, you may need to reset it. Failure to register correctly with SAM will prevent your organization from applying through Grants.gov. The applicant must maintain an active SAM registration with current information at all times during which it has an active Federal award or application under consideration.

What registrations are necessary to apply?

Registration requirements include several one-time actions that must be completed before submitting an application in response to the Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) (e.g., register with the System for Award Management (SAM), obtain a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) number, register with Grants.gov, and register with FedConnect.net to submit questions). However, you do not need to complete these actions prior to submitting a Concept Paper. To submit a Concept Paper compliant with Section III.C.i of the FOA document, please ensure the Concept Paper is emailed to FOA2740@netl.doe.gov by the deadline stated in the FOA for the relevant Topic Area. It is still vital that applicants address the required registrations as soon as possible as some may take several weeks and failure to complete registrations could interfere with an applicant’s ability to apply to this FOA. 

We had issues registering on SAM.gov. How will this affect our ability to apply?

Applicants must register with SAM at https://www.sam.gov/ prior to submitting an application in response to this FOA. However, registration is not necessary to submit a Concept Paper. To submit a Concept Paper compliant with Section III.C.i of the FOA document, please ensure the Concept Paper is emailed to FOA2740@netl.doe.gov by the deadline stated in the FOA for the relevant Topic Area. IMPORTANT! It is vital that applicants address the required registrations (SAM.gov, Grants.gov) as soon as possible as high demand for SAM registrations and UEI requests are taking longer than expected to process and failure to complete could interfere with an applicant’s ability to apply to this FOA. If entities have technical difficulties with the SAM registration or UEI validation process they should utilize the HELP feature on SAM.gov. SAM.gov will address entity service tickets in the order in which they are received and asks that entities do not create multiple service tickets for the same request or technical issue.

Can we find the Teaming Partner List on FedConnect?

DOE is compiling a “Teaming Partner List” to facilitate the formation of new project teams for this FOA. To find it, go to www.FedConnect.net and select "Search Public Opportunities Only". Under “Search Criteria” choose “Reference Number” and then enter “DE-FOA-0002740” in full to find the list of proper GRIP documents. You will find the Teaming Partner List link on the right-hand side under: "Documentation>DE-FOA-0002740>Amendment 1> DOE FOA 2740 Teaming Partner List" (Note: you must enter the full reference number as it appears above). The Teaming Partner List will be regularly updated to reflect new teaming partners who provide their organization’s information.

Is it permissible for a team to switch the Prime to one of the identified Subrecipients from the Concept Paper phase to the Full Submission phase? The team understands either Prime would need to be an eligible Applicant under the Topic Area.

Yes. DOE makes an independent assessment of each Concept Paper based on the criteria in Section V of the FOA document. DOE will encourage a subset of applicants to submit Full Applications. Other applicants will be discouraged from submitting a Full Application. DOE will provide a unique tracking number with each notification of results. Applicants who are encouraged to submit a Full Application are required to include that tracking number with their submission.

I was wondering if we can add/change partners between now and the Full Proposal? Are we bound to the teams we mention in our concept paper?

Applicants can add or change project partners between now and submission of the Full Application.

On page 52 of the latest FOA under section IV.D.iii, the 2nd and 3rd paragraph reads:  

“Note that the Project/Performance Site Congressional District is entered in the format of the 2-digit state code followed by a dash and a 3-digit Congressional district code, for example VA-001. Hover over this field for additional instructions 

Use the Next Site button to expand the form to add additional Project/Performance Site Locations.” 

As you can see they mention using a “next site button” as well as reviewing districts for additional information but fail to mention a specific platform or system for reference. Is it possible there’s a missing link or they are speaking to a mapping tool available on grants.gov through the workspace site for the respective funding opportunity?

Please refer to the instructions for the form stipulated in the Grants.gov portal, under the SF 424 Family of forms.

If an Electric Distribution Company is applying for a grant and is a subsidiary of a parent company that already has an existing SAM.GOV account and UEI number, does that subsidiary need to apply for a separate registration in SAM.GOV and get a unique UEI number?  Both the subsidiary and the parent company will be applying for separate grants.  Alternatively, can the subsidiary get a unique UEI number using the parent company’s existing registration in SAM.GOV.

Each applicant needs to have a SAM.gov account. If an entity is a subsidiary using a parent Identifier, the application will be submitted in the name of that Parent as the applicant, since the UEI is connected to the applicant entity.

Are you able to clarify why concept papers are encouraged to be submitted at least 48 hours in advance of the submission deadline when these are emailed submissions? Are you anticipating email traffic to impact the timing of receipt or acknowledgement of receipt? How does DOE plan on acknowledging receipt of the concept paper at a date/time to reflect compliance with the submission deadline?

Applicants are strongly encouraged to submit their Concept Papers and Full Applications at least 48 hours in advance of the submission deadline, to allow for any technological trouble. Under normal conditions (i.e., at least 48 hours in advance of the submission deadline), applicants should allow at least 1 hour to submit a Concept Paper and Full Application. DOE acknowledges receipt of Concept Papers via email to the submission point of contact.

The DOE Grid resiliency webinar on February 8 mentioned 2 trainings coming up on Feb 27 and 28.  The trainings are to discuss Community Benefit Planning and Cyber Security Planning that are both required parts of the application. They did not indicate how to sign up and instructed us to ask questions here. Can you provide instructions on how to sign up for this webinar?

GDO will send an invitation with registration link by email to all entities that have submitted a concept paper.  The emails will be sent to the Business Point of Contact identified on the Cover Page of the Concept Paper.  Information will also be provided at https://www.energy.gov/gdo/grid-resilience-innovation-partnership-programs.

Is there any guidance on how to complete the Project/Performance Site Location(s) form if the proposed project under Topic Area 2 will include thousands of behind the meter customer sites?

As outlined in FOA Section, IV.D.xx (Locations of Work), the applicant must complete the supplied template by listing the city, state, and zip code + 4 for each location where project work will be performed by the prime recipient or subrecipient(s).

As outlined in FOA Section, IV.D.iv (Project/Performance Site Location(s)), on the form indicate the primary site where the work will be performed. If a portion of the project will be performed at any other site(s), identify the site location(s) in the blocks provided.  This form captures the full addresses for the organizations conducting the project work (prime entity and other project team members); including street, city, state, county, zip code, country as well as other information.

The FOA states that “Applicants must submit a Concept Paper to be eligible to submit a Full Application.” Can an applicant amend the legal entity listed as “prime applicant” on the concept paper on the full application as long as the underlying concept and proposed project(s) remain the same? This change of prime applicant would be made in order to meet the FOA requirements and for legal and accounting purposes. How should this change be noted on the full application? (The original applicant would remain on the application as part of the “Teaming Arrangements” as described in the FOA).

Yes, however the control number assigned to the Concept paper needs to be stipulated in the full application, and only 1 concept paper can be used to support the application.

If a Concept Paper was submitted by one entity, can a different entity submit the Full Application for that Concept Paper as the Prime Applicant?

When DOE provides an encouragement letter in response to a concept paper, it provides the applicant a tracking number.  If the applicant chooses to have a different entity submit the full application, the applicant shall provide the tracking number to that entity in order for second entity to submit the full application. For each tracking number, only one entity may submit an application.

If an entity applies and the application is not selected, can the entity submit the same, but improved, application under the same topic area in subsequent years?

The FOA does not prohibit the submission of a previously submitted application that has been modified in subsequent application cycles.

In preparing a Topic Area 1 Application Workspace on Grants.gov for DE-FOA-0002740, the Application Closing Date is displaying as March 17, 2023. Please confirm, will Grants.gov Workspace "Closing Date" be automatically adjusted according to each Topic Area's submission deadline (specifically for Topic Area 1)?

For reference, the FundOpp_DE-FOA-0002740_Amd_000005 Submission Deadlines for Full Applications are as follows: 

Topic Area 1: April 6, 2023

Topic Area 2: March 17, 2023

Topic Area 3: May 19, 2023

Yes, an extension of the FOA will be released to allow subsequent close dates, as stipulated in the FOA, once the earlier topic area closes.

My read of the Grants.gov Online Help is that we can update / edit our applications after submission as long as the deadline has not passed. It sounds like the submission then becomes a "Related Submission" and we would answer, "yes, this is a changed/corrected application."  Would you mind confirming this?

Applications can be updated. However, any updates to applications need to occur prior to the deadline established in the FOA for the specific Topic Area.

If a Concept Paper was encouraged for full application submission, is that encouragement valid for this funding cycle only or does the encouragement apply to the next round of funding (Q1 2024)? In other words, if we choose not to apply before the April deadline, would we have to submit another concept paper (for the same project and same topic area) before we could apply in Q1 2024?

Yes.

Our original prime applicant (for overall project management) cannot participate for some reason. Can we switch Prime to either 1. one entity that was not included in the team members listed in Concept Paper, or 2. one entity that was included in the team members? The new Prime is an eligible entity listed in Topic Area #2 requirements.

When DOE provides an encouragement letter in response to a concept paper, it provides the applicant a tracking number. If the applicant chooses to have a different entity submit the full application, the applicant shall provide the tracking number to that entity in order for the second entity to submit the full application. For each tracking number, only one entity may submit an application.

Can you please explain how to add multiple sights to this document.  The FOA says the following (see below) but the form we have titled "PerformanceSite_4_0-V4.0" does not have a 'Next Site' button as stated in the FOA.

iii. Project/Performance Site Location(s)

Indicate the primary site where the work will be performed. If a portion of the project will be performed at any other site(s), identify the site location(s) in the blocks provided.

Note that the Project/Performance Site Congressional District is entered in the format of the 2-digit state code followed by a dash and a 3-digit Congressional district code, for example VA-001. Hover over this field for additional instructions.

Use the Next Site button to expand the form to add additional Project/Performance Site Locations.

If the ‘Next Site’ button is not available, then the best course of action is to option would be to “create another form.”

Can forms such as SF-424, Project/Performance Site Location(s) and Lobbying forms be uploaded and submitted as PDF attachments to the workspace, or must they be completed in the grants.gov forms already embedded in the workspace system?

Please follow the instructions in the FOA as it relates to naming of documents and the submission of those files in Grants.gov. Usage of the Grants.gov forms can be used to create workspace, with the exception of the SF 424 Budget Documents which were included in Amendment 000001 and should be added as an attachment along with the mandatory Grants.gov document.

If my organization is submitting an application that requires construction do we still need to fill out the 'Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs' (SF-424A). It details the form status as In Progress and says requirement, but I do not recall seeing anything in the FOA that details that specific form.

Please submit both the Grants.gov 'Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs (SF-424A)' and the Budget forms stipulated in Amendment 000001 for budget forms to be included with the application.

The webform in Grants.gov (not the excel file .xls) for the budget form SF424-A is listed as mandatory, but only has space for four budget periods. There is currently no way to add additional budget periods for TA3 that can go for up to 8 periods. Please advise if the webform will be updated or unchecked as mandatory?

Please submit both the Grants.gov 'Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs (SF-424A)' and the Budget forms stipulated in Amendment 000001 for budget forms to be included with the application.

Additionally, Grants.gov only allows a max 10 excel files to be uploaded, but we have 10+ subrecipients, is it allowable to upload any excess as PDFs?

This requirement derives from Grants.gov. No more than 10 excel files can be uploaded, but other forms of submission are acceptable.

We have concerns about the current Grants.gov structure and its potential impact on fulfilling the GRIP Topic 3 application requirements. The current limit is for 99 attachments and some files are limited to 10MB file size.  Please advise the following:

• Will there will be any exceptions or relief of the current attachment limitations in Grants.gov?
• Could applicants be allowed to either increase the number of attachments that can be added to the Grants.gov application, or could the maximum file size be increased (for those applications)?

We have many, many partners in this grant proposal, which means a large number of forms to be uploaded and a large amount of data to aggregate and relay. We foresee that the current configuration of attachments number and file size may be an obstacle to a successful and complete submission. Thank you for advising if changes can be made to grants.gov configuration, or, alternatively, how we should handle submission of additional information if we run into the max limit on either number of files or file size allowed.

Grants.gov file limitations cannot be adjusted by a grantor organization. Please contact Grants.gov as it relates to file limitations. In the event that you’re unable to submit all the needed files, maintain the files and DOE may consider submission by an alternate method after application receipt. DOE will only accept documents that were created/modified in advance of the 05/19/2023 5:00pm ET deadline for submission of Full Applications for Topic Area 3 of FOA 2740.

Within the FOA and Sam.gov, I do not see any mention of "10 CFR Part 600 Subpart D Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements with For-Profit Organizations" being mandatory. For Topic 3 applications, is it required to adhere to this?

Please refer to 2 CFR Part 200.

We understand subrecipients should submit LOCs plus budgets and other docs. Should vendors submit budget justifications if over $250K, given that they're not subrecipients?

Submit letters of commitment from all subrecipient and third-party cost share providers. If applicable, also include any letters of commitment from suppliers/partners/end users/future customers/labor unions/community-based organizations (one-page maximum per letter). See Section IV.D.ix. of the FOA document for additional information regarding budget justification submissions.

How should you complete the SF-LLL form if you have done no lobbying related to the infrastructure act, but have a lobbyist for your city?

Per Section IV.D.xiv. of the FOA Document, prime recipients and subrecipients are required to complete and submit SF-LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities” to ensure that non-federal funds have not been paid and will not be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence any of the following in connection with the application: 

• An officer or employee of any federal agency; 
• A Member of Congress.

In the FOA, both primes and subrecipients are being both stated as being responsible for completing a SF-LLL form. However the SF-LLL form on the grants.gov webpage for GRIP is already partially filled out for the prime with the prime box being marked. Should subrecipients mark the subawardee box in conjunction with the prime box?

The forms in the application package of grants.gov are editable PDF files, allowing the prime box to be able to be unmarked for subrecipient use.

If a Concept Paper was submitted by one entity, can a different entity submit the Full Application for that Concept Paper as the Prime Applicant?

Yes. When DOE provides an encouragement letter in response to a concept paper, it provides the applicant a tracking number.  If the applicant chooses to have a different entity submit the full application, the applicant shall provide the tracking number to that entity in order for second entity to submit the full application. For each tracking number, only one entity may submit an application.

1) Section D.iii on p.53 of the FOA "Project/Performance Site Locations" and the Locations of Work spreadsheet in Section D.xx on p.69 seem duplicative (except the former also requires congressional districts to be entered directly into the blocks online). Would DOE please clarify/confirm that both are required?

2) The nature of our projects is such that there are hundreds of locations - seems administratively burdensome to enter one at a time into the blocks of the grants.gov portal, which is why we are asking question #1 above (to make sure we are not misunderstanding). 

Both forms are required to be submitted however if there are limitations as to the number of files entered there may be limitations. The Locations of Work spreadsheet can include all entities in one document, however separate entries may be required for the Project/Performance site locations, and would be subject to portal limitations associated with the application submission.

Please clarify if both the Location of Work Spreadsheet and PerformanceSite_4_0-V4.0 need to be submitted with the full application.

Yes, both forms are required to be submitted. However, if there are limitations as to the number of files entered there may be limitations.  The Locations of Work spreadsheet can include all entities in one document, however separate entries may be required for the project/performance site locations, and would be subject to portal limitations associated with the application submission.

Please clarify if form SF424A-V1.0 needs to be submitted with the full application as it is not listed in list of forms in the RFP. If yes, would subs recipients need to submit this form as well?

Refer to Section IV.D.ii of the FOA for information relative to the SF424 required forms for submission.  

Subrecipient Budget Justification documents are required for each subrecipient that is expected to perform work estimated to be more than $250,000 or 25% of total work effort (whichever is less) See Section IV.D.xii. of the FOA document for further information on subrecipient budget justification.

The Budget Tab in the Workspace application on Grants.gov only allows for 4 Budget Periods and we are proposing a 60-month program (5 years) with 5 Budget periods. How should we enter our costing when we cannot alter the Workspace.

We have listed 5 budget periods in the DOE provided Budget Justification Workbook and SF-424A, but we don't know what to do in the application.

Amendment 000001 issued included the budget justification documentation which addressed and included project with a 5 year term. You may consider using additional budget forms provided as needed to address the complete project period, while ensuring usage of all mandatory forms in the Grants.gov application package.

My read of the Grants.gov Online Help is that we can update / edit our applications after submission as long as the deadline has not passed. It sounds like the submission then becomes a "Related Submission" and we would answer, "yes, this is a changed/corrected application."  Would you mind confirming this?

Applications can be updated, however, any updates to applications need to occur prior to the deadline established in the FOA for the specific Topic Area.

The FOA contains requirements for listing a one project manager, including on the summary slide and summary/abstract for public release. If a prime recipient is designating a subrecipient to complete most of the project implementation activities, can the project manager be a representative of the subrecipient or does a prime applicant project manager need to be listed on the summary documents?  Can more than one project manager be listed on those documents?

The recipient should identify the lead Project Manager (PM).  Subrecipients may also designate PMs for their component of the effort. However, the Applicant must identify a lead PM.

For Topic Area 3, does the Applicant need to be the same entity as the prime recipient or is it possible for an Applicant to submit on behalf of a prime recipient? Both entities are eligible under Topic Area 3.

Each application must have one designated team member to serve as the prime recipient and that team member must qualify as an eligible applicant.

See Section I.B.ii of the FOA document for more information on Teaming Arrangements.

Per the FOA, Topic Area 3 may have a period of performance of 60-96 months (5-8 years). If an applicant has a projected budget in years 6-8, how should that information be provided in the application? Is there an updated Budget Justification Workbook that covers up to 8 years? The one posted in FedConnect is up to 5 years.

The required workbook to be submitted via grants.gov is intended to be used for the proposed project’s initial four years.

The budget document included in amendment 000001 is for the proposed project’s initial five years.

It is recommended that for projects that are expected to go beyond the timelines of the aforementioned documents, that added budget justification documents be added as another attachment to the application.  Applicants may add as many workbooks to the application via grants.gov to cover the proposed project’s entire period of performance. 

What materials are required to support the Report on Resilience requirement for Grid Resilience Utility and Industry Grants (40101(c))? 

An applicant must submit as part of their application, a report detailing past, current, and future efforts by the eligible entity to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events. The report must summarize any programs and related approved funding that your organization has implemented over the past 3 years to reduce the likelihood of events in which operations of the electric grid are disrupted, preventively shut off, or cannot operate safely due to extreme weather, wildfire, or a natural disaster. This report should include efforts over at least the previous 3 years and at least the next 3 years and any broader resilience strategy used by the applicant. See Section IV.D.xviii of the FOA document.

What are the essential components of the cybersecurity plan?  

The Cybersecurity Plan should, at a minimum address questions noted in Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) section 40126(b) ‘Contents of Cybersecurity Plan’. 

(1) plans to maintain cybersecurity between networks, systems, devices, applications, or components-

              (A) within the proposed solution of the project; and

              (B) at the necessary external interfaces at the proposed solution boundaries;

(2) will perform ongoing evaluation of cybersecurity risks to address issues as the issues arise throughout the life of the proposed solution;

(3) will report known or suspected network or system compromises of the project to DOE; and

(4) will leverage applicable cybersecurity programs of the Department, including cyber vulnerability testing and security engineering evaluations.

The Cybersecurity Plan requirement is only applicable to the Smart Grid Grants (Topic Area 2) and Grid Innovation Program (Topic Area 3). Applicants must submit a Cybersecurity Plan during award negotiations and prior to receiving funding. See Appendix E of the FOA document.

Are applicants required to include a Table of Contents prior to Section 1? If a Table of Contents is included in the Concept Paper, will it count towards the page count of the Concept Paper?

Consistent with Section IV.C. of the FOA, applicants are not required to include a Table of Contents prior to Section 1. If a Table of Contents is included in the Concept Paper, it will count towards the page count of the Concept Paper.

Confirming if “Community and Labor Partnership documentation” can be submitted for the Concept Paper or is just intended for the Full Application?

Consistent with Section IV.C. of the FOA, the Community Benefits Plan component of the Concept Paper content and form requirements does not include formal documentation. Community and Labor Partnership documentation is intended for the Full Application, as per Section IV.D. of the FOA. 

For a qualifying applicant to submit their previous year's EIA Form 861, does the form need to be converted to PDF format or can it be included in the concept paper email submittal as an Excel file?

As described in Section IV.D.xix, applicants must save the EIA Form 861 in a single PDF file for submission of the full application.  DOE expects this process to also be followed for submission of the  EIA Form 861 with the concept paper. 

On Page 52 of the FOA, paragraph iii. Project/Performance Site Locations, it reads as if there is a fillable PDF but we cannot find anything that resembles this form.  Where is it located?

Consistent with Section IV.D of the FOA document, applicants must complete the application forms found on the Grants.gov website at https://www.grants.gov/ in accordance with the instructions.  Please be sure to read the full FOA document for registration requirements.

42 USC §18711(c)(5) requires 30% of total funding to be set aside for small utilities. The FOA defines that threshold to be no more than 4,000,000 MWh of electricity sales per year. The FOA further states that eligibility must be demonstrated through EIA Form 861 data showing, “total retail electricity sales to ultimate customers.” Line 11 in EIA Form 861 appears to match the FOA description. Please confirm if sales reported on line 11 for individual EIA Form 861 respondents will be the sole line used to confirm eligibility for the small utility set aside.

Sales to customers reported on line 11 for individual EIA Form 861 respondents will be the sole line used to confirm eligibility for the small utility set aside.

Should the concept papers include the budget amount for the project? And if so, in what section should that be included?

Consistent with Section IV.C. of the FOA document, budgetary information is not required at the Concept Paper submission phase of the application process. Consistent with Section IV.D. of the FOA document, applicants are required at the Full Application phase to submit more detailed information on their proposed budget, as outlined in the discussion around the Budget Justification Workbook and, if applicable, the Subrecipient Budget Justification Workbook. For additional information, see Sections IV.D.ix. and IV.D.xii. of the FOA document.

Letters of commitment/support are not required for concept paper, but are they welcome/encouraged?

Documentation demonstrating support for the project, including from potential partners, are permitted, but not required.  All applications will be reviewed consistent with the merit review process.

In the FOA document - Section IV. D. iii. (Project/Performance Site Location(s)) - the discussion is related to project/performance site locations for the full application. However, the Concept Paper cover page also asks for project location(s). Are congressional district designations all that is needed, or do applicants need to include all impacted counties, cities, or other location designations for individual aspects of the proposed project? For example, a smart grid project that covers a utility's full electric service area could include many substation or other device locations, etc. Would the applicant need to include each and every device location anticipated to be included as part of the proposed project or, can they simply provide the congressional district designation(s) that encompass the proposed areas of impact?

For the concept paper, Applicants should indicate the location of the Prime Applicant.

The Community Partnership Documentations has a page limitation of 10 pages. Are Memorandum of Understanding or similar agreements also to be one page? If these documents are to be one page, what if we exceed 10 community partnerships?

In support of the Community Benefits Plan, applicants may submit documentation to demonstrate existing or planned partnerships with community entities. In total, the partnership documentation must not exceed 10 pages. The partnership documentation could be in the form of a letter on the partner’s letterhead outlining the planned partnership signed by an officer of the entity, a Memorandum of Understanding, or other similar agreement. If the applicant intends to enter into Workforce and Community Agreements as part of the Community Benefits Plan, please include letters from proposed partners as appropriate. Each letter must not exceed 1 page. See Section IV.d.vii. of the FOA document for additional information.

On page 51, in the Applications Components section, Locations of Work is listed. What does this mean? Is it different from the Project/Performance Site Location(s) component? Is there a template for the Locations of Work component that could be provided?

These are two separate documents. The Project Performance Site Location is a form which is a part of the application package posted on Grants.gov. Please refer to Package detail in grants.gov to access that form. The Location of Work document is an Excel Spreadsheet which identifies and summarizes the locations where work will be performed.  No template for this spreadsheet has been provided.

Please confirm that the Appendix F PDAD is only required for small entities applying under Topic Area 1. Also, should the document be uploaded as a separate file or as part of the technical document.

Consistent with Section IV.D.xx. of the FOA document, applicants for all three topic areas must complete and submit the PDAD. Note that there are requirements specific to Topic Area 1 and Topic Area 3, for which the applicant will respond and certify responses via the PDAD, as described in Section I.B. Applicants shall prepare the PDAD in the format provided in Appendix G of the FOA. The PDAD must be signed by the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) on behalf of the organization and be submitted in PDF format. Save the PDAD in a single PDF file using the following convention for the title “PDAD.pdf”.

The Locations of Work section does not have component description listed on page 51 of the FOA. Can you provide a description? Will the DOE provide a template for the Locations of Work component?

The Location of Work document is an Excel Spreadsheet which identifies and summarizes the locations where work will be performed.  No template for this spreadsheet has been provided.

There are several SF-424 forms. Can you clarify which form should be used for full application submission and provide a link to the form?

The application forms to be submitted consist of those documents listed in the Grants.Gov portal under the package forms details. Additionally, you will be required to submit with an application all l documents identified on page 51 of the FOA.

FedConnect.net Amendment 001 issued a link to the Budget Justification Workbook year 1-5. The originally issued form Budget Justification Workbook has nuance differences. Grants.gov does not have any budget justification workbook in the package forms provided. Can you please advise which one we should be using?

The Budget Workbook included in Amendment 000001 is the workbook that should be included as instructed in FOA Amendment 000001.

Please clarify how the form Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs (SF-424A) [V1.0] is to be used, completed, and submitted within the GRIP grant application. The form is listed as mandatory within the grants.gov application workspace "Forms" tab. However this document is not referenced within the Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number: DE-FOA-0002740 Amendment 3 document.

The Budget Workbook included in Amendment 000001 is the workbook that should be included as instructed in FOA Amendment 000001.

The chart provided on pages 50-51 of the Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number: DE-FOA-0002740 Amendment 3 lists a component as "Locations of Work" as an excel document to be named LOW.xls/xlsx. However, a corresponding explanation does not seem to be present in Sections IV.D.ii through IV.D.xx in pages 51-69. Please provide guidance on completing and submitting the component "Locations of Work" including any available templates or excel documents

The Location of Work document is an Excel Spreadsheet which identifies and summarizes the locations where work will be performed.  No template for this spreadsheet has been provided.

Please clarify if all Topic Areas (1, 2, and 3) are required to prepare and submit the PDAD.

Please clarify if the PDAD.pdf document is to be uploaded to the application using the "Add Optional Other Attachments" button.

