BAA_Questions and Answers.pdf

1 Question [Input by Interested Vendor] BAA Solicitation Reference [Input by Interested Vendor] Response to Question [Provided by Government] Revision to BAA Solicitation? [Provided by Government]

Given the importance of public outreach and education to any successful water security plan within the Colorado River Basin, will submissions that focus exclusively on the development and evaluation of outreach or education programs intended to support the work of this Initiative be considered? BAA: Establishing Consortia to Advance Energy-Water Security

Education and outreach can and should be a component of projects, but should not be the primary focus of submitted projects None

How do you gain access to the pre-recorded virtual industry day scheduled for July 22nd?

None.

The following is the link to the pre-recorded industry day: https://nsf.zoomgov.com/rec/share/i-bz-oNpm4OPEQa-En6knQFldGewuMTW1G-l7lFqZ5ZbF_aotzMlgySsaC2XzRF8.XawEUGj-EvzBcgYn None

Please provide guidance on the following submission limit: "An Offeror may submit multiple white papers in response to this BAA but may only submit one white paper under each priority outcome area". Does "Offeror" refer to an institution or a faculty member? None specified. An "offeror" refers to the institution. None

Can the white paper be submitted for basins other than Colorado where water-energy issues are significant? Also, does the lead institution of the consortia should be in the Colorado river basin?

None specified.

Projects that focus on other basins can be submitted, but an explanation of how the outcomes might have applicability to the CRB should be included. The lead institution does not have to be from the CRB. None

6 Should the ROM statement be part of the 5-page proposal description?

BAA P. 4 "The submittal must be no more than five single-sided pages excluding the cover page, and Rough Order of Magnitude Estimate (ROM estimate) cost" BAA p. 4 "Schedule and Price Estimate Major milestones for the project must be included, in terms of weeks, from the project’s start.

A summary of the ROM (ballpark) price estimate, including labor, and travel (if applicable) must be included in this section. "

A summary of the ROM shall be included in the 5-page proposal description but the actual ROM is excluded from the 5-page limit; there is no page limit for the ROM in the White Paper and no specific format for the ROM. None.

Can a recently submitted proposal be considered for funding under both programs or should we separately submit a new whitepaper for this BAA? None specified.

Please submit a separate white paper in response to this BAA solicitation. None.

Can you add roles/expertise for partner names and address on the cover page or does that go in a table in the white paper document?

49100426R0009 BAA: Establishing Consortia to Advance Energy- Water Security

Yes, roles/expertise for partners can be included on the cover page Updated cover page contents accordingly.

Must we include some institutions from the Colorado River Basin areas? Can an institution outside the basin area lead a proposal? None specified. No and Yes. None

10 Does the term “Offeror” refer to the PI or to the Institution as a whole

Page 2 - "Offeror may submit multiple white papers in response to this BAA but may only submit one white paper under each priority outcome area." An "offeror" refers to the institution. None.

If an institution was a prime offeror/lead institution for one white paper and a subrecipient/subcontractor for another white paper under the same priority outcome area, would participation in both submissions prevent the institution from submitting separate white papers under the same priority outcome area? None specified.

An institution may be a prime offeror for one white paper and a subcontractor for another white paper. None.

12 Where is the BAA solicitation located/posted? N/A SAM.gov N/A

Can you please elaborate on the differences and/or emphasis of the two Priority Program Outcomes?

None specified.

Please see illustrative examples in the BAA, section

1.2. The first five (5) bullets are illustrative of the

first priority outcome area; the remaining bullets are illustrative of the second priority outcome area. None

Does the 20% limit apply to each individual FFRDC separately, or is it a combined cumulative cap across all participating FFRDCs