Please clarify Section IV.D.XX paragraph 1, sentence 3, "Applicants shall prepare the PDAD in the format provided in Appendix G of the FOA." The Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Number: DE-FOA-0002740 Amendment 3 document ends with Appendix F - Project Description and Assurances Document Template (PDAD) pages 137-140 . Should the sentence above read "Applicants shall prepare the PDAD in the format provided in Appendix F of the FOA." where "G" is replaced with "F"?

Or is Appendix F missing and Appendix G PDAD is mislabeled? If this is the case please provide Appendix F.

Consistent with Section IV.D.xx. of the FOA document, applicants for all three topic areas must complete and submit the PDAD. Note that there are requirements specific to Topic Area 1 and Topic Area 3, for which the applicant will respond and certify responses via the PDAD, as described in Section I.B. Applicants shall prepare the PDAD in the format provided in Appendix F of the FOA. The PDAD must be signed by the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) on behalf of the organization and be submitted in PDF format. Save the PDAD in a single PDF file using the following convention for the title “PDAD.pdf”.

Section IV.D.xx referenced an incorrect Appendix reference. The reference should have been stated as Appendix F. 

Please provide clarification on how the Community Partnership Documentation is to be uploaded to the Application. Should this pdf be uploaded using the "Add Optional Other Documents" button?

Yes.

The is contradictory information on the need to fill out the SF-LLL form. The FOA states it is required, but the grants.gov workspace shows it as an optional document.  We are a local co-op and do not participate in any lobbying activities.  Wondering if it this is necessary for us to complete as a part of the application.

As stipulated in Section IV.D.xiv (page 62) of the FOA, this form is a required document to be submitted with the applications for this announcement. 

The SF-424[V4.0] Application for Federal Assistance included in the application package forms on grants.gov for the GRIP program seems to have expired on 12/31/2022. Is the DOE going to upload a new form/version with an expiration date past application due dates or can applicants just move forward with the current copy available and submit that along with applications?

The document versions in the Grants.gov application package should be used with application submission. Currently that form indicates an expiration date of 11/30/2025.

On Grants.gov the provided Application for Federal Assistance SF 424 V4.0 and the Project/Performance Site Location V4.0 have an expiration date of 12/31/2022 in the upper right-hand corner and the provided forms for Application for Federal Assistance SF 424 V4.0, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities SF-LLL V2.0, and the Project/Performance Site Location V4.0 are not fillable PDFs. Would you please clarify which fillable pdfs with versions that are not expired to use and where they can be located.

The document versions in the Grants.gov application package should be used with application submission.  Forms have been recently updated and should be used, PDF forms can be edited for fill ins.

How do pilot + scale projects respond to the project performance locations and environmental questionnaires if they do not know where exactly all the site locations will be. For example – the pilot projects we know where the projects will be implemented but for scaling, we have interested locations but nothing definitively set.

As described in FOA Section IV.D. xiii, Applicants are required to submit an Environmental Questionnaire as part of a full application.  The Applicant must submit an environmental questionnaire providing for the work of the entire project. The Applicant is also responsible for submitting a separate environmental questionnaire for each proposed subrecipient performing at a different location. A NEPA review will be conducted on the impacts the project activities may have on human health and the environment. The Environmental Questionnaire is available at https://www.netl.doe.gov/File%20Library/Business/forms/451_1-1-3.pdf.

Applicants shall prepare this Environmental Questionnaire (EQ) as accurately and completely as possible for all work locations known at the time of submittal of the Full Application.  If the Application is selected for award negotiations, the Applicant will be required to assist in the timely and effective completion of the NEPA process which would include ensuring that a separate environmental questionnaire has been submitted for each work location.  Additionally, if locations of work are added during the execution of a project, a NEPA review must be conducted prior to work starting at any new location.

Could you please provide links to the latest templates for Forms "SF-424" and "Project/Performance Site Location" that applicants should use for their full application submissions?

The document versions in the Grants.gov application package should be used with application submission.  Application forms have been recently undated in Grants.gov.

For the Community Benefits Document Appendix. The Appendix is limited to 10 pages. Can we include more than 10 community partners as long as we keep to the 10-page maximum?

As stipulated in Section IV.D.vii of the FOA,  Each letter must not exceed 1 page. In total, the partnership documentation must not exceed 10 pages. Save the partnership documentation in a single PDF file using the following convention for the title “LeadOrganization_Partner.pdf”.

Is the concept paper identification code noted in the letters of encouragement meant to be used as the control number for the full application?

The control number referenced in the Concept paper Notification Letter is meant to be stipulated and included in the Full application.

The FOA amendment 3 requires a Locations of Work section submitted in excel format.  The detail guidance in IV.D. does not provide any additional information on the required submittal. Is this similar to the Project/Performance Site Location(s) form provided in the application.

The Location of Work document is an Excel Spreadsheet which identifies and summarizes the locations where work will be performed. Refer to Amendment 000005 for template.

The Contractual Services tab of the Budget Justification Workbook states that quotes will be required for costs of $250,000 or more; some the goods or services of the project will not have been procured before the application is due, what will be sufficient documentation to include as justification for the cost estimates we will be including on the budget workbook? For instance we are expecting to procure a contractor for some of the engineering and constructions services required for our project, but bids and quotes may not be available before the deadline.

It depends. If the services are based on a quote, providing the quote at time of application would be acceptable. The budget document should stipulate the basis of estimation used for costs at time of application.

For the SF-424A, do Sections B (Budget Categories) and C (Non-Federal Resources) require budget information just for first year or for total across all five years? Is Section D (Forecasted Cash Needs) for first year only? Is Section E (Budget Estimates of Federal Funds Needed for Balance of the Project) for years 2-5 of the project?

The figures included in the Budget documents should represent costs for the total project.   As such Section B and Section C should represent cost for the total project.  Section D represent cost for future years beyond the initial year, and need to connect to those figures from the budget documents.

Can applicants load their own versions of forms in lieu of the mandatory forms on grants.gov?

Mandatory forms should be used in the application submission.

Should the information on SF-424A match the budget justification workbook?

Yes, the budget justification form should match those figures stipulated on the SF 424A.

The NOFO says "vi. Letters of Commitment - Submit letters of commitment from all subrecipient and third-party cost share providers. If applicable, also include any letters of commitment from suppliers/partners/end users/future customers/labor unions/community-based organizations (one-page maximum per letter). Save the letters of commitment in a single PDF file using the following convention for the title “LOC.pdf” and click on "Add Optional Other Attachment" to attach. Letters of support or endorsement for the project from entities that do not have a substantive role in the project are not required nor desired."

The second sentence "If applicable, also include any letters of commitment from suppliers/partners/end users/future customers/labor unions/community-based organizations (one-page maximum per letter)." Are these letters needed only if they are a subrecipients? Or is this letter needed if the project technology will be deployed in certain locations d=that benefit a community / load reliability.

Can communities submit letters later after the deadline? Many organizations have to have several reads to pass letters of commitment through legal procedures which can take up to several months.

Consistent with Section IV.D.vi. of the FOA document, applicants are required to submit letters of commitment from all subrecipient and third-party cost share providers. If applicable, also include any letters of commitment from suppliers/partners/end users/future customers/labor unions/community-based organizations (one-page maximum per letter). Letters of support or endorsement for the project from entities that do not have a substantive role in the project are not required nor desired. As described in FOA Section IV.D, applicants must submit a Full Application by the specified due date and time to be considered for funding under this FOA.  Section IV.D.i of the FOA lists the Full Application Content Requirements.

Relating to Buy America requirements, will US DOE provide either a checklist of content elements required in a manufacturer's certification or a template letter for the certification?

DOE will not provide a checklist of content elements or a template letter for certification under the Buy America waiver request requirements.

For a project with many locations (e.g. distribution line hardening over miles or smart meter installation at thousands of homes), how should the "locations of work" and "project/performance site locations" requirements be handled?

As outlined in FOA Section, IV.D.xx (Locations of Work), the applicant must complete the supplied template by listing the city, state, and zip code + 4 for each location where project work will be performed by the prime recipient or subrecipient(s).

As outlined in FOA Section, IV.D.iv (Project/Performance Site Location(s)), on the form indicate the primary site where the work will be performed. If a portion of the project will be performed at any other site(s), identify the site location(s) in the blocks provided.  This form captures the full addresses for the organizations conducting the project work (prime entity and other project team members); including street, city, state, county, zip code, country as well as other information.

If an applicant includes loaded rates on the "Personnel" tab of the "Budget Justification" workbook, should the "Fringe Benefits" tab be left blank? Are these considered duplicative?

A loaded rate may be comprised on more than just Fringe Benefits, as such an explanation.

What documentation is required for industry cost share?

See FOA section IV.d.vi for commitment letters to be submitted with Application, also refer to Appendix A Relative to Cost share stipulations. 

The Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO) template included in the GRIP FOA (Appendix D) reads as if it is a document that will be required after an applicant is notified of a potential award. However, when mentioned in the FOA (e.g., Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO); pg. 60) it reads like it is a mandatory part of the full application. Can you please confirm whether (or not) the SOPO must be submitted with the full GRIP application (Topic Area 2; Smart Grid) or not until after an applicant has received notification of prospective award?

The Statement of Project Objectives is a required application document, and should be submitted with application as described on page 60.

Is there a sample contract available for review for Topic Area 2 so that we can understand the general contract terms?

No a sample cooperative agreement/grant award is not available.

Page 58 of the FOA states general Letters of Support are not desired or required while the Community Benefits Plan scoring rubric shows strong letters of support in 'Best Practices' column and states in the 'Score Reduction' column that none or weak Letters of Support could detract from scores. Are general Letters of Support desired from groups including members of local government, Disadvantaged Communities, and other community-based organizations, or only if they describe a specific commitment/partnership?

FOA Section IV.D.vi states that “Letters of support or endorsement for the project from entities that do not have a substantive role in the project are not required nor desired.” 

Section IV.D.vi of the FOA also states that applicants are to Submit letters of commitment from all subrecipient and third-party cost share providers. If applicable, also include any letters of commitment from suppliers/partners/end users/future customers/labor unions/community-based organizations (one-page maximum per letter). 

Additionally, as described in Section IV.D.vii of the FOA, in support of the Community Benefits Plan, applicants may submit documentation to demonstrate existing or planned partnerships with community entities, such as, organizations that work with local stakeholders most vulnerable to or affected by the project, such as organizations that carry out workforce development programs, labor unions, Tribal organizations, and community-based organizations that work with disadvantaged communities. The partnership documentation could be in the form of a letter on the partner’s letterhead outlining the planned partnership signed by an officer of the entity, a Memorandum of Understanding, or other similar agreement. Such letters must state the specific nature of the partnership and must not be general letters of support. If the applicant intends to enter into Workforce and Community Agreements as part of the Community Benefits Plan, please include letters from proposed partners as appropriate. Each letter must not exceed 1 page. In total, the partnership documentation must not exceed 10 pages. Save the partnership documentation in a single PDF file using the following convention for the title “LeadOrganization_Partner.pdf”.

In instances where an applicant is partnering with labor unions and community based organizations, when should we be seeking Letters of Commitment vs Community Partnership Documentation?

It is recommended that applicants request the Letters of Commitment or Community Partnership Documentation as early as practicable to ensure they are available for submission as part of the Full Application submission by the applicable deadline noted on the FOA Cover Page. 

Can Letters of Support and Letters of Commitment be sent to the DOE after the application deadline, and will these "late" letters be accepted as part of the review process?

No, as described in FOA Section IV.D, applicants must submit a Full Application by the specified due date and time to be considered for funding under this FOA.  Section IV.D.i of the FOA lists the Full Application Content Requirements. 

There is significant overlap in the requirements within the various sections of the Workplan in the Technical Volume and the SOPO. Please clarify the differences in format and/or level of detail expected in the WBS and Task Description Summary, the Project Schedule, and the Statement of Project Objectives. Can a single Project Schedule Gantt chart satisfy requirements for the "WBS and Task Description Summary", the "Milestone Summary", and "Go/No-Go Decision Points"?

The Work Breakout Schedule (WBS) is a deliverable-oriented grouping of project elements that organizes and defines the total scope of the project.  Each descending level represents an increasingly detailed definition of the project work.  The WBS should be based on a logical breakdown of the overall project effort into WBS elements. This may be based on a decomposition of the program work activities, deliverables, and products that will be produced by the project, or a combination of all.  

Since the Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO) organizes the work to be done into tasks and subtasks, for example, then the WBS elements can be modeled in the same way (i.e., each subtask would constitute an individual WBS work element). The goal is to progressively divide the work to the point of individual elements that can be assigned to an organizational unit or to an individual. 

The Applicant shall provide a timeline of the project broken down by each task and subtask. Additional task information may include a start date, end date, and team members participating on the task. The timeline should also show any interdependencies with other tasks and note the milestones identified in the Milestone Log. It is highly recommended that the Applicant consider using a commercial software package (i.e., Microsoft Project) to generate the timeline as a Gantt chart or other applicable format. 

It is conceivable that a single Gantt chart could capture the various elements (e.g. WBS, Task Description Summary, Interdependencies, Milestones and Decision Points) but it is at the applicant’s discretion as to how best document the required elements. 

The Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO) establishes fundamental objectives and success criteria for the proposed project and provides a detailed, concise, and understandable description of the tasks and subtasks by which the overall project scope will be achieved.   

As described in Appendix D of the FOA, prospective recipients of awards funded from Funding Opportunity Announcement DE-FOA-0002740 (FOA 2740) must prepare/submit a detailed statement of project objectives (SOPO) that addresses how the project objectives will be met. The SOPO must contain a clear, concise description of all activities that will be completed during project performance and follow the structure/format outlined in Appendix D. Since the SOPO may be released (in whole or in part) to the public by the Department of Energy (DOE) after award, it shall not contain proprietary or confidential business information. 

The SOPO generally consists of less than five (5) pages to describe the proposed work. Prospective recipients of FOA 2740 funding (FOA 2740 Recipient) shall prepare the SOPO according to the format provided in the SOPO template and in accordance with the application content and form requirements identified in Section IV Of the FOA. 

Should applicants add detail to the Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO) subtasks for Project Management Plan (PMP), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance, Cybersecurity Plan (CSP), and Continuation Briefing(s) or is the text in the provided template sufficient?

As described in the Background/Instructions Section of Appendix D of the FOA, the text shown as normal font within the SOPO template is to be included in the proposed SOPO; this includes the Task 1.0: Project Management and Planning and related subtasks (i.e. Project Management Plan (PMP), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance, Cybersecurity Plan (CSP), and Continuation Briefing(s)).

No additional text is needed for Task 1.0 and related subtasks for the SOPO submitted with the full application.  If selected for negotiations leading to award, modification of the text may be required at that time.

Will DOE be providing more guidance on what information needs to be included in the locations of work document? How does that differ from the project/performance site locations form?

The Location of Work document is an Excel Spreadsheet which identifies and summarizes the locations where work will be performed.  Refer to Amendment 000005 for template.

The NOFO says "vi. Letters of Commitment - Submit letters of commitment from all subrecipient and third-party cost share providers. If applicable, also include any letters of commitment from suppliers/partners/end users/future customers/labor unions/community-based organizations (one-page maximum per letter). Save the letters of commitment in a single PDF file using the following convention for the title “LOC.pdf” and click on "Add Optional Other Attachment" to attach. Letters of support or endorsement for the project from entities that do not have a substantive role in the project are not required nor desired." 

The second sentence "If applicable, also include any letters of commitment from suppliers/partners/end users/future customers/labor unions/community-based organizations (one-page maximum per letter)." Are these letters needed only if they are a subrecipients? Or is this letter needed if the project technology will be deployed in certain locations d=that benefit a community / load reliability.

Can communities submit letters later after the deadline? Many organizations have to have several reads to pass letters of commitment through legal procedures which can take up to several months.

As described in FOA Section IV.D, applicants must submit a Full Application by the specified due date and time to be considered for funding under this FOA.  Section IV.D.i of the FOA lists the Full Application Content Requirements. 

Letters of Commitment 

As described in Section IV.D.vi of the FOA, applicants are to Submit letters of commitment from all subrecipient and third-party cost share providers. If applicable, also include any letters of commitment from suppliers/partners/end users/future customers/labor unions/community-based organizations (one-page maximum per letter). Save the letters of commitment in a single PDF file using the following convention for the title “LOC.pdf” and click on "Add Optional Other Attachment" to attach. 

Letters of support or endorsement for the project from entities that do not have a substantive role in the project are not required nor desired. 

Community Partnership Documentation 

Furthermore, as described in I.A.iii of the FOA , BIL-funded projects are expected to (1) support meaningful community and labor engagement; (2) invest in the American workforce; (3) advance diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility; and (4) contribute to the goal that 40% of the overall investments of certain federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities (the Justice40 Initiative).    

To ensure these goals are met, applications must include a Community Benefits Plan that illustrates how the proposed project plans to incorporate the four goals stated above and are encouraged to submit Community Partnership Documentation from established labor unions, Tribal entities, and community-based organizations that demonstrate the applicant’s ability to achieve the above goals as outlined in the Community Benefits Plan.

The Community Benefits Plan is included as a requirement within the technical volume content of the application, and it is also listed separately as an additional application attachment requirement (pg 63 amendment 4). Should we just include a high-level overview of the plan within the technical volume content and then go into detail in the separate attachment? 

As stipulated in Section IV.D. of the FOA,  the page limit for the Technical Volume is 25 pages.  As part of the Project Overview Section of the Technical Volume (approximately 10% of the Technical Volume) must include various information including a sub-section called Community Benefits Plan:  Job Quality and Equity in which the applicant should summarize the overall anticipated benefits that will accrue to the local community and DACs (including, but not limited to, decreased duration, frequency, or impact of power disruption; increased access to clean power; and the support of minority business enterprises). The applicant should summarize a plan to attract, train, and retain a skilled labor force with strong labor standards, ensure workers’ free and fair chance to join a union, and identify potential partners they are working with to support these objectives. 

Additionally, a separate Community Benefits Plan having a page limit of 12 pages is required.  As described in the FOA:  the “Community Benefits Plan: Job Quality and Equity (Community Benefits Plan or Plan) must set forth the applicant’s framework to ensure that federal investments in the power sector advance the following four priorities: (1) community and labor engagement; (2) investing in the American workforce; (3) advancing diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA); and (4) the Justice40 Initiative.”  Required content for the Community Benefits Plan is provided in the FOA.

We understand subrecipients should submit LOCs plus budgets and other docs. Should vendors submit budget justifications if over $250K, given that they're not subrecipients?

As stated on Page 60 of the FOA: “Submit letters of commitment from all subrecipient and third-party cost share providers. If applicable, also include any letters of commitment from suppliers/partners/end users/future customers/labor unions/community-based organizations (one-page maximum per letter)”. Please see Section IV.D.xi. of the FOA document for additional information on subrecipient budgets. 

If precise geographic locations of all project elements have not been determined at the time of application, can applicants defer completion of the Environmental Questionnaire until that information is determined during the award negotiation phase?

Consistent with Section IV.D.xiii. of the FOA document, the Applicant must submit an environmental questionnaire providing for the work of the entire project during the Full Application stage of the process. The Applicant is also responsible for submitting a separate environmental questionnaire for each proposed subrecipient performing at a different location. If selected for award and if a subrecipient’s location is not known at the time of application, a subsequent environmental questionnaire will be needed prior to them beginning work at an alternate location.

Can the Environmental Questionnaire be completed according to project technology/scope vs. a separate EQ for each physical location? For example, if an element of the proposal includes a series of pole replacements (perhaps in the hundreds) can one Environmental Questionnaire be completed for that pole replacement initiative instead of a separate Environmental Questionnaire for each individual pole?

As outlined in Section IV.D.xii. of the FOA document, the Applicant must submit an environmental questionnaire providing for the work of the entire project. The Applicant is also responsible for submitting a separate environmental questionnaire for each proposed subrecipient performing at a different location. The environmental questionnaire is available at http://www.netl.doe.gov/File%20Library/Business/forms/451_1-1-3.pdf. 

MLGW is working complete the full application for the GRIP Opportunity. I clicked the link in the FOA instructions to access the environmental questionnaire but received an error message. I clicked the following link: http://www.netl.doe.gov/File%20Library/Business/forms/451_1-1-3.pdf and received the following error message. HTTP Error 404. The requested resource is not found.

The link in Section IV.D.xiii. of the FOA document and stipulated below is an active link: http://www.netl.doe.gov/File%20Library/Business/forms/451_1-1-3.pdf 

The link to the environmental questionnaire on page 62 of 141 is not working. Can you provide the file in FEDConnect or update link? 

The link in Section IV.D.xiii. of the FOA document and stipulated below is an active link: http://www.netl.doe.gov/File%20Library/Business/forms/451_1-1-3.pdf 

Can To Be Named subawards be included in the proposal budget?

Yes. However, the cost and basis of cost needs to be included in budget documents.

Please clarify if both the Location of Work Spreadsheet and PerformanceSite_4_0-V4.0 need to be submitted with the full application.

Yes, both need to be submitted.

The Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO) template included in the GRIP FOA (Appendix D) reads as if it is a document that will be required after an applicant is notified of a potential award. However, when mentioned in the FOA (e.g., Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO); pg. 60) it reads like it is a mandatory part of the full application. Can you please confirm whether (or not) the SOPO must be submitted with the full GRIP application (Topic Area 2; Smart Grid) or not until after an applicant has received notification of prospective award? 

The Statement of Project objectives is a required document to be submitted with the application. See FOA section as it relates to application documents to be submitted.

The Budget Tab in the Workspace application on Grants.gov only allows for 4 Budget Periods and we are proposing a 60-month program (5 years) with 5 Budget periods.  How should we enter our costing when we cannot alter the Workspace. We have listed 5 budget periods in the DOE provided Budget Justification Workbook and SF-424A, but we don't know what to do in the application.

Amendment 000001 included budget justification documentation which addressed and included projects with a 5-year term.

For the Project/Performance Site Location(s) form, the FOA indicates to “indicate the primary site where the work will be performed.  If a portion of the project will be performed at any other site(s), identify the site location(s) in the blocks provided.” The form itself asks for project location addresses. Our proposed project locations do not have specific addresses because the resilience improvements to the electric grid span many miles.  

To fill in the address, should we list the zip code (like the Locations of Work spreadsheet) and say NA to the other fields, or do we need to pick a discrete address, recognizing that discrete addresses won’t encompass the entire project location? 

For the project as described, the primary location which must have a specific address, the usage of zip codes to identify additional project locations would be acceptable.  

When clicking on the link in the FOA to access the environmental questionnaire, I receive the following error message: Not found. HTTP Error 404. The requested resource is not found. Please advise of where or how the form can be accessed.

The link listed in the FOA for accessing the Environmental questionnaire is an active link. Please notify DOE if the link does not work.

For the Project/Performance Site Location(s) form, the FOA indicates to “indicate the primary site where the work will be performed.  If a portion of the project will be performed at any other site(s), identify the site location(s) in the blocks provided.” The form itself asks for project location addresses. Our proposed project locations do not have specific addresses because the resilience improvements to the electric grid span many miles. To fill in the address, should we list the zip code (like the Locations of Work spreadsheet) and say NA to the other fields, or do we need to pick a discrete address, recognizing that discrete addresses won’t encompass the entire project location?

Please proceed as proposed given the nature of this project.

Can the Memorandum of Understanding be more than 1 page? Can we have multiple organizations sign on the same MOU? 

As stipulated in the FOA Section IV.D.vii., the following guidance is provided: "…. please include letters from proposed partners as appropriate. Each letter must not exceed 1 page. In total, the partnership documentation must not exceed 10 pages. Save the partnership documentation in a single PDF file using the following convention for the title 'LeadOrganization_Partner.pdf'."

The GRIP FOA instructions for the Project/Performance Site Locations reads, "Indicate the primary site where the work will be performed. If a portion of the project will be performed at any other site(s), identify the site location(s) in the blocks provided. Note that the Project/Performance Site Congressional District is entered in the format of the 2-digit state code followed by a dash and a 3-digit Congressional district code, for example VA-001. Hover over this field for additional instructions." 

Our question is, for projects that will include infrastructure mounted on a large number of utility poles that are spread out through multiple counties across two states, should applicants provide the utility's primary headquarters address and congressional district? Individual poles do not have specific street addresses and including a list of Project/Performance Site Locations that includes nearly 200 individual utility pole locations seems excessive.

Consistent with Section IV.D.iii. of the FOA document, applicants are required to indicate the primary site where the work will be performed. If a portion of the project will be performed at any other site(s), identify the site location(s) in the blocks provided. Note that the Project/Performance Site Congressional District is entered in the format of the 2-digit state code followed by a dash and a 3-digit Congressional district code, for example VA-001. 

Section V. Application Review Information, A. Technical Review Criteria, ii. Full Applications – applications will be evaluated against the technical review criteria shown below: Should the Technical Volume section of the application be organized in the order of the Criterion shown in this section that starts on Page 81 or should it be organized in the order shown in D. iv. Page 54 as shown in the table named “Technical Volume Content Requirements” with specific sections and subsections including information outlined in the table (with responses taking into consideration the weighting of the technical criterion in section V)? Some of the questions appear to be addressed in different sections when comparing the two sets of instructions.

Applications must comply with technical volume content requirements identified in Section IV of the FOA document and will be assessed on the basis of the technical review criteria in Section V of the FOA document.

Is there any possibility to increase the estimated budget requested in the Concept Paper when we submit the final application? We will absolutely assure that the proportional applicant contribution exceeds the proportion estimated in the concept paper. However, we are seeing that demand and supply chain issues are increasing prices even since our early January 2023 quotes.

Adjustments can be made from the submission of the Concept Paper until the submission of Full Applications.

Section D.iii on p.53 of the FOA "Project/Performance Site Locations" and the Locations of Work spreadsheet in Section D.xx on p.69 seem duplicative (except the former also requires congressional districts to be entered directly into the blocks online). Would DOE please clarify/confirm that both are required?

Both are required.

The nature of our projects is such that there are hundreds of locations - seems administratively burdensome to enter one at a time into the blocks of the grants.gov portal, which is why we are asking question #1 above (to make sure we are not misunderstanding).

Consistent with Section IV.D.iii. of the FOA document, applicants are required to indicate the primary site where the work will be performed. If a portion of the project will be performed at any other site(s), identify the site location(s) in the blocks provided. Note that the Project/Performance Site Congressional District is entered in the format of the 2-digit state code followed by a dash and a 3-digit Congressional district code, for example VA-001.

Our project contains several separate technology deployments. When preparing the budget justification form, should our team separate the different technology deployments into separate budgets that may be easier to comprehend or have it all be a part of a one single budget justification form?

Consistent with Section IV.D.i. of the FOA document, each Full Application must be limited to a single concept or technology. Do not consolidate unrelated concepts and technologies in a single Full Application.

What documentation is required for industry cost share?

The Commitment Letter and the Cost Share tab in the Budget Justification Workbook are required for industry cost share.

Can To Be Named subawards be included in the proposal budget?

Yes, though all estimated costs need to be captured in the budget document.

To whom should letters of commitment or support be addressed?

Address to FOA 2740, or to Whom It May Concern. File naming should be as stipulated in Section IV.D.vi. of the FOA document in the discussion of letter of commitments.

Our proposed project includes 55 different site locations that include pole and line replacement, undergrounding and substation expansions. Do we need to do an Environmental Questionnaire for all 55 sites? Or is there another preferred method for reporting the required information?

As outlined in Section IV.D.xii. of the FOA document, the Applicant must submit an environmental questionnaire providing for the work of the entire project. The Applicant is also responsible for submitting a separate environmental questionnaire for each proposed subrecipient performing at a different location. The environmental questionnaire is available at http://www.netl.doe.gov/File%20Library/Business/forms/451_1-1-3.pdf.

As noted on the form, Location of Activities covered by this Environmental Questionnaire are provided as: (City/Township, County, State).

In the FOA, both primes and subrecipients are being both stated as being responsible for completing a SF-LLL form. However, the SF-LLL form on the grants.gov webpage for GRIP is already partially filled out for the prime with the prime box being marked. Should subrecipients mark the sub awardee box in conjunction with the prime box?

The forms in the application package of grants.gov are editable PDF files.

Re the LLL form. If we are a multi-state utility with a multi-state application and we have lobbyists in multiple states, do you need to see all lobbyists in Form LLL? In the past we have used our DC-based lobbyist. Is that sufficient?

Recipients are required to submit the SF-LLL “to ensure that non-federal funds have not been paid and will not be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence any of the following in connection with the application…” This suggests that lobbying, paid for with non-federal funds, is prohibited. Conversely, the FOA on P. 100 states only that by accepting funds the recipient “agrees that none of the funds obligated on the award shall be expended…to influence Congressional action on any legislation or appropriation matters pending before Congress.

Submitting the grant applications involves a series of steps. We do not want to lose an opportunity because we haven't taken the steps correctly. What are your best suggestions on ensuring we take the steps correctly (in addition to carefully following the instructions in the FOA)? Is there any way to do a submission test run, or even, odd as it may sound, a YouTube video that steps through the process? May seem like an odd question, but making sure we get everything right...

No additional resources are available, relative to submission of forms or completion of the forms, please refer to Instructions on the form for assistance in completion.

The FOA specifies letters should be no more than one page and grouped into one PDF. Are you concerned about the font, font size or margins for any letters of support or commitment that we receive?

Please refer to Section IV.D. of the FOA document, as it relates to Letters of support and commitment letters, documentation, content, and format.

The table on pages 51-52 of the FOA outlines “full application requirements”. The table includes a “Locations of Work” requirement, but the FOA does not provide any additional context on what that document should include. Can you explain what information should be included and if there is a template available?

See Section IV.D.xx of the FOA document, and in particular, the template attached to Amendment 000005 of the FOA.

Would you please elaborate on the content for letters of commitment? Would it be appropriate for stakeholders to state their commitment based on the awarding of funds? In other words, can it be assumed that the project won't happen if the funds are not received?

Commitment letters are to be provided by those entities whom will be providing cost share to the projects. The level of cost share required is the recipient responsibility to secure. However, if the source of commitment is from other sources, then commitment letters are required. 

As stipulated in Section IV.D.vi. of the FOA document: “Submit letters of commitment from all subrecipient and third-party cost share providers. If applicable, also include any letters of commitment from suppliers/partners/end users/future customers/labor unions/community-based organizations (one-page maximum per letter)”.

The new FOA specifies the project locations require zip codes to be included for each project location. There is also a part of the environmental questionnaire that asks for county information. We do not have these two pieces of information...are we allowed to submit longitude and latitude coordinates in place of this information?

Environmental questionnaires need to submit the information as requested related to the county information. County information can be obtained at Free USPS Address Verification & Address Validation Tools (smarty.com).

Please clarify if form SF424A-V1.0 needs to be submitted with the full application as it is not listed in list of forms in the RFP. If yes, would subs recipients need to submit this form as well?

Refer to Page 52 of the FOA for required forms for submission. Budget Justification documents are required. Subrecipient Budget Justification documents are required for each subrecipient that is expected to perform work estimated to be more than $250,000 or 25% of total work effort (whichever is less). See page 62.

For Topic 3, companies may partner with state organizations to submit a grant application (where the state is submitting the application). In this case do letters of support/commitment have to be directed only to the state or can they also be directed to the company that is working with the state as well?

Consistent with Section IV.D.vi. of the FOA document, applicants are required to submit letters of commitment from all subrecipient and third-party cost share providers. If applicable, also include any letters of commitment from suppliers/partners/end users/future customers/labor unions/community-based organizations (one-page maximum per letter). Save the letters of commitment in a single PDF file using the following convention for the title “LOC.pdf” and click on "Add Optional Other Attachment" to attach. Letters of support or endorsement for the project from entities that do not have a substantive role in the project are not required nor desired.

Relative to the Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO) document:  In Task 1.0: Project Management and Planning Subtask 1.1, it states “The Recipient shall not proceed beyond Task 1.0 until PMP has been accepted by the FPO.”  Our PMP will then have the individual line and substation projects listed as Task 2, Task 3, etc. 

This would seem to conflict with the definition of Pre-award Costs noted above and then delay the start of design work beyond the Effective Date of the award and/or the execution of the Selection Statement and Analysis.

As stipulated above, pre-award cost that are approved must be necessary for efficient and timely conduct for the Statement of Project Objectives. The PMP is a planning document outlining key components of the project. It is possible that pre-award cost may be associated with the planning document. Additionally, there may be limitations of allowable pre-award cost authorizations based on possible NEPA restrictions associated with infrastructure projects. If NEPA conditions are not authorized that represents a limitation of pre-award authorizations, and therefore a restriction of those authorizations. The planning document is a preliminary document that needs to be reviewed in order to advance the project to subsequent tasks and or to address the acquisition of long lead/supply equipment items.

Are we to submit only one Budget Justification Workbook, with all the individual projects contained in that single Workbook?

The recipient is required to consolidate all budgets associated with the project to include efforts from the subrecipient. Subrecipient budgets are required to be submitted if their cost exceed the FOA stipulations and submitted separately in accordance with FOA stipulations. Each application must contain a budget which complies with the stipulations in Section II.F. of the FOA document, and relates to a unique, and scientifically distinct project.

Is it possible to submit two different budget worksheets under one application for two different scenarios? We are unsure what will be justifiable as part of the cost-share.

Consistent with Section IV.D.i. of the FOA document, each Full Application must be limited to a single concept or technology. Do not consolidate unrelated concepts and technologies in a single Full Application. Applications must conform to the content and form requirements stipulated in Section IV.D. of the FOA document.

For sub-recipient budgets (as required for sub recipients greater than $250,000), would DOE prefer that sub-recipient budget justification workbooks for each sub-recipient be uploaded as separate files, or some kind of summary workbook, or a zipped file upload?

With regards to environmental forms, would DOE prefer a combined pdf file of all the environmental forms plus map files (in this case there are around a dozen), or for them to be submitted as separate file uploads?

Yes, if the stipulations in the FOA relative to subrecipient budget justification workbooks, is applicable they need to be uploaded as subrecipient budget justification workbook for all subs whom meet the requirement stipulated in the FOA.

We understand that letters of commitment are required from all entities committed to providing cost share.  Are letters of commitment also required for customers/off-takers of electricity?  Our project involves the development of microgrids. 

As described in Section IV.D.vi of the FOA, applicants are required to submit letters of commitment from all subrecipient and third-party cost share providers. If applicable, also include any letters of commitment from suppliers/partners/end users/future customers/labor unions/community-based organizations (one-page maximum per letter). Save the letters of commitment in a single PDF file using the following convention for the title “LOC.pdf” and click on "Add Optional Other Attachment" to attach. Letters of support or endorsement for the project from entities that do not have a substantive role in the project are not required nor desired.

As described in I.A.iii of the FOA , BIL-funded projects are expected to (1) support meaningful community and labor engagement; (2) invest in the American workforce; (3) advance diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility; and (4) contribute to the goal that 40% of the overall investments of certain federal investments flow to disadvantaged communities (the Justice40 Initiative). To ensure these goals are met, applications must include a Community Benefits Plan that illustrates how the proposed project plans to incorporate the four goals stated above and are encouraged to submit Community Partnership Documentation from established labor unions, Tribal entities, and community-based organizations that demonstrate the applicant’s ability to achieve the above goals as outlined in the Community Benefits Plan.

Also, is there a limit to number of total pages we can attach as letters of commitment?

Consistent with Section IV.D.i. of the FOA document, Letters of Commitment are limited to 1 page each.

Can letters of support from elected official be included? If yes, where should they be attached within the application?

Consistent with Section IV.D.vi. of the FOA document, letters of support or endorsement for the project from entities that do not have a substantive role in the project are not required nor desired.

If the project is focused on vegetation management and the project work will be conducted throughout the entire service area - should all cities and counties in the service area be added for the the Locations of Work. If so what address would be used as this is work along lines and not fixed addresses?

As outlined in FOA Section, IV.D.xx (Locations of Work), the applicant must complete the supplied template by listing the city, state, and zip code + 4 for each location where project work will be performed by the prime recipient or subrecipient(s).

Should we repeat the same information in the Project/Performance Site Locations Form in grants.gov and the locations of work excel?

There are differences in information contained within each document. As such, both documents need to be submitted based on document content.

We plan to submit two excel sheets for the budget justification form.

One version will be titled "Confidential" and all cells containing confidential information will be highlighted in yellow, headers and footers for the specific excel sheet tabs will have the recommended confidential language/warning.

The other one will be titled "Non-Confidential" and the confidential information will be deleted. However, section totals will be hard-coded to ensure each tab ties back to the total project cost.

Please confirm that this approach is acceptable.

The approach described above is not prohibited. See Section IV.D.ix. of the FOA document for additional information on the Budget Justification Workbook. Consistent with Section VIII.D. of the FOA document, relating to Treatment of Application Information, if an application includes business sensitive, trade secrets, proprietary, or otherwise confidential information, it is furnished to the Federal Government (Government) in confidence with the understanding that the information shall be used or disclosed only for evaluation of the application. Such information will be withheld from public disclosure to the extent permitted by law, including the Freedom of Information Act. Without assuming any liability for inadvertent disclosure, DOE will seek to limit disclosure of such information to its employees and to outside reviewers when necessary for merit review of the application or as otherwise authorized by law. This restriction does not limit the Government’s right to use the information if it is obtained from another source. If an applicant chooses to submit business sensitive, trade secrets, proprietary, or otherwise confidential information, the applicant must provide two copies of the submission (e.g., Concept Paper, Full Application). The first copy should be marked, “non-confidential” with the information believed to be confidential deleted. The second copy should be marked “confidential” and must clearly and conspicuously identify the business sensitive, trade secrets, proprietary, or otherwise confidential information and must be marked as described below. Failure to comply with these marking requirements may result in the disclosure of the unmarked information under the Freedom of Information Act or otherwise. The Government is not liable for the disclosure or use of unmarked information and may use or disclose such information for any purpose.

The FOA says that "Applications may submit documentation" under D.vii. Can you confirm whether this is required or optional?

Community Partnership Documentation is required to support the application.

The Budget Justification workbook states that for situations where the project has more that 5 budget periods, that we should contact DOE first before adjusting (See Attached).

The Budget justification workbook and 424a document are all built on a 5 year plan. In the case of topic 3 transmission applications, this might stretch to the maximum of 96 months. Please advise on how we should proceed with data input for these two items (i.e. should we adjust the workbook, should we use another workbook, how do we deal with the SF424a webform which is capped at 5 budget periods...etc).

Applicants will have to use more than one budget document in order to achieve the 96 month maximum period under Topic Area 3, included with their Full Application.

If the project period performance is 60 months, should each budget period in the budget justification workbook cover 12 months?

Yes, 60 months represents a term of 5 years in 12-month increments.

To whom should letters of commitment or support be addressed?

Address to FOA 2740, or to Whom It May Concern. See Section IV.D.vi of the FOA document for further information relative to letters of commitment.

Our proposed project includes 55 different site locations that include pole and line replacement, undergrounding and substation expansions. Do we need to do an Environmental Questionnaire for all 55 sites? Or is there another preferred method for reporting the required information?

Consistent with Section IV.D.xiii. of the FOA document, the Applicant must submit an environmental questionnaire providing for the work of the entire project. The Applicant is also responsible for submitting a separate environmental questionnaire for each proposed subrecipient performing at a different location.

Re the LLL form. If we are a multi-state utility with a multi-state application and we have lobbyists in multiple states, do you need to see all lobbyists in Form LLL? In the past we have used our DC-based lobbyist. Is that sufficient?

Consistent with section IV.C of the FOA document, applicants are required to submit all team member organizations for the proposed project in the cover page of the concept paper.

Submitting the grant applications involves a series of steps. We do not want to lose an opportunity because we haven't taken the steps correctly. What are your best suggestions on ensuring we take the steps correctly (in addition to carefully following the instructions in the FOA)? Is there any way to do a submission test run, or even, odd as it may sound, a YouTube video that steps through the process? May seem like an odd question, but making sure we get everything right...

All applicants that submitted a Concept Paper received information through an instructional webinar to assist with the full application process and a link to register for the webinar within their Concept Paper Encourage/Discourage Determination Letter. A recording of this webinar is available on the GRIP portal.

The FOA specifies letters should be no more than one page and grouped into one PDF. Are you concerned about the font, font size or margins for any letters of support or commitment that we receive?

There are no additional formatting requirements beyond what is stated in the FOA. Please refer to the discussion of Letters of Commitment in Section IV.D.vi. of the FOA document.

The table on pages 51-52 of the FOA outlines “full application requirements”. The table includes a “Locations of Work” requirement, but the FOA does not provide any additional context on what that document should include. Can you explain what information should be included and if there is a template available?

See the Locations of Work discussion in Section IV.D.xx of the FOA document.

Would you please elaborate on the content for letters of commitment? Would it be appropriate for stakeholders to state their commitment based on the awarding of funds? In other words, can it be assumed that the project won't happen if the funds are not received?

Letters of commitment are to be provided by those entities which will be providing cost share to the projects. The level of cost share required is the recipient responsibility to secure and commitment from other sources must be substantiated through letters of commitment. Consistent with Section IV.D.vi of the FOA document, applicants are required to submit letters of commitment from all subrecipient and third-party cost share providers. If applicable, also include any letters of commitment from suppliers/partners/end users/future customers/labor unions/community-based organizations (one-page maximum per letter).

The new FOA specifies the project locations require zip codes to be included for each project location. There is also a part of the environmental questionnaire that asks for county information. We do not have these two pieces of information ... are allowed to submit longitude and latitude coordinates in place of this information.

Environmental questionnaires need to contain the information as requested related to the county information. County information can be obtained at Free USPS Address Verification & Address Validation Tools (smarty.com).

Can To Be Named subawards be included in the proposal budget?

Yes. However, the cost and basis of cost needs to be included in budget documents.

The GRIP FOA instructions for the Project/Performance Site Locations reads, "Indicate the primary site where the work will be performed. If a portion of the project will be performed at any other site(s), identify the site location(s) in the blocks provided. Note that the Project/Performance Site Congressional District is entered in the format of the 2-digit state code followed by a dash and a 3-digit Congressional district code, for example VA-001. Hover over this field for additional instructions."

Our question is, for projects that will include infrastructure mounted on a large number of utility poles that are spread out through multiple counties across two states, should applicants provide the utility's primary headquarters address and congressional district? Individual poles do not have specific street addresses and including a list of Project/Performance Site Locations that includes nearly 200 individual utility pole locations seems excessive.

As outlined in the Project/Performance Site Location discussion in IV.D.iv. of the FOA document, indicate on the form the primary site where the work will be performed. If a portion of the project will be performed at any other site(s), identify the site location(s) in the blocks provided.  This form captures the full addresses for the organizations conducting the project work (prime entity and other project team members); including street, city, state, county, zip code, country as well as other information.

This should include the location of all project-related work including pole management.

Section V. Application Review Information, A. Technical Review Criteria, ii. Full Applications – applications will be evaluated against the technical review criteria shown below: Should the Technical Volume section of the application be organized in the order of the Criterion shown in this section that starts on Page 81 or should it be organized in the order shown in D. iv. Page 54 as shown in the table named “Technical Volume Content Requirements” with specific sections and subsections including information outlined in the table (with responses taking into consideration the weighting of the technical criterion in section V)? Some of the questions appear to be addressed in different sections when comparing the two sets of instructions.

Applicants should ensure that their proposals include all of the required content consistent with Section IV.D.iv of the FOA document. Additionally, applicants should also review the full criteria in Section V.A of the FOA document. The order of the information in the proposal is not as important as making sure the information is provided.

Our project contains several separate technology deployments. When preparing the budget justification form, should our team separate the different technology deployments into separate budgets that may be easier to comprehend or have it all be a part of a one single budget justification form?

Consistent with Section IV.D.i. of the FOA document, each Full Application must be limited to a single concept or technology. Do not consolidate unrelated concepts and technologies in a single Full Application.

Is Statement of Project Objectives required for initial (full) application? The Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO) template included in the GRIP FOA (Appendix D) reads as if it is a document that will be required after an applicant is notified of a potential award. However, when mentioned in the FOA (e.g., Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO); pg. 60) it reads like it is a mandatory part of the full application. Can you please confirm whether (or not) the SOPO must be submitted with the full GRIP application (Topic Area 2; Smart Grid) or not until after an applicant has received notification of prospective award?

The Statement of Project objectives is a required document to be submitted with the application, see FOA section as it relates to application documents to be submitted.

The FOA contains requirements for listing a one project manager, including on the summary slide and summary/abstract for public release. If a prime recipient is designating a subrecipient to complete most of the project implementation activities, can the project manager be a representative of the subrecipient or does a prime applicant project manager need to be listed on the summary documents?  Can more than one project manager be listed on those documents?

Yes, multiple project managers can be identified. However, the prime recipient should identify a participant in that role.

With regards to environmental forms, would DOE prefer a combined pdf file of all the environmental forms plus map files (in this case there are around a dozen), or for them to be submitted as separate file uploads?

Although it is permissible for environmental questionnaire (EQ) forms be combined into a single .pdf file, DOE prefers that the separate environmental questionnaire (EQ) forms for each proposed subrecipient performing at a different location be provided as separate files.

We'd like to confirm that when completing the Environmental Questionnaire for a subrecipient that "proposer" should name the prime applicant and also be signed by the prime as well ( as opposed to the subrecipient).

Consistent with Section IV.D.xiii. of the FOA document, while it is permissible that all environmental questionnaire (EQ) forms (one for each proposed subrecipient performing at a different location) be prepared and signed by the prime applicant, it is recommended that each entity (prime applicant or subrecipient) complete and sign their own EQ form(s) for the work being done at their respective location(s) since that entity would be most familiar with the information needed to complete the form. DOE prefers that the separate environmental questionnaire (EQ) forms for each proposed subrecipient performing at a different location be provided as separate files.

For the Project/Performance Site Location(s) form, the FOA indicates to “indicate the primary site where the work will be performed.  If a portion of the project will be performed at any other site(s), identify the site location(s) in the blocks provided.” The form itself asks for project location addresses. Our proposed project locations do not have specific addresses because the resilience improvements to the electric grid span many miles.

To fill in the address, should we list the zip code (like the Locations of Work spreadsheet) and say NA to the other fields, or do we need to pick a discrete address, recognizing that discrete addresses won’t encompass the entire project location?

For the project as described, the primary location which must have a specific address, the usage of zip codes to identify additional project locations would be acceptable.

Can the Memorandum of Understanding be more than 1 page? Can we have multiple organizations sign on the same MOU?

As stated in Section IV.D.vii of the FOA document, “…. please include letters from proposed partners as appropriate. Each letter must not exceed 1 page. In total, the partnership documentation must not exceed 10 pages. Save the partnership documentation in a single PDF file using the following convention for the title “LeadOrganization_Partner.pdf”.”

The application for BIL Section 40103 (b) is seeking the address each work location. As all of this work will be performed inside electric sub-stations, and as such equipment locations are considered sensitive, and as we do not publish such addresses publicly, is there a mechanism available for us to meet the requirements of the grant yet keep the physical address of such facilities confidential? Could we identify the location by Congressional District, or Town or Zip code?

Mark the forms detailing locations as specifically as one can while maintaining necessary confidentiality.

Please see section VIII.D of the FOA document for information relative to the treatment of application information.

For Topic 3, companies may partner with state organizations to submit a grant application (where the state is submitting the application). In this case do letters of support/commitment have to be directed only to the state or can they also be directed to the company that is working with the state as well?

There is a distinction between a letter of commitment and a letter of collaboration/support described within the Community Benefits Plan.  Letters of commitment come from cost share contributors to the project effort as stated in Sections IV.C.vi, Additionally reference is provided as it relates to letters of support or collaboration stated in Sections IV.c. vii and xvi.  Letters of support, commitment or collaboration should be direct to the applicant submitted application in support of the project they are submitting.

Is it possible to get additional guidance on how to show solar PV costs in our budget justification workbook? We typically request bids from developers that are design/procure/construct type bids. The bids we receive do not separate the pricing into labor and equipment.  The budget justification workbook has everything split out by labor (contract and EPB) and equipment.  I’m not sure how to separate these for contracted solar bids.

Applicants should consult the recommendations outlined in the Budget Justification Workbook and if applicable, to the Subrecipient Budget Justification Workbook with attention to the differences required for vendors versus subrecipients. For additional information, relative to content and form of these workbooks see Sections IV.D.ix. and IV.D.xii. of the FOA document.

Which entities are eligible to apply for funding? 

See Section III.A of the FOA document for details of eligible entities.

Can eligible entities simultaneously receive funds from the Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP) program and the Transmission Facilitation Program (TFP)?

Yes, eligible entities can participate in both GRIP and TFP simultaneously.

Can applicants apply for funding from both the Grid Resilience Utility and Industry Grants (40101(c)) and Grid Resilience Formula Grants (40101(d)) within the same application cycle? 

An eligible entity is not allowed to submit the same application for a grant under IIJA Section 40101(c) and Section 40101(d) in the same application cycle.  DOE considers a "grant" to have a specific scope (i.e., a unique project).  Accordingly, an eligible entity may not submit a grant application with the same scope under both Sections 40101(c) and 40101(d) in the same application cycle.  Eligible entities can submit applications to both Sections 40101(c) and 40101(d) in the same application cycle as long as they are separate scopes of work that address different resilience measures. If an applicant is submitting an application to both the GRIP FOA 2740 application [40101(c)] and the ALRD FOA 2736 [40101(d)], the applicant will be required to describe the differences between the applications in Appendix F, Item 5 of the Project Description and Assurances Document Template (PDAD). 

For the following topic, Section 40101(c), would a State entity be considered an eligible entity under this provision if the State entity was the owner of transmission and/or generating assets? 

A generation or transmission facility or combination of the two are operated on behalf of the State by a local electric co-operative via an operating agreement; so, while the State does own the asset, it does not operate the asset.  A Management Committee, which oversees all budget and finances related to the facilities, is comprised of representatives from off-takers of the facilities power. As the governing body with respect to the facilities, would a Management Committee be eligible to apply for such funding although the State is the owner and the local electric co-operative the operator of the asset?  It should be noted the Management Committee in and of itself, does not own or operate any assets. 

Is the language with respect to Section 40101(c) / topic 1 quite narrowly defined and to be taken as stated, or would the State, as an owner of such generation and transmission assets eligible to apply for such funding?  Is there language specifically excluding those State entities which may be owners of those assets listed in the FOA?

Consistent with 42 USC 18711(a)(2) and the eligibility information for Topic Area 1 contained in Section III.A. of the FOA, only the following domestic entities are eligible to apply as the prime recipient: electric grid operator; electricity storage operator; electricity generator; transmission owner or operator; distribution provider; and fuel supplier.  An applicant must be one of these listed entities (e.g., the owner of a transmission facility) in order to be a prime recipient of an award under this FOA.  If an entity is a transmission owner or operator, a grid operator or any other eligible entity as listed in the eligibility information for Topic Area 1 contained in Section III.A, then that entity is an eligible entity in their own capacity and may apply as the prime recipient. A committee or governing body which is neither an owner nor operator of facilities listed above would not be considered eligible to apply.  

Question: Is a 501(c)12 not-for-profit organization (electrical cooperative) eligible for the Smart Grid Grants Program under GRIP? While the FOA indicates non-profit entities are eligible, not-for-profit entities are slightly different. Thanks.

If the electrical cooperative is a non-profit entity, a for profit entity, or an element of state, local, or tribal nation government, then it is eligible for the Smart Grid Grants.  DOE considers not-for-profits to be non-profits for purposes of this program.

A "unit of local government" is listed as an eligible entity under Topic Area 3 -- how is "unit of local government" defined for purposes of eligibility?

If an entity is recognized as a government entity under the law of the state or district in which it is located, then it is a local government for purposes of this program.

To qualify as an “eligible entity” under Topic 1, could the prime applicant be a holding company that owns one or more entities that fall within one of the categories of entities listed under FOA Section III.A.i?

If the holding company owns or operates one of the eligible entities, then it is an eligible entity.

We're interested with Topic Area 1 but have a question regarding the small utilities requirement. Our company is developing a type of technology, though we do manufacture but as we're in relatively early stage, we haven't started the sales process. 

Does this mean we're not eligible for Topic Area 1 or we are still viewed as small utilities with 0 MWh electricity sale? Or we can apply with 50% cost share? 

"Applicants who are small utilities applying to Topic Area 1 must submit the EIA Form 86technology1 for the last reporting year showing the total retail electricity sales to ultimate customers to ensure status as a small utility."

Consistent with Section III. of the FOA document, the  domestic entities eligible to apply include electric grid operators, electricity storage operators; electricity generators; transmission owner or operators; distribution providers; and fuel suppliers, but do not include battery manufacturers. Further, for technologies which have not yet been commercially deployed, applicants are encouraged to explore opportunities with Office of Clean Energy Demonstration (OCED).

Does inclusion on the teaming list affect eligibility to apply for funding?

No, participation on the teaming partner list does not affect eligibility. Please see Section III of the FOA document for eligibility requirements.

Can eligible entities submitting concept papers/applications as a prime within a topic area also be listed as a collaborator/project team member on another eligible entity’s project within the same topic area? For example, can Entity A be listed on a concept paper or provide a letter of commitment for Entity B applying under the same topic area? Furthermore, if yes, do the projects need to be uniquely different or can there be some overlap in scope? Are there specific guidelines to follow for this or is it based on our own judgment?

An eligible entity may submit a concept paper/application within a topic area as the prime applicant and could also be proposed as a subrecipient on a separate concept paper/application submitted by a different eligible entity.  Consistent with Section III.F of the FOA document, “An entity may submit more than one Concept Paper and Full Application to this FOA, provided that each application describes a unique, scientifically distinct project and provided that an eligible Concept Paper was submitted for each Full Application.” 

Can applications in cycle 1 of topic 3 be focused on doing a study, with the intention of applying for full funding in a subsequent cycle?

Under Topic Area 3, DOE is interested in both technical and non-technical approaches that improve grid reliability and resilience on a local, regional, and interregional scale. Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, research-based proposals are eligible for consideration, but projects funded through this program should demonstrate innovative approaches to transmission, storage, and distribution infrastructure to harden and enhance resilience and reliability, and/or demonstrate new approaches to enhance regional grid resilience, implemented through States by public and rural electric cooperative entities on a cost-shared basis.  Sec. 40103(b)(3)(A)-(B), 42 U.S.C.A. § 18712(b)(3)(A)-(B). "Demonstration" means a project designed to determine the technical feasibility and economic potential of a technology on either a pilot or prototype scale. 2 CFR § 910.130(e).  DOE is unable to further comment on which applications are likely to be successful.

Can a statewide or regional organization apply on behalf of its members which are smaller utilities/Can a public power non-profit organization submit a statewide or regional application on behalf of its utility members?

Consistent with Section III.A of the FOA document, statewide or regional organizations and public power non-profit organizations are not eligible applicants under Topic Area 1 (BIL Section 40101(c)) or Topic Area 3 (40103(b)).  However, statewide or regional organizations and public power non-profit organizations that are for-profit entities or non-profit entities are eligible under Topic Area 2 (BIL Section 40107).

Are public power districts eligible for Topic Area 1?  We are a political subdivision of the state, but are also distribution providers.

A public power district would be eligible for Topic Area 1 as a distribution provider.

Is the headquarters of an applicant's parent company taken into account in the scoring? e.g. if a company that is based in a non-US country has US subsidiaries applying for this FOA, are they going to be rated lower than an applicant that is 100% US-based? (this applies more to topic areas 1 and 2)/ Would a foreign company based in the Basque Country, Spain, need to establish a US subsidiary so to be eligible as a subrecipient of a grant even if they partner with, say for example, a US utility as the primary recipient? (The utility would file a waiver request)

Consistent with Section III.A.iv.b. of the FOA document, in limited circumstances, DOE may approve a waiver to allow a foreign entity to participate as a prime recipient or subrecipient. A foreign entity may submit a Full Application to this FOA, but the Full Application must be accompanied by an explicit written waiver request. Likewise, if the applicant seeks to include a foreign entity as a subrecipient, the applicant must submit a separate explicit written waiver request in the Full Application for each proposed foreign subrecipient. Consistent with Section V of the FOA document, the location of the headquarters of the parent company of an applicant is not among technical review criteria for this FOA. See Appendix D of the FOA document for additional information on waiver requests for foreign entity participation.

Are municipal utilities (as part of the local government) able to apply under the third (government) funding opportunity?

Consistent with Section 3.A.i. of the FOA document, domestic units of local government are eligible to apply under Topic Areas 2 and 3.

Can we partner with a municipally-owned utility (LADWP) to submit our concept paper for the Grid Innovation Program (3rd option of the GRIP family of grants)? LADWP is a branch of the City of LA's local government.

Consistent with Section 3.A.iii. of the FOA document, a unit of local government is eligible to apply under Topic Area 3 (Grid Innovation Program).

If WAPA is not eligible as a prime or subrecipient of the GRIP program, could they still participate as a co-applicant? As noted above, Southline would fund the upgrades to WAPA’s existing line and could be the prime grant recipient if appropriate.

As noted in the FOA document, federal agencies are eligible to participate as subrecipients. Co-applicants are required to meet all of the statutory requirements of a prime recipient, and thus federal agencies, except for the Tennessee Valley Authority (under Topic Area 1) are not eligible to be a co-applicant.

Hi, can we apply for the same projects for this FOA and for the forthcoming IIJA funding such as section 41001, Energy Storage Demonstration Projects?

It is the potential applicant's decision on whether to apply to a FOA.  If a project receives funding from one FOA, it may be precluded from receiving funding from another FOA depending on the terms of that FOA.

We are working with City of Philadelphia, Division of Aviation on a possible solar farm project at PNE Northeast Airport which would promote regional grid resilience and reduce airport-related loads on the system. However, for the solar farm project to be viable, an enabling project is required to upgrade a transformer and associated infrastructure in the area. The project would be designed and constructed by the local utility and paid for by the City. Our question is - Is the enabling transformer project eligible for the grant?

Per 42 U.S.C.A. § 18711(e)(2)(A)(i)(I), generation is not an eligible use of grants in Topic Area 1. Transformers and other electrical infrastructure may be eligible of grants if it would reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events.

For an entity submitting multiple applications for the same Topic Area, what is considered a "different project"? Would a similar technology deployment "project" executed with different utility partners in different geographies each be considered a unique project, and eligible for submission as a distinct concept paper to the same opportunity (SGG Section 40107)?

As noted in the FOA, “an entity may submit more than one Concept Paper and Full Application to this FOA, provided that each application describes a unique, scientifically distinct project and provided that an eligible Concept Paper was submitted for each Full Application.”  A project located in different locations with different partners would be considered to be unique.

Can we submit a concept paper under Topic Area 3 as a non-eligible applicant if we are still looking for the entity to partner, and in case of a successful partnership, resubmit as a secondary applicant with the principal applicant is an eligible entity for this topic for the next round of applications?

Concept papers may only be submitted by eligible entities.

According to the FOA, an entity may submit more than one Concept Paper and Full Application to this FOA, provided that each application describes a unique, scientifically distinct project and provided that an eligible Concept Paper was submitted for each Full Application. 

With that, can an eligible entity include a subproject in a partner consortium bid and also include that same subproject in their own bid? For example, the subproject in the consortium bid is $20M of the total $200. Similarly, the same subproject is in the sole applicant bid is $20M of the total $150 bid. Is this allowable?

Consistent with Section III.F. of the FOA document, an entity may submit more than one Concept Paper and Full Application to this FOA, provided that each application describes a unique, scientifically distinct project. Overlap across proposed projects is discouraged.

Do you have guidance on reporting for foreign national participation? Both FOAs state applicants must provide info to DOE when they anticipate involving foreign nationals but I'm wondering what DOE considers foreign national "involvement" or "participation"?

The FOA cites the applicable rules, which will have to be applied to the specific facts of an application. The outcome will depend on the sensitivity of the project and what foreign nationals or entities are proposed in the project.  If a foreign national or entity may potentially participate or be involved then they should look closely at the “Waiver for foreign Entity Participation” to understand the type of concerns the US government would have and address these concerns in a waiver application.

Is it allowable to have unfunded collaborators?

Collaborators roles will need to be further clarified as to their efforts and the contributions to the project.

Can an entity be a vendor to the Prime award recipient and also be a 2nd tier subcontractor that also provides cost share?

Section 200.331 of 2 CFR 200 explains the roles of subrecipients and contractors so the prime recipient can determine the relationship.   In addition please refer to 2 CFR 200  which provides further guidance for making this determination with the definitions in sections 2 CFR 200.1 for the terms contract, contractor, subaward and subrecipient.

The FOA has no prohibitors identified.

Reading the FOA, it precludes FFRDCs from being recipients or subrecipients, but is silent on whether an FFRDC can participate as a contractor to a recipient in the form of a strategic partnership project.  Could we use an FFRDC as a contractor in this way? 

National Labs and Federal Funded Research and Development Centers are not eligible to apply for funding as a prime recipient and may not be proposed as a subrecipient on another entity’s application. This restriction applies to both DOE/NNSA and Non-DOD/NNSA (national labs and FFRDC’s). See Section III of the FOA document for additional details.

If a single holding company is the prime applicant and wholly owns other entities, is it an eligible entity?

Holding companies are not necessarily precluded from eligibility under GRIP. See Section III of the FOA document relating to eligibility.

If a single holding company is the prime applicant and wholly owns other entities, are the owned entities also eligible entities?

For Topic Area 1, to be an eligible entity, an entity must be an entity identified in Section 40101(a)(2)(A)-(G). A holding company of such a company would qualify as an eligible entity. Other entities owned by the holding company would not be eligible unless they independently qualify as an eligible entity under Topic Area 1. For Topic Area 2, eligibility is based on the type of investment. For Topic Area 3, private companies are not eligible entities.

Do the subsidiaries have to be wholly owned or only majority owned by the parent company to count as eligible entities?

See Section III of the FOA document relating to eligibility.

One of our subawardees is organized in Delaware and has a physical location for business operations in the U.S.  However, the subawardee is funded by an investment fund based in France.  On our reading of Appendix B, the foreign funding does not trigger "Foreign Entity" classification and this subawardee would NOT qualify as a Foreign Entity for the purposes of this FOA.  Is that a correct reading of Appendix B?

Review Appendix B relating to Waiver Requests for Foreign Entity Participation.

Some of our partners at NREL want to work with us and are seeking clarification on the following:  

The GRIP FOA indicates that FFRDC (i.e. National labs) are not eligible to be a grant requestor or sub-recipient; however, if a Utility or a for profit entity is interested in direct payment to a National lab for services to support the grant outcomes, would this count for eligible cost share requirements?

No, this would not count for eligible cost share requirements.

Is it allowable to have unfunded collaborators?

It depends on how the unfunded collaborators are proposed to participate in the project. Without additional context, DOE is unable to answer this question.

Can a given entity apply awards from multiple distinct DOE funding programs to a single project?

Each application must be unique, scientifically distinct, and should not overlap in scope with other applications. Each application will be evaluated on the merits of solely that application regardless of how many applications an applicant submits.

Is substation physical security eligible under Topic Area 1?

An eligible entity may use funds in TA 1 for activities identified in BIL Section 40101(e)(1)(K) that reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events and provide physical security, including physical hardening of power lines, facilities, substations, of other systems.

As part of Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnership (GRIP) Topic 1, a concept paper was submitted addressing customers served by transmission lines in a radial configuration. This concept paper included constructing new lines at or above 69 kV to provide looped service to customers in disadvantaged communities that are negatively impacted by the radial nature of their transmission service. This looped service concept would improve both the reliability and the resiliency of the transmission system that serves these customers that, in their current configuration, could result in long outages to the customers served.

On February 3, 2023, this concept paper was given an “encouraged to apply” notice and, in anticipation of and due to this response, significant time and resources were and are being invested towards completing the full application due April 6, 2023.

On February 6, 2023, DE-FOA-0002740, Amendment 000004 was released declaring "applications that include new transmission lines at or above 69 kV are not of interest (1)” and “new transmission lines at or above 69 kV are not an eligible use (2).” 

As a result of Amendment 000004, this concept paper would be eliminated in its entirety from being eligible to continue through the application process. Further, the amendment leaves an insufficient amount of time to re-tool the current proposal, effectively rendering it moot. Finally, curtailing 69kV and above runs contrary to the goals of the electric utility industry, essentially awarding funds to projects that the industry has little desire to invest in.

To enable continued efforts towards application with the “encouraged to apply” guidance it is requested of the DOE to issue:

1. An exemption from the restriction made in Amendment 000004, or
2. Create an additional amendment to correct the revision in Amendment 000004, or
3. Delay implementing the revision in Amendment 000004 to a future Funding Opportunity Announcement.

Consistent with Section III.G. of the FOA document, DOE makes eligibility determinations in response to full applications and not in response to concept papers. As stated in Section B.1.i of the FOA document, the construction of new transmission lines at or above 69kV are not eligible for funding under Topic Area 1.

Please clarify whether the prohibition on construction of new 69 kV or higher transmission lines also prohibits any utility pole replacement or other improvements to high-voltage power lines. The FOA appears to indicate upgrades to any existing transmission infrastructure (including 69 kV or higher) to improve resilience would qualify, but please confirm.

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, under Topic Area 1, new distribution lines below 69 kV, reconductoring, undergrounding and other upgrades to existing transmission infrastructure, including pole replacement, which reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events are eligible for funding.

Appendix B of the FOA describes the information required to request a waiver for foreign entity participation or foreign work. Was there a template available for foreign entity participation waiver requests?

No template for foreign entity participation waiver requests has been provided.

The Overview of Topic Area 1 describes eligibility criteria for projects. Page 22, item "(M)" indicates eligibility for new distribution lines below 69 kV and goes on to list reconductoring, undergrounding, and other upgrades to existing transmission infrastructure as eligible. Does the 69 kV limit apply to any reconductoring, undergrounding, or other upgrade to existing transmission infrastructure? Or are upgrades to transmission infrastructure at voltages above 69 kV permitted?

The 69kV limit does not apply to reconductoring, undergrounding, or other upgrade to existing transmission infrastructure.

Can you use GRIP funds be used to upgrade utility owned assets that cross federal lands?

GRIP funds may be used to upgrade utility owned assets that cross federal lands so long as applicable permitting requirements have been satisfied.

We understand that grants are intended to be supplemental to existing hardening efforts of applicants for any given year and may include the acceleration or expansion of planned activities that would not be accelerated or expanded but-for the funding. If a utility is accelerating and expanding a program, must they only request funding for the accelerated and expanded benefits, or may they request a grant for the full projects costs (including but not limited to the expansion and acceleration)?

As stated in Section I.B.i of the FOA, funding supplemental to existing efforts is allowed and proposals can include full project costs but the applicant should describe in a narrative how the grant funding provided by this program would result in proposed activities that are additional to efforts that would have been undertaken but for the funding.

Are projects that include investments that utilize specific tax credits or deductions under the Internal Revenue Code 1) prohibited from applying for grant funding, or 2) prohibited from being used to meet the GRIP cost-share requirements (i.e., US Dept of Energy may discount a grant award to account for the federal tax incentives)?

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, investment or expenditures for Smart Grid technologies, devices, or equipment that utilize specific tax credits or deductions under the Internal Review Code are not eligible for funding under Topic Area 2. However, no such prohibition exists under Topic Areas 1 and 3. See Appendix A of the FOA document for additional information on cost matching requirements.

The following questions all apply to Topic Area 1:

1. In regard to material presented during February 8 WebEx we note that slide #17 provides the following:

   “Restrictions on the funding of new generation in GRIP Programs

   Topic Area 1:
   - New transmission lines at or above 69kV are not an eligible use.
   - Construction of a new generating facility is not an eligible use.”
   
   Please clarify eligibility requirements for new transmission lines:  Are new lines that will operate at/above 69kV that are NOT ASSOCIATED WITH NEW GENERATION eligible for funding in Topic Area 1?

2. In a case where we want to replace an existing transmission line with a new line on a different route between the same two terminals and with a higher capacity rating, please confirm that the relocated line is eligible for funding in Topic Area 1?
    
3. How do we handle anticipated inflation in the cost estimates, particularly for a project that won’t even start for 2-3 years?  Do we build the budget with costs that include projected inflation through the life of the project in the 5-year window?

1. As stated in Section I.B and I.C of the FOA document, new transmission lines at or above 69 kV are not eligible for funding, whether they are associated with new generation or not.

2. This would constitute construction of new transmission and is not permitted.

3. Budget costs can reflect estimated inflation costs on equipment/materials throughout the span of a project proposal.

1. If a single holding company is the prime applicant and wholly owns other entities, is it an eligible entity?
2. If a single holding company is the prime applicant and wholly owns other entities, are the owned entities also eligible entities?
3. Does an affiliate company mean a company the applicant does not hold a majority ownership stake in?
4. Is the criterion that makes investments of subsidiaries not count the fact that they are not majority owned by the holding company?
5. Do the subsidiaries have to be wholly owned or only majority owned by the parent company to count as eligible entities?
6. To clarify, wholly-owned and majority-owned subsidiary resilience investments count toward parent companies, who is also the prime applicant, resilience investments, but subsidiaries that are not majority owned by the parent company do not count, correct?

Prime recipients and subrecipients must comply with all the eligibility requirements in Section III.A of the FOA document. DOE will not make eligibility determinations for potential applicants prior to the date on which applications to this FOA must be submitted.

Please clarify whether the prohibition on construction of new 69 kV or higher transmission lines also prohibits any utility pole replacement or other improvements to high-voltage power lines. The FOA appears to indicate upgrades to any existing transmission infrastructure (including 69 kV or higher) to improve resilience would qualify, but please confirm.

Under Section I.B.i upgrades to existing transmission lines (utility pole management) is eligible for funding for Topic Area 1. Construction of new transmission lines at or above 69 kV is not eligible.

Reading the FOA, it precludes FFRDCs from being recipients or subrecipients, but is silent on whether an FFRDC can participate as a contractor to a recipient in the form of a strategic partnership project.  Could we use an FFRDC as a contractor in this way?

National Labs and FFRDC are not eligible to apply for funding as a prime recipient and may not be proposed as a subrecipient on another entity’s application. This restriction applies to both DOE/NNSA and Non DOD/NNSA (national labs and FFRDC’s) See Section III of the FOA document for further eligibility information.

One of our subawardees is organized in Delaware and has a physical location for business operations in the U.S.  However, the subawardee is funded by an investment fund based in France.  On our reading of Appendix B, the foreign funding does not trigger "Foreign Entity" classification and this subawardee would NOT qualify as a Foreign Entity for the purposes of this FOA.  Is that a correct reading of Appendix B?

Consistent with Section III.G. of the FOA document, DOE will not make eligibility determinations for potential applicants prior to the date on which applications to this FOA must be submitted.

Please see Appendix B of the FOA document for additional information relative to foreign entity participation and Section III.A. of the FOA for additional eligibility information.

BIL Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP) (DE-FOA-0002740). We have two concept papers submitted, one each for Topic Areas 2 and 3.

1. Funding Request - Is there any possibility to increase the estimated budget requested in the Concept Paper when we submit the final application? We will absolutely assure that the proportional applicant contribution exceeds the proportion estimated in the concept paper. However, we are seeing that demand and supply chain issues are increasing prices even since our early January 2023 quotes.
2. Eligible Tax Credits - If there are eligible federal or state tax credits regarding energy technology (say, for solar panels or other items), can the applicant still take those tax credits if awarded the grant? Related, if not, could they take the tax credits for only the 50% matching portion that contributes? Pro rata or otherwise?
3. Adjustments can be made from the submission of the concept paper until the submission of the full application.
4. Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, investment or expenditures for Smart Grid technologies, devices, or equipment that utilize specific tax credits or deductions under the Internal Review Code are not eligible for funding under Topic Area 2. However, no such prohibition exists under Topic Areas 1 and 3. See Appendix A of the FOA document for additional information on cost matching requirements.

Amendment 4 of the FOA states "new distribution lines below 69 kV, reconductoring, undergrounding and other upgrades to existing transmission infrastructure are considered eligible; and applications that include new transmission lines at or above 69 kV are not of interest."

We are upgrading 2 of our main transmission transformers, as part of this project, which will require increasing the gauge of the current 69 kV transmission lines.  Can reconductoring the 69 kV lines be used towards our match requirement for this project?

Reconductoring existing 69kv lines would be an eligible use of funding for Topic Area 1.

Some of our partners at NREL want to work with us and are seeking clarification on the following: The GRIP FOA indicates that FFRDC (i.e. National labs) are not eligible to be a grant requestor or sub-recipient; however, if a Utility or a for profit entity is interested in direct payment to a National lab for services to support the grant outcomes, would this count for eligible cost share requirements?

Per Section III.A.iv.c of the FOA document, National Laboratories and Federal Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) are not eligible to apply for funding as a prime recipient and may not be proposed as a subrecipient on another entity’s application. For more information on cost share requirements, see Appendix A of the FOA document.

Are vendors that are helping prepare a GRIP application and design the associated project(s) eligible to be selected for project implementation (construction and O&M)?

The FOA does not contain prohibitions on preventing a vendor’s participation in the application process.

Thank you for the encouragement to submit a full application based on our Concept Paper submission assigned as, TA3-089-E. At this time, we are preparing a full application in response and have a question about the Prime Applicant. The paper was originally submitted under a state business contact at one State Authority. Is there any reason the State can not assign the a different Authority as Prime and update the business contact, and any other necessary information on the full application? Please let us know if this is possible, and if so what would need to be done in order to make the change.

Applicants must have submitted a Concept Paper to be considered for a Full Application. Applicants’ proposed prime recipients and business contacts from their submitted Full Applications will be the contacts DOE communicates with relative to the proposed project.

Please refer to Section III of the FOA document for eligibility information and see Section IV.D.i of the FOA document for additional information on full application content requirements.

Are grant awards available to applicants seeking to expand and/or accelerate existing project plans under Topic Area 1?  

Yes. An eligible entity may apply for funding to support projects which go beyond and are additional to existing plans, so long as that applicant can satisfactorily demonstrate that the proposed expansion or acceleration would not have occurred but-for grant awards through the Grid Resilience and Innovative Partnerships program. See the Topic Area 1 Requirements discussion in Section I.B.i of the FOA document.

Which projects are eligible to receive funding? 

Topic Area 1:  Grid Resilience Grants (40101(c))

A grant awarded to an eligible entity under this Topic Area may be used for activities, technologies, equipment, and hardening measures to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events, including—

• weatherization technologies and equipment;
• fire-resistant technologies and fire prevention-systems;
• monitoring and control technologies;
• the undergrounding of electrical equipment;
• utility pole management;
• the relocation of power lines or the reconductoring of power lines with low-sag, advanced conductors;
• vegetation and fuel-load management;
• the use or construction of distributed energy   resources for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events, including microgrids; and battery-storage subcomponents;
• adaptive protection technologies;
• advanced modeling technologies;
• hardening of power lines, facilities, substations, of other systems; and
• the replacement of old overhead conductors and underground cables.

A grant under this Topic Area may not be used for construction of a new electric generating facility or large-scale battery storage facility that is not used enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events; or cybersecurity. See the Topic Area 1 discussion in Section I.B.i of the FOA document.

Topic Area 2:  Smart Grid Grants (40107)

For a complete list of qualifying investments under section 40107, see the Topic Area 2 discussion in Section I.B.i of the FOA document.  The priority investment areas for section 40107 include:

• Increasing transmission capacity and operational transfer capacity through grid enhancing technologies such as dynamic line rating, flow control devices, advanced conductors, and network topology optimization, to improve system efficiency and reliability. 
• Improving the visibility of the electrical system to grid operators, to help quickly rebalance the electrical system with autonomous controls, through data analytics, software, and sensors. 
• Enhance secure communication and data flow between distribution components, through investments in optical ground wire, dark fiber, operational fiber, and wireless broadband communications networks. 
• Aggregation and integration of distributed energy resources and other “grid-edge” devices to provide system benefits, such as renewable energy resources, electric vehicle charging infrastructure, vehicle-to-grid technologies and capabilities, and smart building technologies.
• Enhancing interoperability and data architecture of systems that support two-way flow of both electric power and localized analytics to provide information between electricity system operators and consumers. 
• Anticipate and mitigate the impacts of extreme weather or natural disaster on grid resiliency, including investments to increase the ability to redirect or shut of power to minimize blackouts, prevent wildfires, and avoid further damage. 

Certain expenditures and investments are not eligible for Smart Grid grant funding, including:

• Investments or expenditures for Smart Grid technologies, devices, or equipment that utilize specific tax credits or deductions under the Internal Revenue Code, as amended. 
• Expenditures for electricity generation, transmission, or distribution infrastructure or equipment not directly related to enabling Smart Grid functions. 
• After the final date for State consideration of the Smart Grid Information Standard under section 2621(d)(17) of title 16, an investment that is not in compliance with such standard. 
• After the development and publication by the Institute of protocols and model standards for interoperability of smart grid devices and technologies, an investment that fails to incorporate any of such protocols or model standards. 
• Expenditures for physical interconnection of generators or other devices to the grid except those that are directly related to enabling Smart Grid functions. 
• Expenditures for ongoing salaries, benefits, or personnel costs not incurred in the initial installation, training, or startup of smart grid functions. 
• Expenditures for travel, lodging, meals or other personal costs. 
• Ongoing or routine operation, billing, customer relations, security, and maintenance expenditures. 

Topic Area 3: Grid Innovation Program (40103(b))

For full details, see the Topic Area 3 discussion in Section I.B.i of the FOA document.  Applications in this area could include technologies, solutions, and advanced functionalities such as:

Area of Interest 1: Transmission system applications

• Investments and strategies that accelerate interconnection of clean energy generation and/or storage;  
• Interregional or cross-ISO/RTO projects that address key grid reliability, flexibility, and/or resilience challenges; 
• Projects addressing grid access challenges for remote, stranded, or novel low-carbon resources; 
• Planning, modeling, cost allocation, or other approaches that enable a transition to innovative financial and/or regulatory constructs that accelerate transmission expansion; 
• Underground or underwater HVDC systems in challenging environments; 
• Capacity enhancing approaches such as advanced conductors or dynamic line rating systems; 
• Congestion management techniques including energy storage and integrated controls; 
• Transmission-scale reactive power devices; 
• Flexible alternating current transmission system (FACTS) devices; 
• Solid state transformers;  
• Power flow controllers for AC or High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) systems. 

Area of Interest 2:  Distribution system applications

• Adaptive microgrid formation, reliable islanded operations, and service provision during grid-tied operations; 
• Demonstration of reliable and resilient system operations utilizing high levels of distributed renewable generation and energy storage, or increased levels of non-emitting, non-electric distributed energy resources (e.g., renewable heating or cooling); 
• Black-start capable systems and control approaches to minimize negative impacts during power grid disruptions; 
• Provision of grid services from distributed, advanced grid-forming inverter-based systems at sufficient scale and system complexity; 
• Behind the meter asset operations, aggregation, and coordination to provide demand response and grid services, including building systems, distributed generation, energy storage, electric vehicle fleets and others. 

Area of Interest 3: Combination systems applications

• Utilization of distribution grid assets to provide backup power and reduce transmission requirements; 
• Utilization of distribution grid dispatchable loads, distributed generation, and energy storage to manage transmission congestion and limit required upgrades; 
• Optimized integrated management of transmission and distribution systems; 
• Monitoring and control technologies, that can provide improved resilience and extend grid visibility & situational awareness across the entire electric delivery system by providing real-time situational awareness across the system. 

Can applicants seek reimbursement for pre-award expenses?

Please see Section IV.I.ii of the FOA Document for the full discussion on pre-award costs. Applicants selected for award negotiations (selectee) must request prior written approval to charge pre-award costs. Pre-award costs are those incurred prior to the effective date of the federal award directly pursuant to the negotiation and in anticipation of the federal award where such costs are necessary for efficient and timely performance of the scope of work. Such costs are allowable only to the extent that they would have been allowable if incurred after the date of the federal award and only with the written approval of the federal awarding agency, through the DOE Contracting Officer.

Pre-award costs cannot be incurred prior to the Selection Official signing the Selection Statement and Analysis.

Pre-award expenditures are made at the selectee’s risk. DOE is not obligated to reimburse costs: (1) in the absence of appropriations; (2) if an award is not made; or (3) if an award is made for a lesser amount than the selectee anticipated.

Can you please provide guidance on whether eligible project expenses – incurred prior to a grant award – can be included in the full application?  

If "back-dated" eligible expenses are allowed, please confirm the earliest date for when these eligible project expenses can be claimed (i.e., how long prior to a grant award can eligible project expenses be claimed?). 

Please see Section IV.I.ii of the FOA Document for the full discussion on pre-award costs. Applicants selected for award negotiations (selectee) must request prior written approval to charge pre-award costs. Pre-award costs are those incurred prior to the effective date of the federal award directly pursuant to the negotiation and in anticipation of the federal award where such costs are necessary for efficient and timely performance of the scope of work. Such costs are allowable only to the extent that they would have been allowable if incurred after the date of the federal award and only with the written approval of the federal awarding agency, through the DOE Contracting Officer. 

Pre-award costs cannot be incurred prior to the Selection Official signing the Selection Statement and Analysis. 

Pre-award expenditures are made at the selectee’s risk. DOE is not obligated to reimburse costs: (1) in the absence of appropriations; (2) if an award is not made; or (3) if an award is made for a lesser amount than the selectee anticipated. 

Pre-award costs would not be approved prior to the Selection Official signing the Selection Statement and Analysis. 

It is our understanding that DOE only expects to award as little as 4 projects under topic area 3 for this funding cycle. If true, this adds to our concerns about using tight resources to prepare robust proposals that ultimately may be a waste of time.

Consistent with Section 2.A.i. of the FOA document, DOE anticipates granting between 4 and 40 awards.  The wide range in the number of anticipated awards is attributed to the federal share maximum amount for any one individual award, $1B for interregional transmission projects and $250M for other awards.  DOE will evaluate applications in accordance with the FOA and the guidance provided in the “DOE Merit Review Guide for Financial Assistance,” effective September 2020.  See Section V.B. of the FOA document.  The actual number of awards is currently unknown and will be based on available funding, the results of the merit review, and the application of program policy factors (if applicable).  Consistent with section III.G of the FOA document, 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.

Can you please clarify the maximum amount that can be requested in this round. Since the first funding cycle will include both FY22 and FY23, can submissions request $100M ($50M for each year) or is the $50M max for both years combined?

Under BIL sections 40101(c), 40107, and 40103(b), the BIL appropriated approximately $10.5 billion for the five-year period encompassing FY22 through FY26, via annual release of competitive FOAs. This FOA will include both fiscal years 2022 and 2023, totaling approximately $3.9 Billion of federal funding that DOE expects to make available for new awards under this FOA, subject to the availability of appropriated funds.  Applicants should review the Estimated Funding table in Section II.A.i of the FOA document for the anticipated maximum award size for any one individual award (Fed Share). 

For Topic Area #1 are capital construction borrowings from USDA/RUS considered eligible for matching federal grant funds?

Assuming that eligible purposes of a USDA/RUS Electric loan and GRIP funding overlap, funds from such RUS loan may be used to satisfy the non-federal cost match requirement in the GRIP FOA.  However, any portion of such loan that is to be forgiven at a future date may not be used to satisfy the non-federal share.

If XXXXX uses its own cash upfront to complete a project and then receives a portion back from the GRIP grant is it allowed to then use the remaining balance to submit to RUS for the already pre-approved construction workplan line of credit/loan? 

Please contact USDA for questions regarding the terms and conditions of the RUS program. 

For Topic 1, for purposes of determining the amount that an eligible entity has spent in the previous 3 years on efforts to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events under FOA Section II.A.i, can an applicant include amounts spent by the applicant’s affiliates, such as the applicant’s parent company, subsidiaries, or other companies under common ownership.

No, only the documented expenditures of the applicant entity would be eligible for inclusion in the Report on Resilience Investments. See Section IV.D.xviii of the FOA document for additional guidance.

Can you provide a little more guidance on the intent of the Cost Share section in the FOA stating "Vendors/contractors may not provide cost share. Any partial donation of goods or services is considered a discount and is not allowable."  What if the Prime entity has partnering/subcontractor entities (classified as a vendor) that are willing to contribute equipment necessary for the performance or demonstration as in-kind cost share? Furthermore, what if the same entity needed to make modifications to the equipment, could the hours needed to make modifications count as in-kind cost share?  Based on 2CFR 200.306 (b), cost share is allowable when it meets the criteria listed in section (b).

A vendor participates in the project solely to provide goods or services in a procurement type relationship in support of its normal business operations consistent with many different purchasers and is typically considered a dealer, Subrecipient Contractor, distributer, merchant, seller, or service provider.  Vendors normally operate in a competitive environment, and their participation in the project is ancillary.  Based on this type of relationship, cost contributions from a vendor are unallowable.  This is also stated in the Budget Justification attachment to the FOA, under the Cost Sharing tab.

Can you please clarify if related cost to buy and install EV charging stations are allowed since charging station can allow an EV to be grid-enhancing?

Consistent with Section 1.B.i. of the FOA document, electric vehicle charging infrastructure is listed among priority investments under Topic Area 2.

Can batteries or EV be purchased with federal funds?

While large-scale battery-storage facility that is not used for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events are specifically not of interest under Topic Area 1, the use or construction of distributed energy resources for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events, including battery storage subcomponents, are eligible for funding under Topic Area 1.

Are smart thermostats an allowable cost or cost-share (if donated by a partner subprime institution)?

Expenditures relating to the purchase of electric vehicles do not qualify as eligible.

Are the cost-related to upgrade buildings HVAC controls to make it grid-enhancing allowed?

Expenditures relating to smart thermostats or building HVAC controls qualify as eligible smart building technologies under Topic Area 2.

What kind of “vegetation management” are you looking for? Would it be more along the lines of implementing technology to increase the effectiveness of vegetation management programs or would it be the vegetation management itself, like ramping up removals, trimming, treatments, etc.

Consistent with Section I.A.i. of the FOA document, a broad range of activities, technologies, equipment, and hardening measures, including vegetation management, to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events are eligible for funding under Topic Area 1. However, DOE is unable to further comment on which applications are likely to be successful.

For topic area 1, is the installation of solid oxide fuel cell powered micro grids that enhance system adaptive capacity during disruptive events and reduce peak loads by providing base load onsite generation at commercial and industrial facilities considered in scope to “use or construction of distributed energy resources for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events,” or is it considered “construction of a new power generating facility” and therefore outside of this FOA’s scope?

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA, for Topic Area 1, the use or construction of distributed energy resources for enhancing system  adaptive capacity during disruptive events, including microgrids, is eligible for funding. However, the construction of a new power generating facility is not eligible for funding.

For Topic Area 2, specifically for proposals led by “Institutions of higher education”: Can we submit proposals that are research-only without implementation on a physical grid?

Topic Area 2 seeks to deploy and catalyze technology solutions that increase the flexibility, efficiency, reliability, and resilience of the electric power system. Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, research-based proposals are eligible for consideration, but smart grid technologies funded and deployed at-scale under this program should have a pathway to wider market adoption such that the funding significantly encourages and facilitates that development of a smart grid. DOE is unable to further comment on which applications are likely to be successful.

Though GRIP is focused on deployment can the development of interoperable standards and the associated data architectures be a primary objective of a proposal?

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, projects with the goal of enhancing interoperability and data architecture of systems that support two-way flow of both electric power and localized analytics to provide information between electricity system operators and consumers may qualify as eligible under Topic Area 2 (Smart Grid Grants).

Does the Department consider submitting a Concept Paper as an application for the Grid Resilience Industry and Utility Grants such that it would prohibit the applicant from submitting an application for sub-awards from the Grid Resilience Formula Grants for the same project?

Consistent with Section 1.B.i. of the FOA document, if an applicant has submitted a concept paper pursuant to the GRIP FOA, Topic Area 1 (IIJA section 40101(c)), then it may also pursue a subaward or subcontract under the formula grant program administered by States and Tribes pursuant to IIJA section 40101(d) provided that the applicant describes the differences between these applications in the Project Description and Assurances Document in its full application in the GRIP program.  In its application for a subaward or subcontract under IIJA section 40101(d), the applicant should also inform the State or Tribe administering that program of the applicant’s pending application under the GRIP FOA.

Can applicants use funds for project-related travel, e.g. Airfare/Lodging/meals to have workshops with PUC staff, utility staff, etc.?

Consistent with Section 1.B.i. of the FOA document, expenditures and investments relating to travel, lodging, meals, or other personal costs are not eligible for Smart Grid grant funding under Topic Area 2. However, no such disqualification exists under Topic Areas 1 or 3.

Can funds be used for planning/engineering portions of project?

Consistent with Section 1.B.i. of the FOA document, included among qualifying investments under Topic Area 3 (Grid Innovation Program) are documented expenditures incurred in relation to planning, modeling, cost allocation, or other approaches that enable a transition to innovative financial and/or regulatory constructs that accelerate transmission expansion.

How should resilience investments be calculated? What types of costs/spend/investments are eligible to be considered under that investment category?

Consistent with Section 4.D.xviii. of the FOA document, applicants must submit a report detailing past, current, and future efforts by the eligible entity to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events. The report must summarize any programs and related approved funding that your organization has implemented over the past 3 years to reduce the likelihood of events in which operations of the electric grid are disrupted, preventively shut off, or cannot operate safely due to extreme weather, wildfire, or a natural disaster. The report must also summarize current and future efforts planned over at least the next 3 years to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events.

Would transmission line undergrounding be an eligible activity under the Grid innovation program, and can a city apply for those funds if they plan to work with the private owner of the utility?

Consistent with Section 1.B.i. of the FOA document applications in Area of Interest 1 under Topic Area 3 could include technologies, solutions, and advanced functionalities such as underground or underwater HVDC systems in challenging environments. Consistent with Section 3.A.iii. of the FOA document, a unit of local government is eligible to apply under Topic Area 3 (Grid Innovation Program).

Is AMI an eligible expense under Smart Grid Grants?

Consistent with Section 1.B.i. of the FOA document, included among qualifying investments under Topic Area 2 (Smart Grid Grants) are documented expenditures incurred by an electric utility, distributor, or marketer and its customers to purchase and install metering infrastructure and other devices integrated with and attached to an electric utility system or retail distributor or marketer of electricity that are capable of engaging in Smart Grid functions.

If an applicant submits two separate applications, does the max award apply to EACH application or to the APPLICANT?

Consistent with Section 2.A.i. of the FOA document, maximum award sizes are applicable only to any one individual award.

I've been asked to reach out on a question as it relates to Rural Utilities Service (RUS) Loan funding. I know typically federal funds cannot be used as match funding for other federal grant programs, but not sure of any nuances as it relates to loans. Can utility providers receiving a loan through the RUS program use this as match funding for a GRIP grant?

Assuming that eligible purposes of a USDA/RUS Electric loan and GRIP funding overlap, funds from such RUS loan may be used to satisfy the non-federal cost match requirement in the GRIP FOA.  However, any portion of such loan that is to be forgiven at a future date may not be used to satisfy the non-federal share.

Can you confirm that, absent the demonstration of the last three years of resilience investments, an independent transmission developer cannot apply for the Grid Resilience Grant program?

DOE may not award a grant to an eligible entity in an amount that is greater than the total amount that the eligible entity has spent in the previous 3 years on efforts to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events. See section II.A.i of the FOA document for additional award information and estimations. Notwithstanding this limitation, there is no requirement for an eligible entity to have spent any amount in the past three years on efforts to reduce the likelihood and consequence of disruptive events to be eligible for this topic area.

Only 3 awards will be made to "small utilities" correct?

Consistent with the FOA document, DOE may issue one, multiple, or no awards. Small utilities may apply to any of the three Topic Areas. In Topic Area 1, approximately 3 of the anticipated 10 awards will be made to small utilities. Thirty percent (30%) of the total funding available will be set aside for small utilities, which are defined as entities that sell no more than 4,000,000 MWh of electricity per year. See section II.A.i of the FOA document for further details on estimated number of awards and funding levels.

Can you clarify why cybersecurity is not included in funding?

Consistent with Section I.C. of the FOA document, activities relating to cybersecurity are not eligible for funding under Topic Area 1 (Grid Resilience Grants). However, investment relating to cyber-security software may be an allowable expenditure under Topic Area 2 (Smart Grid Grants). Consistent with 42 U.S. Code § 17386 (b)(9), qualifying Smart Grid investments may include documented expenditures which allow software that enables devices or computers to engage Smart Grid functions. Consistent with 42 U.S. Code § 17386 (d)(5), The term “smart grid functions” can include the ability to detect, prevent, communicate with regard to, respond to, or recover from system security threats, including cyber-security threats and terrorism, using digital information, media, and devices.

Can a proposal include the purchase of software as a service (SaaS) from a foreign entity, or does that require a waiver?

An award will include a requirement that, to the greatest extent practicable, all equipment and products purchased with funds made available under this award should be American-made.

In a situation where an OEM is a prime recipient or sub-recipient, should budgeted cost items be proposed based on actual cost or list price, particularly for the equipment that they're supplying?

Please see the Budget Justification form provided as an attachment to the FOA.  The Equipment tab has instructions for providing a costs basis for proposed equipment regardless of the entity type.

I have two questions regarding Topic Area 2.  

Question A: On page 27 of the FOA, "in the case of entities other than electric utilities owning and operating a distributed electricity generator", does electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) hardware count as qualified expenditures that the grant can be used to cover? 

Question B: On page 27 of the FOA, in the case of electric vehicles, the FOA states that "the documented expenses for devices that allow the vehicle to engage in Smart Grid functions" are qualifying investments. Do the purchase costs of the electric vehicles themselves qualify as eligible investments that the grant can be used to cover?

Answer A:  Section 7 of Topic Area 2 states “[i]n the case of persons or entities other than electric utilities owning and operating a distributed electricity generator, the documented expenditures of enabling that generator to be monitored, controlled, or otherwise integrated into grid operations and electricity flows on the grid utilizing Smart Grid functions.”  If electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) hardware is a component part of “enabling a generator to be monitored, controlled, or otherwise integrated into grid operations and electricity flows on the grid utilizing Smart Grid functions,” then it is eligible under subsection 7 of Topic Area 2.  

Answer B:  Section 8 of Topic Area 2 states “[i]n the case of electric or hybrid-electric vehicles, the documented expenses for devices that allow the vehicle to engage in Smart Grid functions (but not the costs of electricity storage for the vehicle).”  The purchase cost of an electric vehicle would not be eligible, but any software or charging infrastructure, except electricity storage, that allows the vehicle to engage in Smart Grid functions would be eligible. 

Are behind-the-meter battery energy storage systems supporting the grid eligible for financing or cost share under Topic Area 2 (as distributed electricity generators)?

Behind-the-meter battery storage systems are permissible in the Smart Grid Grants program because it is a “qualifying investment” under Sec. 17386(b)(4) fulfilling a “smart grid function” in accordance with Sec. 17386(d)(11).

Topic 2 especially says the following are NOT allowable cost items (page 28)  

6. Expenditures for ongoing salaries, benefits, or personnel costs not incurred in the initial installation, training, or startup of smart grid functions. 

7. Expenditures for travel, lodging, meals or other personal costs. 

Please provide clarification for when are these costs allowed  

How is the work done on the project to be paid? 

when it meets the criteria listed in section (b). 

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, expenditures for ongoing salaries, benefits, or personnel costs not incurred in the initial installation, training, or startup of smart grid functions, as well as expenditures for travel, meals, or other personal costs, are not eligible for Smart Grid grant funding under Topic Area 2.

Can Investments in assets that are ITC eligible (e.g. battery energy storage systems) be used to meet the cost-share requirements even though page 28 in the FOA suggests that they’re not eligible to receive Smart Grid grant funding?

Per 42, U.S.C.A. section 17386(c)(1), Smart Grid investments do not include “(1)[i]Investments or expenditures for Smart Grid technologies, devices, or equipment that utilize specific tax credits or deductions under the Internal Revenue Code, as amended.”  Therefore, an investment that utilize specific tax credits or deductions under the Internal Revenue Code are not permitted.

Regarding the itemized budget for the full application, does the 50% cost share requirement apply for every line item or for the total budget request? Can the budget request and the 50% cost-share be different expense categories or do they need to match on each line-item? For example, if a grant budget line-item is for $700k for hardware. Can the total hardware cost be $700k, but our 50% cost-share can come from the applicant covering 100% or $700k of the software costs for the same project but listed in a different part of the budget worksheet?

The cost share contribution is not required to be met by line item.  Cost share contributions must be specified in the project budget, verifiable from the prime recipient’s records, and necessary and reasonable for proper and efficient accomplishment of the project.  Every cost share contribution must be allowable under the applicable federal cost principles, as described in Section IV.I.i. of the FOA. In addition, cost share must be verifiable upon submission of the Full Application.

Could you clarify how the cost share will work for accelerated programs? If the program is accelerated due to DOE funding, will the cost share cover 50% of the entire project or 50% of the accelerated project? If the latter could you provide an example.

Please refer to the Appendix A cost share information as it relates to Cost share/Cost match stipulations. Specific examples for all areas of interest are provided within that Appendix.

My organization has another question regarding the GRIP FOA. Can you explain how the awarded funding will be distributed after award negotiations?

The funding profile is provided on page 37 through 38 of the FOA. See FOA Section II.A.i provides the Estimated Funding.

the FOA states that “[a]n entity may submit more than one Concept Paper and Full Application to this FOA, provided that each application describes a unique, scientifically distinct project and provided that an eligible Concept Paper was submitted for each Full Application.”  Does DOE envision receiving concept papers that involve portfolio of related projects that are intended to be networked rather than one distinct project; in other words a group of projects that collectively have a much larger impact than any one individual project on its own?  If DOE is contemplating this scenario, how does the funding work for such a proposal?  Is it $250M/$1B per project in the concept paper or is it $250M/$1B per concept paper/application in total?

Concept papers can be submitted for a portfolio of related projects or for individual projects at the submitter’s discretion. The maximum award size applies to each concept paper and Full Application.

We are looking at submitting a portfolio of 2 or more HVDC projects in a concept paper. Or does that need to be two CPs?? The main idea is to network 2 HVDC lines so just submitting two CPs for two lines doesn’t make a lot of sense to us

Concept papers can be submitted for a portfolio of related projects or for individual projects at the submitter’s discretion.

We are planning to submit Concept Papers for an Indian Tribe. (There may possibly be multiple tribes, for which several concept papers, one for each.)

1. Eligible Tax Credits - If there are eligible federal or state tax credits regarding energy technology (say, for solar panels or other items), can the applicant still take those tax credits if awarded the grant? Related, if not, could they take the tax credits for only the 50% matching portion that contributes? Pro rata or otherwise?

2. Tribal Matching Waiver – As a tribal applicant, is there an opportunity to apply for a full or partial waiver of the match required?

1. Consistent with Section 1.B.i. of the FOA document investment or expenditures for Smart Grid technologies, devices, or equipment that utilize specific tax credits or deductions under the Internal Review Code are not eligible for funding under Topic Area 2. However, no such prohibition exists under Topic Areas 1 and 3. See Appendix A of the FOA document for additional information on cost matching requirements.

2. No waiver on cost match requirements will be offered.

Would the installation of a microgrid that utilizes new fuel cells to ensure a constant supply of reliable power in the event of grid disruption be considered a "new power generating facility"? Question: Could the DOE please provide an official definition of the term "new power generating facility"? For example, does that contemplate only new, utility-scale facilities (e.g. 5+MW)?

Investment in new fuel cells is considered funding for a new electricity generating facility. Such an investment would not be eligible for investment under Topic Area 1, but no such prohibition exists under Topic Areas 2 and 3.

1. Is investment in passive energy conservation measures (e.g. building weatherization measures) eligible to receive DOE funding in Topic 2?

2. Is investment in a Distributed Energy Resource Management System (DERMS) eligible to receive funding in either Topic 1 or Topic 2?

1. Investment in building weatherization measures is not eligible to receive funding under Topic Area 2. Consistent with 42 USC 17386(b)(10), in the case of buildings, the documented expenses for devices and software, including for installation, that allow buildings to engage in demand flexibility or Smart Grid functions.
2. Investment in a Distributed Energy Resource Management System is eligible to receive funding under Topic Area 2 and is eligible for Topic Area 1 if it is used or constructed for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events.

Can power restoration expenses be included as resilience investments?  During the course of restoration line workers are patrolling line identifying not only the cause of the outages but items that may lead to outages in the future and documenting items to fix later or actually fixing the issues by replacing equipment or failing material, cutting trees for example.

Consistent with Section IV.D.xviii of the FOA document, Topic Area 1 applicants must submit a Report on Resilience Investments as part of their application detailing past, current, and future efforts by the eligible entity to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events.  The report must summarize any program and related approved funding that the applicant’s organization has implemented over the past 3 years to reduce the likelihood of events in which operations of the electric grid are disrupted, preventively shut off, or cannot operate safely due to extreme weather, wildfire, or a natural disaster. The report must also summarize current and future efforts planned over at least the next 3 years to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events.

In addition to submission of the report, applications to Topic Area 1 must include a PDAD that confirms the total amount (USD) of qualifying resilience investments that have been spent for the previous 3 years and the time period utilized for calculation of the reported amount by completing and certifying the PDAD.  The PDAD template is provided as Appendix F.

What percentage of the grant can be used for administrative costs? Do administrative costs need to have a match component? 

See 2 CFR 200.306 except as stipulated below:

For all Federal awards, any shared costs or matching funds and all contributions, including cash and third-party in-kind contributions, must be accepted as part of the non-Federal entity's cost sharing or matching when such contributions meet all of the following criteria:

     (1) Are verifiable from the non-Federal entity's records;

     (2) Are not included as contributions for any other Federal award;

     (3) Are necessary and reasonable for accomplishment of project or program objectives;

     (4) Are allowable under subpart E of this part;

     (5) Are not paid by the Federal Government under another Federal award, except where the Federal statute authorizing a program specifically provides that Federal funds made available for such program can be applied to matching or cost sharing requirements of other Federal programs;

     (6) Are provided for in the approved budget when required by the Federal awarding agency; and

     (7) Conform to other provisions of this part, as applicable.

(c) Unrecovered indirect costs, including indirect costs on cost sharing or matching may be included as part of cost sharing or matching only with the prior approval of the Federal awarding agency. Unrecovered indirect cost means the difference between the amount charged to the Federal award and the amount which could have been charged to the Federal award under the non-Federal entity's approved negotiated indirect cost rate.

Can funds from an United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Rural Utilities Service (RUS) Electric Program loan (Electric Programs | Rural Development (usda.gov)) be used to satisfy the non-federal cost match requirement in the GRIP FOA?

Assuming that eligible purposes of a USDA/RUS Electric loan and GRIP funding overlap, funds from such RUS loan may be used to satisfy the non-federal cost match requirement in the GRIP FOA.  However, any portion of such loan that is to be forgiven at a future date may not be used to satisfy the non-federal share.

If an entity applied for tax credits for one portion of a project, can that entity still submit a grant application for the portions of a project that don't have tax credits? For example, can an organization be eligible to apply for a smart grid project that involves solar and storage assuming tax credits are involved with only the solar and storage?

Tax credits are not material to determination on eligibility under TA 1 and TA3, but investments or expenditures for Smart Grid technologies, devices, or equipment that utilize specific tax credits or deductions under the Internal Revenue Code, as amended are not eligible for Smart Grid grant funding under TA2.

Can Topic Area 2 funding be used to finance energy storage systems that provide smart grid functionality if those projects don’t claim ITC? .e.g. if the battery project completely foregoes the 30% tax credit, can it receive a GRIP grant for 50% of the cost?

Yes. Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, under Topic Area 2, qualifying Smart Grid investments include documented expenditures incurred to purchase and install devices which are integrated with and attached to an electric utility system or retail provider and enable Smart Grid functions including the provision of energy storage to meet fluctuating electricity demand, provide voltage support, and integrate intermittent generation sources, including vehicle-to-grid technologies.

Can Topic Area 2 funding be used to pay for 50% of interconnection fees that may be levied on an energy storage project by a utility or transmission system operator? E.g. interconnection fee for system impact studies, interconnection upgrades?

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, Under Topic Area 2, qualifying Smart Grid investments may include expenditures for physical interconnection of generators or other devices to the grid so long as these expenditures are directly related to enabling Smart Grid functions, including the ability to provide energy storage to meet fluctuating electricity demand, provide voltage support, and integrate intermittent generation sources, including vehicle-to-grid technologies.

Can Topic Area 2 funding be used to pay for %50 of smart EV charger deployments if this equipment is providing grid services? Would they need to forgo the EV Tax Credit?

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, under Topic Area 2, qualifying Smart Grid investment may include, in the case of electric or hybrid-electric vehicles, documented expenses for devices that allow the vehicle to engage in Smart Grid functions (but not the costs of electricity storage for the vehicle), including the ability to facilitate the integration of renewable energy resources, electric vehicle infrastructure, and vehicle-to-grid technologies. Qualifying Smart Grid investments do not include expenditures for Smart Grid technologies, devices, or equipment that utilizes specific tax credits or deductions under the Internal Revenue Service. They would need to forgo the EV Tax Credit.

Would disposals of meters be an eligible cost under GRIP Topic Area 2?

The disposal of meters is not eligible for funding under TA2.

Under Topic Area 2, are costs related to upgrading buildings with new HVAC, water heating and other equipment in order to make them grid enhancing allowable costs under this FOA?

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, under Topic Area 2, included among qualifying Smart Grid investments are documented expenses for devices and software, including for installation, that allow buildings to engage in demand flexibility or Smart Grid functions.

A question regarding cost share for Topic Area 2. For Topic Area 2, can equipment receiving tax credits be eligible for cost share when GRIP funds will not be used for the equipment?

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, under Topic Area 2, investments or expenditures for Smart Grid technologies, devices, or equipment that utilize specific tax credits or deductions under the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, are not included among qualifying Smart Grid investments.

To clarify answer 3) to this question below ( "3) Expenditures relating to the purchase of electric vehicles do not qualify as eligible." ). Does that answer apply to all topic areas?

Question:

Can you please clarify if related cost to buy and install EV charging stations are allowed since charging station can allow an EV to be grid-enhancing? Can batteries or EV be purchased with federal funds? Are smart thermostats an allowable cost or cost-share (if donated by a partner subprime institution)?Are the cost-related to upgrade buildings HVAC controls to make it grid-enhancing allowed?

Answer:

1) Consistent with Section 1.B.i. of the FOA document, electric vehicle charging infrastructure is listed among priority investments under Topic Area 2. 2) While large-scale battery-storage facility that is not used for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events are specifically not of interest under Topic Area 1, the use or construction of distributed energy resources for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events, including battery storage subcomponents, are eligible for funding under Topic Area 1. 3) Expenditures relating to the purchase of electric vehicles do not qualify as eligible. 4) Expenditures relating to smart thermostats or building HVAC controls qualify as eligible smart building technologies under Topic Area 2.

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, the purchase of electric vehicles does not qualify as eligible under Topic Area 2 but is not prohibited under Topic Areas 1 and 3. Under Topic Area 2, in the case of electric or hybrid-electric vehicles, the documented expenses for devices that allow the vehicle to engage in Smart Grid functions are eligible for investment, but not the costs of electricity storage for the vehicle.

Can the total amount of a GRIP (Topic Area 2) full application budget be more than the amount noted in the submitted concept paper? If so, how much can the application budget differ from the concept paper budget estimate?

DOE makes an independent assessment of each Full Application based on the criteria in Section V of the FOA document without reference to the associated Concept Paper. Please refer to Section II.A.i. of the FOA document for additional information on anticipated award sizes for each Topic Area.

Are scholarships to underrepresented electrical engineering college students to train them in general on Smart Grid technologies allowed? Is it allowable to pay someone from the grant to provide outreach to community partners that may not be directly related to the installation of the project? Are direct payments to community partners allowed? Relatedly, are these types of activities/payments allowed as cost shares beyond the required 50 percent if the applicant pays for them?

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, under Topic Area 2, qualifying Smart Grid investments do not include expenditures for ongoing salaries, benefits, or personnel costs not incurred in the initial installation, training, or start up of smart grid functions.

Regarding the qualifying investments under Topic Area 2 of “documented expenditures incurred by the electric utility to purchase and install” various devices, if a recipient plans to use its own personnel for the installation of the qualifying investments, are the transportation costs of getting from the recipient’s office location to the installation site includable as either an allowable cost or a cost share item? This is an item of concern because “Item 7. Expenditures for travel, lodging, meals, or other personal costs” is explicitly stated as not allowable in the FOA. If travel costs (fuel only) are includable as an allowable cost/cost share item, should they be included in the budget workbook as an “Other Direct Cost”?

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, under Topic Area 2, qualifying Smart Grid investments do not include expenditures for ongoing salaries, benefits, or personnel costs not incurred in the initial installation, training, or start up of smart grid functions. Allowable costs should be included in the budget workbook.

Regarding fringe benefits for recipient personnel, tab (b.) of the Budget Justification Workbook states, “A federally approved fringe benefit rate agreement, or a proposed rate supported and agreed upon by DOE for estimating purposes is required at the time of award negotiation if reimbursement for fringe benefits is requested.” AVECC has no approved rate. AVECC would like to compute applicable (annual health insurance costs and other employer-provided insurance costs, employer 401(k) matching costs, and employer social security and Medicare costs) as a % of each labor type’s annual salary to utilize as a cost share item. Is this acceptable? If so, what level of documentation will be required to substantiate this?

As stipulated in the FOA, federally approved Fringe Benefit rate agreement  or a Rate Proposal is required at the time of award negotiation.  Cost associated with that element need to be stipulated in budget documentation and the applicable allocation base of application should be described.

Are operations & maintenance costs eligible for reimbursement beyond the 60 month period of performance?

As described in Section I.B of the FOA, Ongoing or routine operation, billing, customer relations, security, and maintenance expenditures are not eligible for Smart Grid grant funding under Topic Area 2.  However, no such prohibition exists under topic areas 1 and 3. 

An applicant utility is incurring risk, in carrying costs and project spend, depending on the expected reimbursement frequency. Can guidance be provided on the reimbursement frequency?

Submittal of the SF 270 or SF 271 (Requests for Reimbursement) should coincide with your normal billing pattern, but not more frequently than every two weeks.  Requests for reimbursement must be limited to the amount of disbursements made during the billing period for the federal share of direct project costs and the proportionate share of any allowable indirect costs incurred during that billing period. 

The eligibility provisions appear to preclude the construction of a “new electric generating facility.” Could you please confirm that the term “new electric generating facility” is intended to apply to central station capacity that supplies energy to the electric grid itself and not to on-site generation that powers microgrids? An application of this term to microgrids would undercut the intent of the program since a microgrid that lacks its own generation would be incapable of powering a large critical facility or circuit through a grid outage lasting more than a few hours. Since a commercial and industrial scale microgrid cannot function through medium to long duration outages without some form of generation, could you please confirm that distributed energy resources that power microgrids will not be considered “construction of a new electric generating facility” but would instead be considered “construction of distributed energy resources for enhancing system capacity during disruptive events?” Distributed energy resources (DERs) are not only a source of electricity, but are also a means to deliver electricity to critical customers and circuits during times when the larger grid itself may not be functioning. 

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA, for Topic Area 1, investment in new fuel cells is considered funding for a new electricity generating facility, which is not permitted in Topic Area 1 per 42 U.S.C. 18711€(2)(A)(i). The use or construction of distributed energy resources for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events, including microgrids, is eligible for funding in Topic Area 1. Topic Areas 2 and 3 do not contain a similar prohibition for new generation.

We are working on a project for Topic Area #2 and would like to confirm that bi-directional chargers which responds to the "facilitate the aggregation and integration (edge-computing) of electric vehicles and other grid-edge devices or electrified loads" objective listed in the FOA are eligible for this grant.  Are they eligible?Consistent with Section I.B.i.[MA1]  of the FOA document, for Topic Area 2, qualifying Smart Grid investment may include, in the case of electric or hybrid-electric vehicles, documented expenses for devices that allow the vehicle to engage in Smart Grid functions, including the ability to facilitate the integration of renewable energy resources, electric vehicle charging infrastructure, and vehicle-to-grid technologies and capabilities.

Is there a cap to the amount of the grant that can be used for administrative costs?  For example sometimes administrative costs cannot exceed 5% or 20% of the total project budget. 

Generally, a cost is allowable if it complies with the respective cost principles associated with the entity type.  The budget justification document needs to stipulate and address the basis of those costs in order to determine allowability and reasonableness. Costs also need to comply with 2 CFR 200.306 regulations as it relates to associated stipulations for cost share elements.  Cost principles and allowable costs for profit organizations can be found in Federal Acquisition Regulations Part 31. Cost principles associated with other type of entities can be found OMB circular A-122 and OMB circular A-21, as to allowability of costs.

Can you use GRIP funds be used to upgrade utility owned assets that cross federal lands?

Consistent with the requirements of each topic area, GRIP funds may be used as authorized by DOE subject to any local, state, or federal legal requirements.

We understand that grants are intended to be supplemental to existing hardening efforts of applicants for any given year and may include the acceleration or expansion of planned activities that would not be accelerated or expanded but-for the funding. If a utility is accelerating and expanding a program, must they only request funding for the accelerated and expanded benefits, or may they request a grant for the full projects costs (including but not limited to the expansion and acceleration)?

Under Topic Area 1, an eligible entity may only apply for funding to support incremental investments which go beyond and are additional to existing plans and which the applicant can satisfactorily demonstrate would not have occurred but-for grant awards through GRIP. See the Topic Area 1 Requirements discussion in Section I.B.i. of the FOA document.

What are the procedures for returning any funds distributed to a recipient that remain unused at either the termination or completion of the project?

While funds may be obligated at time of award, all expenditures would be monitored via payment released, a recipient should not be submitting for payment costs--- that have not been expensed though recipient records. If funds are not expensed and remain on the project at project completion, they will be de-obligated from the award, as well as any unauthorized expenditures.

Are projects that include investments that utilize specific tax credits or deductions under the Internal Revenue Code 1) prohibited from applying for grant funding, or 2) prohibited from being used to meet the GRIP cost-share requirements (i.e., US Dept of Energy may discount a grant award to account for the federal tax incentives)?

Consistent with Section I.B.i for Topic Area 2 investments or expenditures for Smart Grid technologies, devices, or equipment that utilize specific tax credits or deductions under the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, are not eligible for Smart Grid grant funding under Topic Area 2. No such prohibition exists for Topic Area 1 or 3.  

The following questions all apply to Topic Area 1: 

1. In regard to material presented during February 8 WebEx we note that slide #17 provides the following:

“Restrictions on the funding of new generation in GRIP Programs 

Topic Area 1: 

• New transmission lines at or above 69kV are not an eligible use. 
• Construction of a new generating facility is not an eligible use.” 

Please clarify eligibility requirements for new transmission lines:  Are new lines that will operate at/above 69kV that are NOT ASSOCIATED WITH NEW GENERATION eligible for funding in Topic Area 1?   

2. In a case where we want to replace an existing transmission line with a new line on a different route between the same two terminals and with a higher capacity rating, please confirm that the relocated line is eligible for funding in Topic Area 1? 

3. How do we handle anticipated inflation in the cost estimates, particularly for a project that won’t even start for 2-3 years?  Do we build the budget with costs that include projected inflation through the life of the project in the 5-year window?

Response to Q1 – Consistent with Section I.B.i of the FOA document, construction of new transmission lines at or above 69kV are not eligible for funding under Topic Area 1. 

Response to Q2 - Consistent with Section I.B.i of the FOA document, under Topic Area 1 the relocation of power lines that reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events are eligible for funding, so long as the capacity of these power lines is not increased.   

Response to Q3 - Escalatory factors may be reasonable and would be subject to review and further documented and justified within budgetary estimations. Please refer to Section IV.i. of the FOA document relative to any Funding Restrictions and Allowable Costs.

If our cost share will be provided by a subrecipient, are there certain entities or relationships to the subrecipient that would make certain sources unallowable due to the program restriction on vendors and contractors not being allowed to provide cost share?

Consistent with Section III.B. of the FOA document, 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. Vendors/contractors may not provide cost share.

Can a grant recipient purchase equipment with grant funds and then assign the equipment to the ultimate owner who is the ultimate user of the equipment but who is not a subcontractor/consultant on the project? The use of the equipment will allow the owner/user to realize the benefits laid out in the FOA.

Purchase and disposition of equipment with grant funds must be in accordance with 2 CFR 200.310-316.

If there are eligible federal or state tax credits regarding energy technology (say, for solar panels or other items), can the applicant still take those tax credits if awarded the grant? Related, if not, could they take the tax credits for only the 50% matching portion that contributes? Pro rata or otherwise?

Consistent with Section I.B.i for Topic Area 2 investments or expenditures for Smart Grid technologies, devices, or equipment that utilize specific tax credits or deductions under the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, are not eligible for Smart Grid grant funding under Topic Area 2. No such prohibition exists for Topic Area 1 or 3.

Amendment 4 of the FOA states "new distribution lines below 69 kV, reconductoring, undergrounding and other upgrades to existing transmission infrastructure are considered eligible; and applications that include new transmission lines at or above 69 kV are not of interest." We are upgrading 2 of our main transmission transformers, as part of this project, which will require increasing the gauge of the current 69 kV transmission lines.  Can reconductoring the 69 kV lines be used towards our match requirement for this project?

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, under Topic Area 1, new distribution lines below 69 kV, reconductoring, undergrounding and other upgrades to existing transmission infrastructure, including reconductoring, which reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events are eligible for funding.

I have a couple of questions pertaining to the Community Benefits Plan component for topic 1 of GRIP.

1. Is there guidance on how to build the budget components associated with the community benefit plan?
2. Can an eligible entity utilize another public funding source, such as state government funding, to provide the cost-match for our 50% share of the CBP funding?

1. DOE has not provided guidance on budgeting community benefits plans.
2. Eligible entities may utilize public funding sources, including state government funding, provided that such funding is compliant with Appendix A details on cost share/match, and other applicable law. Also see 2 CFR 200.360.

Multiple affiliates from the same company (different legal entities, accounting systems, CAGE codes) are teaming on a response to the FOA.  Lead legal entity has approved cost accounting system and therefore can take the role of recipient or subrecipient.  Other affiliated legal entities cannot participate on cost reimbursement basis because we do not have the cost accounting systems.  We plan to participate in the vendor role as defined in 2 CFR 200.  Article B, paragraph iii. of the FOA states that vendors can not provide cost share.   

If the vendor provides equipment or services at no cost to their affiliated recipient or subrecipient, can the recipient or subrecipient show that as cost share at a Corporate, in lieu of legal entity level?  Or does the fact that an affiliate has to perform at the vendor level mean that there can be no cost share recognized from that entity, period?   

Additional clarification question added 3/17/23 - Clarifying that the Corporate legal entity is not a recipient, subrecipient, or vendor.  Therefore, can cost share be claimed at the Corporate level because all the businesses are affiliates? 

No. Consistent with the discussion of "Cost Share Types and Allowability" in Section III.B.iii. of the FOA document, “Cost share may be provided by the prime recipient, subrecipients, or third parties (entities that do not have a role in performing the scope of work). Vendors/contractors may not provide cost share. Any partial donation of goods or services is considered a discount and is not allowable.”

If we get awarded with DOE GRIP grant, will we receive the first grant payment right after the agreement/contract signed? Or we will have to wait for certain milestone payment schedules.

Payment will be based on expenditures incurred and authorized based on activities billed.

To clarify answer 3) to this question below ( "3) Expenditures relating to the purchase of electric vehicles do not qualify as eligible." ). Does that answer apply to all topic areas?

Question:

Can you please clarify if related cost to buy and install EV charging stations are allowed since charging station can allow an EV to be grid-enhancing? Can batteries or EV be purchased with federal funds? Are smart thermostats an allowable cost or cost-share (if donated by a partner subprime institution)?Are the cost-related to upgrade buildings HVAC controls to make it grid-enhancing allowed?

Answer:

1. Consistent with Section 1.B.i. of the FOA document, electric vehicle charging infrastructure is listed among priority investments under Topic Area 2. 2) While large-scale battery-storage facility that is not used for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events are specifically not of interest under Topic Area 1, the use or construction of distributed energy resources for enhancing system adaptive capacity during disruptive events, including battery storage subcomponents, are eligible for funding under Topic Area 1. 3) Expenditures relating to the purchase of electric vehicles do not qualify as eligible. 4) Expenditures relating to smart thermostats or building HVAC controls qualify as eligible smart building technologies under Topic Area 2.

The purchase of electric vehicles does not qualify as eligible under Topic Area 2 but is not prohibited under Topic Areas 1 and 3.

Would BABA requirements apply to existing component stock or would these be exempted, reducing cost and complexity if available for use?

Consistent with Appendix C of the FOA document, and in accordance with section 70914 of the BIL, none of the project funds (includes federal share and recipient cost share) may be used for a project for infrastructure unless:

1. All iron and steel used in the project are produced in the United States.
2. All manufactured products used in the project are produced in the United States.
3. All construction materials are manufactured in the United States.

If we start working on subtasks like design and equipment order placement before the Project Management Plan has been accepted, we will incur costs at the design phase; when we order equipment we issue a purchase order, but equipment is not generally paid for until delivery.  Are these considered pre-award costs, and if so, can we request approval to include those in the project costs?

Prior approval of pre-award costs is required and would be reviewed respective to the circumstances of specific request. Long lead items that are necessary (allocable) to the project would be reviewed to ensure they are allowable and reasonable in accordance with the respective cost principles.

To the extent a construction project uses materials out of our inventory, and those items in inventory may have been acquired prior to project award or PMP approval, are we considered to have incurred the cost when the equipment was originally purchased for inventory, or when it is charged out of inventory for installation in a funded project?

Prior approval of pre-award costs is required and would be reviewed respective to the circumstances of specific request. Long lead items that are necessary (allocable) to the project would be reviewed to ensure they are allowable and reasonable in accordance with the respective cost principles. All costs are reviewed to determine allocability. Allowability and reasonableness. Products that are readily available may not be considered in a pre-award authorization.

On the individual worksheets for Personnel, Equipment, Construction, etc. categories, are we to “roll up” the total yearly costs in each category to a total of all such yearly costs across all the projects, or list each project separately, each identified with a specific task number from the SOPO?

Please follow the instruction on the form for Amendment 000001 Budget Justification attachment.

Can a local organization working in workforce development be a sub recipient of funding? For example, would a local education program geared toward workforce development be eligible for funding? Additionally, do community organization partners and sub recipients need to employ and train workers related to the infrastructure investment to apply as a sub recipient or would an organization related to advancements in the Community Benefits Plan be eligible for funding?

Cost principles vary by entity, sub-recipient type, and the nature of project participation. All investments of this kind must be allocable, allowable, and reasonable. See 2 CFR part 200.

Can a community benefits fund be set up to support the community benefits plan, which would allocate funds to local organizations? Is this eligible for funding?

The FOA does not provide specific eligibility restrictions for proposed projects’ community benefits plans. When documenting the merits of a proposed community benefits plan, applicants are encouraged to provide specific detail on how to ensure the delivery of measurable community and jobs benefits and how those benefits promote the four community benefits plan priorities. (See Content and Form Requirements for Community Benefits Plans in Section IV.D.xvi.)

What percentage of funds can be used for administrative expenses?

Generally, a cost is allowable if it complies with the respective cost principles associated with the entity type. The budget justification document needs to stipulate and address the basis of those costs in order to determine allowability and reasonableness. Costs also need to comply with 2 CFR 200.306 regulations as it relates to associated stipulations for cost share elements. Cost principles and allowable costs for profit organizations can be found in Federal Acquisition Regulations Part 31. Cost principles associated with other type of entities can be found OMB circular A-122 and OMB circular A-21, as to allowability of costs.

If a project concept (core technical volume) includes creating a hub for providing technical assistance/capacity building on additional energy projects to the larger community through its community benefits plan, is it allowable to allocate stipends/funding for those community projects beyond the core GRIP project concept? Are there any limitations that should be considered?

Consistent with Section I.B.i. of the FOA document, the proposed investment is not an eligible use of GRIP funds.

What is the dollar threshold for Buy America?

See Section IV.I.vii. and Appendix C of the FOA document for specific guidelines regarding Buy American Requirements for Infrastructure Projects.

Are vendors that are helping prepare a GRIP application and design the associated project(s) eligible to be selected for project implementation (construction and O&M)?

See 2 CFR § § 200 Subpart D, Procurement Standards.

If a Tribe owns heavy equipment and plans to use the equipment and Tribal members to do earthwork and site prep for a microgrid project proposed for GRIP funding, can the Tribe use as match 1) the value of the owned equipment and 2) the value of the delta in labor costs for using Tribal members versus a third-party vendor to perform the labor?

Consistent with Section III.B.iii. and Appendix A of the FOA document, the donation of equipment is allowable as an in-kind contribution. See Section III.B.iii. to regarding the allowability of cost savings as a contribution.

In regards to topic area 3, are state tax credits allowable as cost share?

There is no prohibition on allowing state tax credits as cost share.

Can state ITCs count towards cost match?

For information about the Investment Tax Credit (ITC), please contact the Department of Treasury. For general information about Cost Match, see 2 CFR 200.306.

If state ITCs do not count towards cost match are they treated as a discount to the project cost?

For information about the Investment Tax Credit (ITC), please contact the Department of Treasury. For general information about Cost Match, see 2 CFR 200.306. 

Can federal ITCs count towards cost match?

For information about the Investment Tax Credit (ITC), please contact the Department of Treasury. For general information about Cost Match, see 2 CFR 200.306.

If federal ITCs do not count towards cost match are they treated as a discount to the project cost?

For information about the Investment Tax Credit (ITC), please contact the Department of Treasury. For general information about Cost Match, see 2 CFR 200.306.

Is there a cap to the amount of the grant that can be used for administrative costs?  For example sometimes administrative costs cannot exceed 5% or 20% of the total project budget.

Generally, a cost is allowable if it complies with the respective cost principles associated with the entity type. The budget justification document needs to state and address the basis of those costs in order to determine allowability and reasonableness. Costs also need to comply with 2 CFR 200.306 regulations as it relates to associated requirements for cost share elements. Cost principles and allowable costs for profit organizations can be found in Federal Acquisition Regulations Part 31. Cost principles associated with other type of entities can be found OMB circular A-122 and OMB circular A-21, as to allowability of costs.

See 2 CFR 200.306 except as stated below:  For all Federal awards, any shared costs or matching funds and all contributions, including cash and third-party in-kind contributions, must be accepted as part of the non-Federal entity's cost sharing or matching when such contributions meet all of the following criteria:

(1) Are verifiable from the non-Federal entity's records;

(2) Are not included as contributions for any other Federal award;

(3) Are necessary and reasonable for accomplishment of project or program objectives;

(4) Are allowable under subpart E of this part;

(5) Are not paid by the Federal Government under another Federal award, except where the Federal statute

authorizing a program specifically provides that Federal funds made available for such program can be applied to matching or cost sharing requirements of other Federal programs;

(6) Are provided for in the approved budget when required by the Federal awarding agency; and

(7) Conform to other provisions of this part, as applicable.

(c) Unrecovered indirect costs, including indirect costs on cost sharing or matching may be included as part of cost sharing or matching only with the prior approval of the Federal awarding agency. Unrecovered indirect cost means the difference between the amount charged to the Federal award and the amount which could have been charged to the Federal award under the non-Federal entity's approved negotiated indirect cost rate.

As noted in the budget justification workbook, subrecipients and vendors are distinct from each other based on their role in the project. I don't see definitions in the FOA, so can we assume that the definitions provided in the budget justification workbook apply to GRIP to distinguish between subrecipients and vendors? I ask because in the FOA, the Buy America requirements seem to apply only to subrecipients, whereas the Davis Bacon requirements make sure to call out "subrecipients, contractors or subcontractors," which seems to include vendors in the requirements.  Are vendors exempt from the Buy America requirements and similarly the Lobbying requirements since only subrecipients are called out by these? "Applicants must provide a separate budget justification for each subrecipient that is expected to perform work estimated to be more than $250,000 or 25 percent of the total work effort (whichever is less)." Are vendors exempt from this requirement regardless of whether they meet the $250K or 25% threshold? Finally, the budget justification workbook states that $100K is the threshold for requiring a subrecipient to complete a separate budget justification. Can this be ignored in favor of the FOA stated thresholds?

For the purposes of this FOA, a vendor participates in the project solely to provide goods or services in a procurement type relationship in support of its normal business operations consistent with many different purchasers and is typically considered a dealer, contractor, distributer, merchant, seller, or service provider. 

Vendors normally operate in a competitive environment, and their participation in the project is ancillary. Based on this type of relationship, cost contributions from a vendor are unallowable.  Additional information on cost sharing can be found in Appendix A of the FOA document.

Vendors are not exempt from the budget justification requirements.  

The FOA-stated thresholds can be used for completion of the budget justification document.

See “Buy America Requirements for Infrastructure Projects” term and Appendix C in the FOA – “These requirements must flow down to all sub-awards, all contracts, subcontracts and purchase orders for work performed under the proposed project, except where the prime recipient is a for-profit entity.”

See “Davis-Bacon Act Requirements” term in the FOA – applicable to “all laborers and mechanics employed by the applicant, subrecipients, contractors or subcontractors in the performance of construction, alteration, or repair work funded in whole or in part under this FOA”.

Can a grant recipient purchase equipment with grant funds and then assign the equipment to the ultimate owner who is the ultimate user of the equipment but who is not a subcontractor/consultant on the project? The use of the equipment will allow the owner/user to realize the benefits laid out in the FOA.

According to Section IV.B.xxv. of the FOA document, real property and equipment purchased with project funds (federal share and recipient cost share) are subject to the requirements at 2 CFR 200.310, 200.311, 200.313, and 200.316 (non-Federal entities, except for-profit entities) and 2 CFR 910.360 (for-profit entities).

For projects selected for award under this FOA, the recipient may take disposition action on the real property and equipment or continue to use the real property and equipment after the conclusion of the award period of performance. Recipients may continue to use the real property and equipment so long as the recipient:

a. continues to use the property for the authorized project purposes;

b. complies with the applicable reporting requirements and regulatory property standards; and

c. requests continued use of the property with its final SF-428 Tangible Personal Property Report and/or SF-429 Real Property Status Report submission during award closeout.

The recipient’s written Request for Continued Use must identify the real property and equipment and include: a summary of how the property will be used (must align with the authorized project purposes).

a proposed use period, (e.g., perpetuity, until fully depreciated, or a calendar date where the recipient expects to submit disposition instructions); acknowledgement that the that the recipient shall not sell or encumber the property or permit any encumbrance without prior written DOE approval; current fair market value of the property; and an Estimated Useful Life or depreciation schedule for equipment.

When the property is no longer needed for authorized project purposes, the recipient must request disposition instructions from DOE. For-profit entity disposition requirements are set forth at 2 CFR 910.360. Property disposition requirements for other non-federal entities are set forth in 2 CFR 200.310 – 200.316.

I have a couple of questions pertaining to the Community Benefits Plan component for topic 1 of GRIP.

1. Is there guidance on how to build the budget components associated with the community benefit plan?
2. Can an eligible entity utilize another public funding source, such as state government funding, to provide the cost-match for our 50% share of the CBP funding? ​​

Q1. See Section IV.D.xvi of the FOA document for recommendations and instructions on how to construct a Community Benefits Plan.

Q2. State government funding would typically qualify for cost sharing. See Appendix A of the FOA Document for additional cost share information. 

What is the dollar threshold for Buy America?

See Section IV.I.vii and Appendix C of the FOA document for information relative to the Buy American requirements for infrastructure projects.

If a Tribe owns heavy equipment and plans to use the equipment and Tribal members to do earthwork and site prep for a microgrid project proposed for GRIP funding, can the Tribe use as match 1) the value of the owned equipment and 2) the value of the delta in labor costs for using Tribal members versus a third-party vendor to perform the labor?

See Section III.B. of the FOA document relative to cost share requirements, allocation and allowability, and documented in budget documentation submitted to support the components of those costs.

As stated in Section II.B.iii. cost share can be provided in the form or cash or in-king contributions and provided by the prime applicant or subrecipients/third parties. Vendor and or contractors may not provide cost share.    

See the below excerpt from the FOA:

Allowable in-kind contributions include, but are not limited to: the donation of volunteer time or the donation of space or use of equipment.

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.

The prime recipient may not use the following sources to meet its cost share obligations including, but not limited to:

Revenues or royalties from the prospective operation of an activity beyond the project period;
Proceeds from the prospective sale of an asset of an activity;
Federal funding or property (e.g., federal grants, equipment owned by the federal government); or Expenditures that were reimbursed under a separate federal program.

 

Can subrecipients use DOE GRIP funding to purchase real estate property that is needed to complete their planned project?

There is no prohibition in this FOA from using award funding to purchase real estate property that would be required for proposed project completion.

In regards to topic area 3, are state tax credits allowable as cost share?

Consistent with Section 1.B.i. of the FOA document investment or expenditures for Smart Grid technologies, devices, or equipment that utilize specific tax credits or deductions under the Internal Review Code are not eligible for funding under Topic Area 2. However, no such prohibition exists under Topic Areas 1 and 3. See Appendix A of the FOA document for additional information on cost matching requirements.

The DOE FOA Appendix C states that if an applicant is seeking a waiver of the Build America Buy America requirements, it must include a written waiver request with the Full Application. If applicants don't have sufficient information and completed procurement procedures on certain products prior to application submission that would inform the justification for a waiver, would DOE consider a waiver request after execution of a cooperative agreement? If not, is DOE expecting applicants to review and retain records for all products/ materials for their project and their compliance with Build America Buy America in advance of the application submittal?

Q1: Consistent with Appendix C of the FOA document, if an applicant is seeking a waiver of the Buy America requirements, it must include a written waiver request with the Full Application.

DOE may require additional information before considering the waiver request.

Q2: Within the first two pages of the workplan, applicants must provide a short statement on whether the project will involve the construction, alteration, and/or repair of infrastructure in the United States and be subject to Build America Buy America Requirements. Please see Appendix C of the FOA document for all details that are required from applicants to demonstrate compliance with Buy America requirements.

If an eligible applicant submits a concept paper under a topic area and is discouraged from submitting a full application because the Department believes the project should apply under a different topic area (and the applicant is eligible), will the applicant be allowed to submit an application in the new topic area?

Consistent with Section VI.A.ii of the FOA document, only applicants who have submitted an eligible Concept Paper will be eligible to submit a Full Application.  DOE will notify applicants of its determination to encourage or discourage the submission of a Full Application. DOE will send a notification letter by email to the technical and administrative points of contact designated by the applicant in on the Concept Paper cover page.  Applicants may submit a Full Application even if they receive a notification discouraging them from doing so.

It is our understanding that only multi-state, large scale project applications will be competitive for topic area 3 awards. Considering scarce time and resources for developing any proposals, we wonder if single-state applications under topic area 3 are worth an applicant's time. Do you suggest moving forward with developing single-state proposals, or re-prioritizing to only develop multi-state proposals?

Consistent with Section 1.B.i. of the FOA document, DOE anticipates consideration of local, regional, and interregional projects proposed by states, Tribes, local governments, and public utility commissions comprising a variety of technical approaches under Topic Area 3. DOE cannot offer guidance on which projects should be prioritized by applicants. See Section 1.B.i. of the FOA document for additional information on Topic Area 3 investment priorities.

I'm not finding a date for the encourage/discourage notifications.

Topic Area 1: Anticipated date of concept paper responses is February 2023. 

Topic Area 2: Anticipated date of concept paper responses is February 2023.

Topic Area 3: Anticipated date of concept paper responses is March 2023.

If we submit concept papers, are they considered public?  Will other entities (outside of IIJA) know that DTE has submitted a concept paper for XYZ grant?

I know we can have information marked as confidential (referenced below), just curious if our filings will be accessible by the public.

DOE will not make concept papers publicly available, but concept papers may still be subject to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request.

How do you handle projects changing between concept and full proposal?

Consistent with Section IV.C. of the FOA document, DOE makes an independent assessment of each Concept Paper based on the criteria in Section V of the FOA document. DOE will encourage a subset of applicants to submit Full Applications. Provided that an applicant is encouraged to submit a Full Application following their Concept Paper submission, their Full Application will be assessed based on the criteria in Section V and without reference to their previous Concept Paper submission.

Can DOE provide a sense of when/how more information would be requested to make it from the concept paper to the second round?

DOE will not request additional information from applicants during the Concept Paper phase of the application process.

What is the minimum TRL level for technologies employed in this deployment program?

No minimum TRL requirements are applicable to this FOA.

Will priority/preference be give to projects that are more shovel ready - getting funds into economy sooner?

Consistent with Section 1.A.i. of the FOA document, DOE is looking to leverage funding to unlock transformative projects that would not be built and deployed without federal funding under the GRIP program. Please review Section V of the FOA document for additional information on application review criteria.

What is the time horizon of anticipated emissions reductions from the projects that we should be calculating for?

The FOA does not specify a time horizon for anticipated emissions reductions, and as a result applicants may determine the most appropriate horizon. To the extent that applicants present anticipated emissions reductions for multiple years, we request that they indicate anticipated annual emissions reductions.

Will applicants that are not selected in this round have an opportunity to follow up with staff on how they can improve?/If an entity applies for a project (i.e., submits a Concept Paper) under one Topic Area but DOE deems the Concept is better suited for a different Topic Area, will DOE be allowed to shift proposals from one area to another?

Consistent with Section 4.C. of the FOA document, DOE makes an independent assessment of each Concept Paper based on the criteria in Section V of the FOA. DOE will encourage a subset of applicants to submit Full Applications. Other applicants will be discouraged from submitting a Full Application. An applicant who receives a “discouraged” notification may still submit a Full Application. DOE will review all eligible Full Applications. However, by discouraging the submission of a Full Application, DOE intends to convey its lack of programmatic interest in the proposed project in an effort to save the applicant the time and expense of preparing an application that is unlikely to be selected for award negotiations. DOE may include general comments provided from reviewers on an applicant’s Concept Paper in the encourage/discourage notification sent via email at the close of that phase.

My question relates to eligibility under 40107. VEIR is an early-stage (TRL 3-4) company with an operational prototype but with no operational, grid-tied, commercial projects. Is there a strict requirement under 40107 that any project funded under that program must be a commercial project that provides economic value to a customer or end-user? Or is there scope under 40107 to submit a project that would result in a "behind-the-company-fence" deployment of a full-scale demonstration project that provides no economic value to a customer or end-user, but that greatly accelerates a company's path to commercialization?

Qualified Smart Grid investments may include any of the investments described in 42 U.S.C.A. section 17386(b)(1)-(14) and may not include investments described in section 17386(b)(2).  The issue of whether the technology at issue must be in commercial use depends on the type of technology at issue.  The question posed does not provide sufficient detail regarding the technology at issue to determine whether it is an eligible investment, but it is important to note that many of the eligible investments require the technology at issue to have been installed (see sections 17386(b)(2), 17386(b)(4), 17386(b)(6), 17386(b)(10), 17386(b)(12).  There is not a statutory requirement to that the technology at issue provide an economic value to a customer.

We have a concept that is potentially eligible for submission under two areas of interest. For example, it could be submitted under Topic Area #2 – Smart Grid with a for-profit entity as the lead applicant. But, with some minor modifications, a very similar concept can also be submitted under Topic Area #3 / - AOI #1: Transmission system Applications with a unit of local government as the lead applicant. If at this point it’s unclear which of the two sub-programs / areas of interest is a better fit for our concept paper, could we submit it under both areas of interest? In this example, we would need to submit the first concept paper by Dec 16 and the other one by Jan 13. If the DOE has programmatic interest in our concept, can DOE decide under which of the two programs it is best to encourage the full application?

Consistent with Section III.F of the FOA document, “An entity may submit more than one Concept Paper and Full Application to this FOA, provided that each application describes a unique, scientifically distinct project and provided that an eligible Concept Paper was submitted for each Full Application.”  DOE does not make recommendations to the applicant regarding submission of concept papers.

When can applicants who submitted a Concept Paper by the 12/16/2022 deadline for Topic Area 1 and 2 receive feedback from DOE staff? Initially, the GDO website indicated 1/27/2023, but that was updated to February 2023 on 12/15/2022. Is there any clearer timeline than February 2022?

Applicants can expect to hear back on Concept Paper submissions in approximately February 2023 for Topic Areas 1 and 2 and March 2023 for Topic Area 3.

Can you tell me when we'll receive feedback on our concept paper and how it will be received?

Applicants can expect to hear back on Concept Paper submissions in approximately February 2023 for Topic Areas 1 and 2 and March 2023 for Topic Area 3. All notifications are delivered via email to submission points of contact.

In a situation where an applicant is discouraged by DOE from proceeding to full application, if the applicant works to address all noted deficiencies completely and thoroughly, is there still an opportunity for the applicant's project to be awarded the IIJA grant? Should the letter of discouragement be interpreted at face-value to indicate there is little-to-no chance of an award?

As described in Section VI.A.ii of the FOA, applicants may submit a Full Application even if they receive a notification discouraging them from doing so. By discouraging the submission of a Full Application, DOE intends to convey its lack of programmatic interest in the proposed project. Such assessments do not necessarily reflect judgments on the merits of the proposed project.

The purpose of the Concept Paper phase is to save applicants the considerable time and expense of preparing a Full Application that is unlikely to be selected for award negotiations.

Furthermore, as outlined in FOA Section V.A.ii, the content of the Full Applications will be evaluated against the technical review criteria specified for Full Applications to a given Topic Area.

Why was the community benefits plan rubric removed? Will the prior rubric still be used or referenced in any way by the individuals or teams that review the final applications?

The Community Benefits Plan will be scored based on the criteria in the FOA.  See Amendments 000004 and 000005.

Under the Community Benefits Plan, it asks to ensure that federal investments are advancing the following four priorities: 

a. Community and labor engagement 

b. Investing in the American workforce 

c. Advancing diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility 

d. The Justice40 initiative 

Our questions regarding this section are: 

1. Is this section graded as pass/fail or on a scale? 
2. Does the CBP need to address all four areas, and address them to a certain level, or can a satisfactory score be addressed if even one section is not addressed or under addressed? 
3. Can an applicant demonstrate satisfactory compliance with item a, b and c without a geographically-defined disadvantaged community?

Please review Section V of the FOA for additional information on GRIP’s review criteria.

In determination of DAC, should we use the DOE energy justice tool or the climate and economic justice screening tool?

The Justice40 Interim Guidance provides a broad definition of disadvantaged communities (Page 2): https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/M-21-28.pdf. The DOE, Office of Management and Budget, and/or the Federal Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) may issue additional and subsequent guidance regarding the designation of disadvantaged communities and recognized benefits under the Justice40 Initiative. DOE will recognize disadvantaged communities as defined and identified by the White House Council on Environmental Quality’s Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST), which can be located at https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/. See footnote in Section I.B.i of the FOA document. DOE’s convenient online DACs mapping tool can be accessed at: https://energyjustice.egs.anl.gov/. Geospatial data files and an excel. Either DOE’s mapping tool or the CEJST are acceptable.

Under the Community Benefits Plan, it asks to ensure that federal investments are advancing the following four priorities:

a. Community and labor engagement

b. Investing in the American workforce

c. Advancing diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility

d. The Justice40 initiative

Our questions regarding this section are:

1. Is this section graded as pass/fail or on a scale?
2. Does the CBP need to address all four areas, and address them to a certain level, or can a satisfactory score be addressed if even one section is not addressed or under addressed?
3. Can an applicant demonstrate satisfactory compliance with item a, b and c without a geographically-defined disadvantaged community?

1. The Community Benefits Plan criteria is graded on a scale and accounts for 20% of the merit review score.

2. As stated in the FOA, all sub-criteria are of equal weight. Please see Section V.A.ii. of the FOA document for the full list of technical review criteria.

3. Submitted Community Benefits Plans will be graded on a scale.

If an entity applies and the application is not selected, can the entity submit the same, but improved, application under the same topic area in subsequent years?

Future FOA requirements will be set in their respective FOA documents.

For Topic Area 3, can a project change Applicants between Concept Paper and Full Application? The potential new Applicant is eligible under Topic Area 3. If permissible to change Applicants, is any additional information, aside what is specified in the FOA, required?

When DOE provides an encouragement letter in response to a concept paper, it provides the applicant a tracking number.  If the applicant chooses to have a different entity submit the full application, the applicant shall provide the tracking number to that entity in order for second entity to submit the full application. For each tracking number, only one entity may submit an application.

Can applicants seek waivers from Buy America requirements? 

In limited circumstances, DOE may waive the application of Buy America requirements where DOE has determined that (1) applying the Buy America requirements would be inconsistent with the public interest; (2) the types of iron, steel, manufactured products, or construction materials are not produced in the United States in sufficient and reasonably available quantities or of a satisfactory quality; or (3) the inclusion of iron, steel, manufactured products, or constructed materials produced in the United States will increase the cost of the overall project by more than 25 percent. Applicants seeking a waiver of Buy America requirements must include a written waiver request with the Full Application. See Appendix C of the FOA document.

How can applicants identify disadvantaged communities?  

The Justice40 Interim Guidance provides a broad definition of disadvantaged communities (Page 2): https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/M-21-28.pdf. The DOE, Office of Management and Budget, and/or the Federal Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) may issue additional and subsequent guidance regarding the designation of disadvantaged communities and recognized benefits under the Justice40 Initiative. DOE will also recognize disadvantaged communities as defined and identified by the White House Council on Environmental Quality’s Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST), which can be located at https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/. See footnote in Section I.B.i of the FOA document. 

Do DOE and/or GRIP program rules prevent a utility who is selected for a GRIP award from using the same consulting firm who assisted with the utility's GRIP application from being selected for the proposed project's design/engineering work? If not, is the applicant utility required to go out to bid for the design/engineering piece or can they select a preferred consultant with no bid process?

A vendor’s participation in the application process to provide cost estimates would not be a reason to exclude the vendor from participation on the award. If selected for award, applicants will be required to provide an acceptable basis of cost for participating vendors (including contractors).

Does the submission of an application for the Grid Innovation Program (40103(b)) bind the applicant such that the applicant cannot withdraw its application prior to accepting a grant award from DOE?

Will any avenues be made available to withdraw from an accepted award in the event greater grant funding becomes available to an awarded party for its project from a different federal or state source prior to the awarded party’s actual receipt of award funding?

Applicants who are offered awards are free to accept or reject them. The submission of a concept paper or a full application alone does not bind the applicant. If an applicant is selected for an award and accepts it, then the applicant will be obligated to satisfy the requirements of the award, including applicable cost match, reporting, and other requirements.  Consistent with Section xvii. of the FOA document, applicants must submit a Potentially Duplicative Funding Notice (if applicable) as part of their full applications. If there is a potential overlap across multiple federal awards, the applicant must notify DOE in writing of the potential overlap and state how it will ensure any project funds (i.e., recipient  cost share and federal funds) will not be used for identical cost items under multiple awards. 

Is the concept paper/full application submission binding for the applicants?

Applicants who are offered awards are free to accept or reject them. If an applicant is selected for an award and accepts it, then the applicant will be obligated to satisfy the requirements of the award, including applicable cost match, reporting, and other requirements. The submission of a concept paper or a full application does not bind the applicant.

Is there a deadline for project completion after receipt of awards? A deadline for spending awards?

Consistent with Section 2.A.ii. of the FOA document, DOE anticipates making awards that will run from 60 months to 90 months in length, comprised of one or more budget periods. The project period represents the period from the start/effective date of the project to project end date. Federal funding should be expended by the end  date of project. See the Period of Performance table in Section 2.A.ii of the FOA document for additional information.

If a proposal is an aggregation of several subprojects at several utilities, do all of utilities have to be "small" or "large". Or, can there be a mix of small and large as long as each meet their appropriate cost share requirements?

Consistent with Section 1.B.ii. of the FOA document, no standards relating to the size of a given organization are applicable to entities hoping to participate in the Teaming Partner List.

Are there any requirements for including real time data access in order to receive GRIP funding? Does DOE consider Green Button Connect "real time"?

Consistent with Section 1.B.i. of the FOA document, DOE will require under Topic Area 2 (Smart Grid Grants) that projects support data standards (e.g., Green Button Connect), interoperability, and nondiscriminatory data access on a real-time basis. Green Button Connect is the energy industry standard enabling easy access to, and secure sharing of, utility customer energy-usage data.

Are applicants required to state all the proposed project's collaborators in the concept paper?

Consistent with section IV.C of the FOA document, applicants are required to submit all team member organizations for the proposed project in the cover page of the concept paper.

In the Application for Federal Assistance form Page 1, Section F, it asks for the "Name and contact information of person to be contacted on matters involving this application:" Does this person need to be the same as the Authorized Representative on page 3?  If there is a difference, what is the distinction between the two roles?

The Contact person stipulated in section F of the FOA, is the person whose principal responsibility is to be knowledgeable about application materials submitted against this FOA, and whom will have responsibility for Business related matters and or technical content of the application submitted against the FOA.  The Authorized Organization Representative stipulated on Page 3 of the FOA, is the person responsible for oversight at the company whom is responsible for SAM related registration and administrative maintenance of that account.   This person is not and may not be knowledgeable on the specifics associated with the application materials submitted under this Funding Opportunity Announcement. There is no requirement for 1 person to hold both roles.

Q1- The GRIP FOA refers to a Project Manager. Is the definition of Project Manager the same as the definition for senior/key personnel on pg. 107? 

Q2- Can the Project Manager be someone who is neither employed by nor affiliated with the prime applicant (e.g., an employee of a team partner)? 

Consistent with Section VI.B.xx. of the FOA document, a Project Manager is among “senior/key personnel” and responsible for the purpose, design, conduct, or reporting of a project funded by DOE or proposed for funding by DOE.  However, the term “Project Manager” is not synonymous with the term “senior/key personnel.” 

Yes, please refer to Section V.a.2 for full application review criteria associated with Project Management element.

This question is regarding the Grid Innovation Program and Topic Area 3. If acquisition of property for the purpose of a transmission project has been completed prior to a concept paper and application being submitted to DOE, is that acquisition of property an allowable and authorized action under the National Environmental Policy Act CFR 40 Section 1506.1 and other applicable NEPA requirements?

In general, DOE cannot make a final award of Federal funds for project activities before appropriate NEPA analysis is complete.  However, DOE has the discretion to allow an applicant to acquire property using non-Federal funds prior to the completion of NEPA under certain circumstances.  See 40 CFR 1506.1(b).  Land or other property acquisition activities that are proposed in the application, as well as those that have been completed prior to the submission of an application but that are related to the proposal, would be eligible for pre-NEPA approval by DOE.  In either case, the applicant would proceed at its own risk; the fact that an applicant has proceeded with land or other property acquisition activities does not create any obligation for DOE to take any particular action.  DOE and the applicant should discuss any proposed land or other property acquisition activities that are the subject of an application, with the goal of satisfying the objectives and procedures of NEPA and meeting the needs of the applicant.

In the FOA's Content and Form of the Concept Paper, Addendum A references a Project Manager to be named. Is the project manager expected to be a representative of the prime applicant? Could there be more than one Project Manager named; for example, one as a representative of the state and another representing a subrecipient?

There can be more than 1 Project Manager, however it is recommended additional Project Managers are identified as Co Project Managers and distinguishing as to whom will be acting as the Lead PM.

DOE- please define "subsidiaries". We have a similar question in that we - a nonprofit joint action electric generator is applying on behalf of several of our members - which are local governments and electric distributors. The projects will be installed within their communities. Can we use the total of what they have invested in resilience projects over three years?

Only investments made by the Prime Applicant are eligible for inclusion in the Report on Resilience Investment for any given project. See Section IV.D.xviii of the FOA document for additional information on the Report on Resilience Investments.

The FOA requires a Report on Resilience Investment section that is ten pages in length describing past and planned future resilience investments by the prime applicant. Can the prime applicant include any company-wide resilience investments located in any area, or should they only include investments located within a certain distance of the proposed project location?

Applicants must submit a report detailing past, current, and future efforts by the eligible entity to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events. The report must summarize any programs and related approved funding that your organization has implemented over the past 3 years, irrespective of location, to reduce the likelihood of events in which operations of the electric grid are disrupted, preventively shut off, or cannot operate safely due to extreme weather, wildfire, or a natural disaster. The report must also summarize current and future efforts planned over at least the next 3 years to reduce the likelihood and consequences of disruptive events. See Section IV.D.xviii of the FOA document for additional information regarding the Report on Resilience Investment.

Is the criterion that makes investments of subsidiaries not count the fact that they are not majority owned by the holding company?

Only resilience investments made by the prime applicant count towards the prime applicant’s Report on Resilience Investments. See Section IV.D.xviii. of the FOA document for additional information on the Report on Resilience Investments.

To clarify, wholly-owned and majority-owned subsidiary resilience investments count toward parent companies, who is also the prime applicant, resilience investments, but subsidiaries that are not majority owned by the parent company do not count, correct?

Only resilience investments made by the prime applicant count towards the prime applicant’s Report on Resilience Investments. See Section IV.D.xviii. of the FOA document for additional information on the Report on Resilience Investments.

The FOA contains requirements for listing a one project manager, including on the summary slide and summary/abstract for public release. If a prime recipient is designating a subrecipient to complete most of the project implementation activities, can the project manager be a representative of the subrecipient or does a prime applicant project manager need to be listed on the summary documents?  Can more than one project manager be listed on those documents?

The prime recipient must identify a project manager. Additional project managers may be identified, including those employed by a subrecipient, as needed.

How should you complete the SF-LLL form if you have done no lobbying related to the infrastructure act, but have a lobbyist for your city?

Refer to FOA Section IV.D.xiv. of the FOA document, which states the following:

Prime recipients and subrecipients are required to complete and submit SF-LLL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities” to ensure that non-federal funds have not been paid and will not be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence any of the following in connection with the application:

• An officer or employee of any federal agency;
• A Member of Congress;

This is my 3rd follow up on questions asked 2/3. Please see one additional question below:

- The Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnership (GRIP) program seeks to catalyze investments in U.S. electric infrastructure that will provide transformational benefits to the grid and deliver innovative approaches to power sector resilience and reliability.  DOE has established a 5-year execution window for projects proposed for grant funding which should provide adequate time to complete the majority of projects.  Nonetheless, there are a broad range of factors that can influence the time required to execute infrastructure projects, particularly the types of projects procured by the DOE through this program.  In implementing the Smart Grid Investment Grant (SGIG) program launched in 2009, the DOE provided some flexibility for selected applicants to request extensions of project completion dates.  Does DOE anticipate offering some degree of flexibility on project completion dates or authorizing on projects to be finalized during a post-project reporting period?

No change to the 5-year execution window for these projects has been authorized.

As noted in the budget justification workbook, subrecipients and vendors are distinct from each other based on their role in the project. I don't see definitions in the FOA, so can we assume that the definitions provided in the budget justification workbook apply to GRIP to distinguish between subrecipients and vendors? I ask because in the FOA, the Buy America requirements seem to apply only to subrecipients, whereas the Davis Bacon requirements make sure to call out "subrecipients, contractors or subcontractors," which seems to include vendors in the requirements.  Are vendors exempt from the Buy America requirements and similarly the Lobbying requirements since only subrecipients are called out by these? "Applicants must provide a separate budget justification for each subrecipient that is expected to perform work estimated to be more than $250,000 or 25 percent of the total work effort (whichever is less)." Are vendors exempt from this requirement regardless of whether they meet the $250K or 25% threshold? Finally, the budget justification workbook states that $100K is the threshold for requiring a subrecipient to complete a separate budget justification. Can this be ignored in favor of the FOA stated thresholds?

 A vendor participates in the project solely to provide goods or services in a procurement type relationship in support of its normal business operations consistent with many different purchasers and is typically considered a dealer, Subrecipient Contractor, distributer, merchant, seller, or service provider.  Vendors normally operate in a competitive environment, and their participation in the project is ancillary.  Based on this type of relationship, cost contributions from a vendor are unallowable.  This is also stated in the Budget Justification attachment to the FOA, under the Cost Sharing tab.

Subrecipient means an entity, usually but not limited to non-Federal entities, that receives a subaward from a pass-through entity to carry out part of a Federal award; but does not include an individual that is a beneficiary of such award. A subrecipient may also be a recipient of other Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency.

The FOA, Section O "Annual Independent Audits" page 117, indicates that an independent compliance audit must be performed annually. Are the grant recipients responsible for engaging and funding the independent auditor as part of the project budget? If so, please provide guidance on the extent of the audit and qualifications desired for this auditor. If not, what is the role of the grant recipient and DOE in this process?

As stipulated in the FOA Section VIII.O:        

If a for-profit entity is a prime recipient and has expended $750,000 or more of DOE awards during the entity's fiscal year, an annual compliance audit performed by an independent auditor is required. For additional information, please refer to 2 CFR 910.501 and Subpart F.If an educational institution, non-profit organization, or state/local government is a prime recipient or subrecipient and has expended $750,000 or more of federal awards during the non-federal entity's fiscal year, then a Single or Program-Specific Audit is required. For additional information, please refer to 2 CFR 200.501 and Subpart F. Applicants and subrecipients (if applicable) should propose sufficient costs in the project budget to cover the costs associated with the audit. DOE will share in the cost of the audit at its applicable cost share ratio.

Do Davis-Bacon requirements apply to the entity of a project which receives GRIP funding, or just the parts of the project which GRIP funding will support?

Consistent with Section IV.I.viii. of the FOA document, Davis-Bacon applies to all “construction, alteration, or repair work on projects funded in whole or in part by awards made as a result of this FOA.”

If we have already identified a project, its developer, and most of their contractors and equipment providers have already been selected, would there still need to be some type of competitive procurement process?

Federal awards require an awardee to have an acceptable Financial Management System, which includes the purchasing system, see 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D for more information.

Is changing the technology vendor allowed after submittal to the FOA? We are also wondering if we are allowed to provide descriptions of multiple technologies that we are in currently in negotiation with in our FOA?

Applicants are allowed to change their vendor, though applicants would be required to first demonstrate that such a change would be justifiable, allocable, and reasonable. Each Full Application must be limited to a single concept or technology. Do not consolidate unrelated concepts and technologies in a single Full Application.

Projects will require information to be collected on waiver requests for BABA for specific components (e.g. glass insulators, substation electronics). What is the timing of collection and submission? When will waiver related information be needed - will these be submitted during negotiation or post-award?

Consistent with Appendix C of the FOA document, if an applicant is seeking a waiver of the Buy America requirements, it must include a written waiver request with the Full Application. DOE may require additional information before considering the waiver request.

How best do project participants represent the need for waivers and compliance in meeting BABA requirements?

Consistent with Appendix C of the FOA document, a waiver request must include the following:

1. A detailed justification for the use of “non-domestic” iron, steel, manufactured products, or construction materials to include an explanation as to how the non-domestic item(s) is essential to the project.
2. Certification that the applicant or recipient made a good faith effort to solicit bids for domestic products supported by terms included in requests for proposals, contracts, and nonproprietary communications with potential suppliers.
3. Applicant/Recipient name and Unique Entity Identifier (UEI).
4. Total estimated project cost, DOE and cost-share amounts.
5. Project description and location (to the extent known).
6. List and description of iron or steel item(s), manufactured goods, and construction material(s) the applicant or recipient seeks to waive from Domestic Content Procurement Preference requirement, including name, cost, country(ies) of origin (if known), and relevant PSC and NAICS code for each.
7. Waiver justification including due diligence performed (e.g., market research, industry outreach) by the applicant or recipient; anticipated impact if no waiver is issued.

Is there an opportunity to extend project period beyond the 96 months if the projects are still in development?

No. Topic 3 has a performance period of between 60 and 96 months, while other TAs are limited to 60 months. Applicants would have to identify just causes and seek authorization for any extension.

The FOA contains requirements for listing a one project manager, including on the summary slide and summary/abstract for public release. If a prime recipient is designating a subrecipient to complete most of the project implementation activities, can the project manager be a representative of the subrecipient or does a prime applicant project manager need to be listed on the summary documents?  Can more than one project manager be listed on those documents?

The prime recipient must identify a project manager. Additional project managers may be identified, including those employed by a subrecipient, as needed.

If precise geographic locations of all project elements have not been determined at the time of application, can applicants defer completion of the Environmental Questionnaire until that information is determined during the award negotiation phase?

Consistent with Section IV.D.xiii. of the FOA document, the Applicant must submit an environmental questionnaire providing for the work of the entire project during the Full Application stage of the process. The Applicant is also responsible for submitting a separate environmental questionnaire for each proposed subrecipient performing at a different location. If selected for award and if a subrecipient’s location is not known at the time of application, a subsequent environmental questionnaire will be needed prior to them beginning work at an alternate location.

Can the Environmental Questionnaire be completed according to project technology/scope vs. a separate EQ for each physical location? For example, if an element of the proposal includes a series of pole replacements (perhaps in the hundreds) can one Environmental Questionnaire be completed for that pole replacement initiative instead of a separate Environmental Questionnaire for each individual pole?

Applicants must submit environmental questionnaires for each location in which a subrecipient is performing at a different location from the proposed project.

Relating to Buy America requirements, will US DOE provide either a checklist of content elements required in a manufacturer's certification or a template letter for the certification?

DOE will not provide a checklist of content elements or a template letter for certification under the Buy America waiver request requirements. See Section IV.I.vii and Appendix C of the FOA document for information relative to the Buy American requirements.

The FOA, Section O “Annual Independent Audits” page 117, indicates that an independent compliance audit must be performed annually. Are the grant recipients responsible for engaging and funding the independent auditor as part of the project budget? If so, please provide guidance on the extent of the audit and qualifications desired for this auditor. If not, what is the role of the grant recipient and DOE in this process?

See eCFR :: 2 CFR Part 910 -- Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards relative to Audits Requirements. Cost associated with the conduct of these reviews/audits can be expensed to the project during the Project Period of performance stated in the award.

If we have already identified a project, its developer, and most of their contractors and equipment providers have already been selected, would there still need to be some type of competitive procurement process?

Yes, compliance with competitive procurement processes and procedures is required even if preferred contractors and equipment providers have been identified.See 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D.

Will DOE consider a Programmatic approach to NEPA for Grant applications containing multiple locations?

As described in FOA Section IV.D.xiii,  The Applicant must submit an environmental questionnaire providing for the work of the entire project. The Applicant is also responsible for submitting a separate environmental questionnaire for each proposed subrecipient performing at a different location. A NEPA review will be conducted on the potential impacts that all project activities may have on human health and the environment.

NOTE: If selected for award and if a subrecipient’s location is not known at the time of application, a subsequent environmental questionnaire will be needed prior to them beginning work at an alternate location. All project activities should be detailed for each site location in order to complete the NEPA determination.

For grants with numerous dispersed work sites, will CatEx work be considered separately for early authorization if cumulative effects are not significant?

As described in the FOA sections IV.I.ii and VI.B.vi, DOE’s decision whether and how to distribute federal funds under this FOA is subject to NEPA. Applicants should carefully consider and should seek legal counsel or other expert advice before taking any action related to the proposed project that would have an adverse effect on the environment or limit the choice of reasonable alternatives prior to DOE completing the NEPA review process.  While NEPA compliance is a federal agency responsibility and the ultimate decisions remain with the federal agency, all recipients selected for an award will be required to assist in the timely and effective completion of the NEPA process in the manner most pertinent to their proposed project.

As described in FOA Section IV.D. xiii, Applicants are required to submit an Environmental Questionnaire as part of a full application.  The Applicant must submit an environmental questionnaire providing for the work of the entire project. The Applicant is also responsible for submitting a separate environmental questionnaire for each proposed subrecipient performing at a different location. A NEPA review will be conducted on the potential impacts the project activities may have on human health and the environment.

For grants containing multiple programs consisting of similar work (with separate Environmental Questionnaires for each program), can NEPA decisions be staggered in order to issue timely decisions on lowest impact work?

As described in FOA Section IV.D.xiii, The Applicant must submit an environmental questionnaire providing for the work of the entire project. The Applicant is also responsible for submitting a separate environmental questionnaire for each proposed subrecipient performing at a different location.

NOTE: If selected for award and if a subrecipient’s location is not known at the time of application, a subsequent environmental questionnaire will be needed prior to them beginning work at an alternate location. All project activities should be detailed for each site location in order to complete the NEPA determination. NEPA determinations will be based upon receipt of these complete details, if additional information is needed, a request will be made.

What accommodations will be made during the grant agreement negotiations if the NEPA review process is expected to extend beyond planned project start dates?

As described in FOA Section IV.D.xiii, The Applicant must submit an environmental questionnaire providing for the work of the entire project. The Applicant is also responsible for submitting a separate environmental questionnaire for each proposed subrecipient performing at a different location.

NOTE: If selected for award and if a subrecipient’s location is not known at the time of application, a subsequent environmental questionnaire will be needed prior to them beginning work at an alternate location. All project activities should be detailed for each site location in order to complete the NEPA determination. NEPA determinations will be based upon receipt of these complete details, if additional information is needed, a request will be made. NEPA reviews and determinations will be expedited to the extent practicable.

Are there any additional Davis Bacon or other requirements as they apply to apprenticeship?

Relative to the full application, there are no additional apprenticeship reporting requirements outside of the Davis Bacon requirements.

See Section IV.I.vii of the FOA Document for relevant Davis Bacon requirements.

Our utility submitted two concept papers for GRIP, with two business point-of-contacts - one for each concept paper. My colleague received an invitation to the Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP) Program Applicant Informational Webinar on February 8, 2023, but I have not received any communication. Are all people that submitted a concept paper receiving an invitation for the upcoming webinar or only the people with concept papers that will be moving forward?

All applicants that submitted a Concept Paper received information about the webinar and a link to register for the webinar within their Concept Paper Encourage/Discourage Determination Letter.  The date and time for the webinar was listed in the table on the FOA Cover page of Amendment 004 of the FOA along with an update to Section P of the FOA document to note that Webinar registration information will be provided in the concept paper responses and on the Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP) Program web page at: Grid Resilience Innovation Partnership Programs | Department of Energy

Were responses to all concept papers sent for topic area 1 sent February 2? If we did not receive a response, who can we contact to follow up on the response?

On Grants.gov the provided Application for Federal Assistance SF 424 V4.0 and the Project/Performance Site Location V4.0 have an expiration date of 12/31/2022 in the upper right-hand corner and the provided forms for Application for Federal Assistance SF 424 V4.0, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities SF-LLL V2.0, and the Project/Performance Site Location V4.0 are not fillable PDFs. Would you please clarify which fillable pdfs with versions that are not expired to use and where they can be located.

Will the DOE make available the list of entities that submitted concept papers for each of the topic areas of this FOA and also list which ones were encouraged? If so, could you please provide the information currently available?

DOE will not publish a list of entities that submitted Concept Paper nor will DOE publish a list of the entities that were encouraged or discouraged from submitting full applications.

Will we be notified of registration of training?

Yes, GDO will send an invitation with registration link by email to all entities that have submitted a concept paper.  The emails will be sent to the Business Point of Contact identified on the Cover Page of the Concept Paper.  Information will also be provided at https://www.energy.gov/gdo/grid-resilience-innovation-partnership-programs. 

40103 question - Who can we reach out to for TA on questions related to match: what qualifies, what doesn't, how certain it needs to be on the date of the application submission, can it be certain, but not yet appropriated through budget process, etc.

Please submit questions to the email listed in the FOA (FOA2740@netl.doe.gov).

Can we learn whether any CA tribes submitted concept papers?

At this time we do not plan to discuss or share concept paper submissions with outside parties.

Will DOE/NETL provide acknowledgement of receipt of GRIP concept papers that were submitted via email before the deadline?

Yes, at this time all entities which submitted GRIP Concept Papers should have received an email acknowledging receipt.

Have you sent out an encouragement letter submitted under topic area 3?

Encouragement letters for Topic Area 3 have been sent out.

The application for BIL Section 40103 (b) is seeking the address each work location. As all of this work will be performed inside electric sub-stations, and as such equipment locations are considered sensitive, and as we do not publish such addresses publicly, is there a mechanism available for us to meet the requirements of the grant yet keep the physical address of such facilities confidential? Could we identify the location by Congressional District, or Town or Zip code?

See Section VIII.D. of the FOA document for information on Treatment of Application Information.

Will the public be able to view the full/final applications and/or the entities that submitted them?

See Section VIII.D. of the FOA document for information on Treatment of Application Information. Please note that consistent with Section IV.D.x. of the FOA document, the Summary/Abstract component of the Full Application may be publicly release.

Appendix A -Cost Share Information, directs the applicants to "consult your DOE contact before filling out the In-Kind cost share section of the Budget Justification" if any questions exist. Can the DOE contact information be provided so applicant can consult on outstanding questions?

Specific questions need to be provided via FedConnect.

Is there are recording of the webinar from 2/8 that we may review? We were not able to attend.

Webinar Information, recording and slides can be found at Smart Grid Grants | Department of Energy.

Have you sent out an encouragement letter submitted under topic area 3?

Concept Paper response letters have been sent to all compliant submissions for Topic Area 3.

When are concept papers and applications due?

See the FOA Cover Page.

What are the Project start and end dates (per topic area)?

As noted on the FOA cover page, the expected dates for DOE Selection Notifications and the expected Timeframe for Award Negotiations for each Topic Area are as follows:

When negotiations are complete and the Contracting Officer approves the award, a start date is established and the project work begins.  As described in Section II.A.ii of the FOA, DOE anticipates making awards that will run from 60 months to 96 months in length (see table below), comprised of one or more budget periods.

The exact project start and end dates will vary from project to project and will depend on the completion date of award negotiations for each project. 

For the required full application documents related to schedule (e.g. Project Schedule (Gantt Chart or similar) document), the applicant should provide a schedule for the entire project, including task and subtask durations, milestones, and Go/No-Go decision points.  The applicant can specify the start and end dates for tasks and subtasks relative to the project start, e.g. Start Date as “Month X” and End Date as “Month Y” and similarly for milestones and decision points.

When can we expect to learn of the results of our pre-application submission?

There is no pre-application process Identified for the FOA. The following notification will be provided as stipulated in the FOA.

Will subsequent competitive funding opportunities have a similar timeline to this opportunity? Meaning will there a be a concept paper due in November/December with a full application due in March/April/May?

The exact timeline for subsequent issuances of this FOA have not yet been determined; at this time we anticipate issuing an announcement during the approximately October – December, 2023 timeframe.

Thank you for the recent letter notification encouraging a full application for Concept Paper ID TA1-158-E.  While setting up our workspace for the full application, I noted the automatically-generated closing date for the workspace indicates Mar. 17, 2023.  However, according to the FOA document, the application deadline is Apr. 6, 2023.  Please confirm that the due date is Apr. 6 as indicated in the FOA.  Also, will the workspace still be open for editing after Mar. 17 to complete the full application?

The deadlines for Topic Area 1 and Topic Area 2 are, respectively, April 6 and March 17. The FOA will be reopened to address other Topic Area deadlines. Due to FedConnect portal limitations multiple closing dates are not recognized, as such when one Topic Area closes, date changes will be made to address extensions, to open up for the next TA applications to be submitted.

On the February 8 webinar, DOE announced there would be two additional trainings, one on Community Benefits Plans and the other on Cybersecurity on February 27 and 28. We appreciate the additional training opportunities. Can you clarify the timeframes for those trainings? The projected dates are now a week away and it would be most helpful to get dates and times on our calendars.

DOE has held several webinars regarding the GRIP program. All the information regarding webinars including recordings, presentation slides, and transcripts can be found on the GRIP website at Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnerships (GRIP) Program | Department of Energy. We will continue to update the website as other webinars and program-relevant events occur. Additionally see Section VIII.P of the FOA.

The FOA suggests on page 58 under technical volume content requirements that budget periods are between 12-18 months.

1. Can the budget periods exceed 18 months? (19 months for each year over 5 budget periods = 95 months total)

2. Can the budget periods be different over the 8 years? (12 months for budget periods 1,2,3 and 30 months for budget periods 3,4 = 96 months total)

1. Budget Periods are typically for a 12 months period however there is the possibility that a budget period can exceed a 12 month period, based on the specifics of the project proposed.  Typically, budget periods are established on an annual basis. In some cases, shorter or longer budget periods may be established for compelling programmatic or administrative reasons, such as to allow for project phases not evenly divisible with 12-month increments or to provide program personnel with logical decision points to evaluate whether the project should proceed.
2. The total duration for the project associated with TA3 is no more than 90 months regardless of the delineation associated with a budget period.  Budget Periods are stipulated based on the specifics of the project.   A budget period is an interval of time into which a project is divided for budgeting and funding purposes.

When do we get to know whether we have cleared the pre-application step? Relating to Buy America requirements, will US DOE provide either a checklist of content elements required in a manufacturer's certification or a template letter for the certification? 

The FOA provides the following schedule for DOE selection Notification:

The following schedule has been provided relative to timeframes for Award Negotiations:

There is no preapplication step. There are 2 phases associated with the application process: a concept paper and full application phase. No checklist or template has been provided for a certification related to the Buy America Requirements for Infrastructure Projects. See Appendix C and OMB Memorandum M-22-11 issued April 18, 2022 for additional information on Buy American Requirement for Infrastructure projects.

Where in the selection/negotiation/award process does the Selection Official sign the Selection Statement and Analysis?

The selection decision predates the negotiation phase and award phase.

Where in the selection/negotiation/award process does the effective date of the federal award occur?

The award date is executed after completion of negotiation phase, and when all matters have been resolved that will be included within award documents.

The FOA states that cost sharing commitment letters from subawardees/subrecipients at all tiers must also obtain an UEI from the SAM and provide the UEI to the Prime Recipient before the subaward can be issued. Are there more details into when and how exactly the UEI from the subrecipient should be provided to the prime recipient (ie, before submission, if notification is given that the prime recipient won the award, is this provided in a memorandum, or at the discretion of the prime recipient...etc).

UEI verification of Subrecipients/subawardees will be required when an award is executed with those entities, and included within the award terms when an award is executed with the Prime applicant.

If we get awarded with DOE GRIP grant, will we receive the first grant payment right after the agreement/contract signed? Or we will have to wait for certain milestone payment schedules.

Payment will be based on expenditures incurred and authorized based on activities invoiced.

If a Concept Paper was encouraged for full application submission, is that encouragement valid for this funding cycle only or does the encouragement apply to the next round of funding (Q1 2024)? In other words, if we choose not to apply before the April deadline, would we have to submit another concept paper (for the same project and same topic area) before we could apply in Q1 2024?

Concept Papers submitted to this FOA are only valid for consideration for this funding cycle. All future funding cycles will contain distinct requirements.

The Grid Resilience and Innovation Partnership (GRIP) program seeks to catalyze investments in U.S. electric infrastructure that will provide transformational benefits to the grid and deliver innovative approaches to power sector resilience and reliability.  DOE has established a 5-year execution window for projects proposed for grant funding which should provide adequate time to complete the majority of projects.  Nonetheless, there are a broad range of factors that can influence the time required to execute infrastructure projects, particularly the types of projects procured by the DOE through this program.  In implementing the Smart Grid Investment Grant (SGIG) program launched in 2009, the DOE provided some flexibility for selected applicants to request extensions of project completion dates.  Does DOE anticipate offering some degree of flexibility on project completion dates or authorizing on projects to be finalized during a post-project reporting period?

No change to the 5-year execution window for these projects has been authorized.

Within the attached FOA, on page 64, there is a section that speaks to additional resourcing available to interested parties to help develop a Community Benefit Plan (CBP), specifically it provides the following link to a “Communities Benefits Plan Scoring Rubric”: https://usdoe.sharepoint.com/:x:/s/PoliticalAppointees/EW9OrirQflNIkHYvSLMlAiUBM80hvE8_lsyxK_9G86MHNg?e=qKlaIP  

However, when you click on the link the page that opens requires you to sign into what seems like a DOE employee account, making the file inaccessible to outside parties. Is there anyway you could point me to how to access the GRIP - “Communities Benefits Plan Scoring Rubric” file in question. Also, if you know about any other available files or resources to reference for CBP development, specifically for the GRIP program, published by the GDO or DOE – it would be greatly appreciated if you could share those.

DOE has been made aware of the unusable link. An amendment to the FOA is forthcoming that will provide applicants with access to the Community Benefits Plan Scoring Rubric.

The link for the required environmental plan (p 61) doesn't seem to be working. Can you update the link or provide specific directions as to where the template can be found on the DOE website?

Thank you for making us aware of the issue with the link.  Please go it https://netl.doe.gov/business/business-forms/financial-assistance.  The form (451.1-1/3 Environmental Questionnaire (NEPA)) is located under Application Forms.

On P. 61 and P.76 of the FOA, it states that recipients are required to submit the SF-LLL “to ensure that non-federal funds have not been paid and will not be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence any of the following in connection with the application...” This suggests that lobbying, paid for with non-federal funds, is prohibited. Conversely, the FOA on P. 100 states only that by accepting funds the recipient “agrees that none of the funds obligated on the award shall be expended…to influence Congressional action on any legislation or appropriation matters pending before Congress…” Can you please clarify that recipients are allowed to use non-federal funds for lobbying?

This same question arose in DE-FOA-0002678: BIPARTISAN INFRASTRUCTURE LAW (BIL) BATTERY MATERIALS PROCESSING AND BATTERY MANUFACTURING, with the DOE stating affirmatively that "Non federal funds can be used for lobbying." See Question 234.

Non-federal funds can be used for lobbying.

Would you please help clarify the DOE’s definition of a subrecipient?  E.g., Would this include any vendor/ contractor who would exceed $250k of the total project costs? For example, if an awardee were planning to work with and engineering, procurement, construction (EPC) firm to conduct more than $250K of effort, would the EPC be considered a 'subrecipient' – and be required to fill out a budget justification workbook? Please help us distinguish between sub-awardees and vendors/ contractors – as we’re trying to determine who needs to complete budget justification workbooks.

Reference 2 CFR 200 which defines a subrecipient as an entity, usually but not limited to non-Federal entities, that receives a subaward from a pass-through entity to carry out part of a Federal award; but does not include an individual that is a beneficiary of such award.  Further if the entity’s participation in the project directly Supports the Recipient’ project objectives, actively participates in project planning, decision making and execution of the scope a subrecipient classification is applicable.  Entities classified as subrecipient’s would need to submit Budget documents.

Contractor is an entity that receives a contract.   Reference 2 CFR 200.331 for further information regarding the subrecipient/Contractor determinations.

If an organization previously submitted two concept papers that could be grouped together into one, would it be permissible for the applicant to move forward with only one full application for efficiency purposes?  The result would be a full application that encompasses the scope of work previously described across two and all other information would remain compliant as originally proposed.

Provided that each Concept Paper was submitted for a single Topic Area it is generally permissible for the applicant to move forward with a single full application to that Topic Area provided that other requirements stipulated in the FOA are not violated, e.g. as outlined in Section IV.D of the FOA, Each Full Application must be limited to a single concept or technology. Do not consolidate unrelated concepts and technologies in a single Full Application. Full Applications must conform to the following content and form requirements and must not exceed the stated page limits.

The applicant should include both control numbers referenced in the Concept Paper Notification letters in the Full Application.

Can you please further define "Community-Based Organizations" and "Community-Serving Organizations". Both terms are used in the FOA and CBP rubric and it is not clear how they are defined and how the terms may be different.

Community-based organization means a public or private nonprofit organization that is representative of a community or a significant segment of a community, and is engaged in meeting human, educational, environmental, or public safety community needs.

Community service organization means a nonprofit entity, other than the association, that is organized to provide services to residents of a common interest development or to the public in addition to the residents, to the extent that the common area is available to the public.

Can you please provide guidance on the difference between vendors and subrecipients?

A vendor participates in the project solely to provide goods or services in a procurement type relationship in support of its normal business operations consistent with many different purchasers and is typically considered a dealer, Subrecipient Contractor, distributer, merchant, seller, or service provider.  Vendors normally operate in a competitive environment, and their participation in the project is ancillary.  Based on this type of relationship, cost contributions from a vendor are unallowable.  This is also stated in the Budget Justification attachment to the FOA, under the Cost Sharing tab.

Subrecipient means an entity, usually but not limited to non-Federal entities, that receives a subaward from a pass-through entity to carry out part of a Federal award; but does not include an individual that is a beneficiary of such award. A subrecipient may also be a recipient of other Federal awards directly from a Federal awarding agency.

Your system has blocked communication to my PC, and I can't read the FOA whole document. Would you please advice me?

DOE is not aware of any restrictions regarding document accessibility. Please consult with technical experts in your organization or region.

Does an affiliate company mean a company the applicant does not hold a majority ownership stake in?

See Section III of the FOA document relating to eligibility.

Is this FOA subject to Executive Order 12372 review? This is a required question on the SF-424.

This FOA is not subject to Executive Order 12372 – Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs. (See FOA Section IV. H)

Appendix A -Cost Share Information, directs the applicants to "consult your DOE contact before filling out the In-Kind cost share section of the Budget Justification" if any questions exist. Can the DOE contact information be provided so applicant can consult on outstanding questions?

Applicants are recommended to ask questions via the application portal within FedConnect.

Would a DOE GRIP award under Topic Area 3 for a transmission project assist with the project being placed on a national corridor designated by DOE, recognized in the FERC rulemaking RM22-7?

GDO has issued a Notice of Intent and Request for Information (NOI/RFI)to inform the designation of National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors.  The RFI seeks feedback on final guidelines, procedures, and evaluation criteria for the designation process. Comments can be submitted via Regulations.gov. All comments must be received by 11:59 p.m. ET on June 29, 2023. We cannot advise on any potential parameters for review until those parameters have been finalized.

Can you please provide guidance on the difference between vendors and subrecipients?

A vendor participates in the project solely to provide goods or services in a procurement type relationship in support of its normal business operations and is typically considered a dealer, Contractor, distributer, merchant, seller, or service provider. Vendors normally operate in a competitive environment, and their participation in the project is ancillary. Vendors may not provide cost share. See also 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart D.

If our cost share will be provided by a subrecipient, are there certain entities or relationships to the subrecipient that would make certain sources unallowable due to the program restriction on vendors and contractors not being allowed to provide cost share?

Consistent with Section III.B. of the FOA document, 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. Vendors/contractors may not provide cost share. Please see Appendix A for cost share information and Appendix B for foreign entity participation.

Your system has blocked communication to my PC, and I can't read the FOA whole document, would you please advise me?

Address internally with technical support at your location. It may be a restriction at your site.

What are the procedures for returning any funds distributed to a recipient that remain unused at either the termination or completion of the project?

The sum of funds that is obligated at the time of award notifications will be monitored throughout project duration. If funds are not expensed at project completion they will be de-obligated from the award.

When clicking on the link in the FOA to access the environmental questionnaire, I receive the following error message: Not found. HTTP Error 404. The requested resource is not found. Please advise of where or how the form can be accessed.

The link listed in the FOA for accessing the Environmental questionnaire is an active link, contact technical support at your location. It may be a restriction at your site.

Will the public be able to view the full/final applications and/or the entities that submitted them?

DOE has no current plans to make all full applications publicly available. Please see section VIII.D of the FOA document for information relative to the treatment of application information.

In order to gain an advisory ruling from Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (MA DPU) that cost recovery is possible for the proposed topic 2 project, we would like to be able to point to something in the DOE grant materials that says that state regulatory action would be helpful to securing the federal grant.

For Topic 1, on page 24, the FOA states: "As appropriate, ensuring that the state, Indian Tribe or territory is engaged in the approach is important. The expectation of the Department is that regulatory stakeholders will be engaged in this process to ensure cost recovery of the concepts are achieved."

We were wondering if this statement is applicable to Topic 2 as well (Specifically the part where the importance of regulatory stakeholder involvement is important to ensure cost recovery of the concepts is achieved)?

Consistent with Section II.B.i of the FOA Document, DOE encourages applicant teams to include a broad set of stakeholders, including but not limited to, electric grid operator or owners, technology vendors, system integrators, subject matter experts, local energy and environmental justice organizations, and community leaders.

In addition, State, Tribal, territory, or regulatory stakeholders should be engaged in the approach as appropriate.

Can partnering Utility’s regulated rates be used towards cost share for meeting Topic 3 eligibility requirements?

See Appendix A of the FOA for information on cost matching requirements and eligibility.

What percentage of Topic 3 Concept Papers got Letters of Encouragement?

DOE does not plan to release this information.

Is there any upcoming webinar scheduled for potential applicants?

No webinars are currently scheduled relative to this FOA.

Do you expect each state to get at least one award?

Awards are based on technical merit as a result of comprehensive merit review in accordance with Merit review criteria stated in the FOA.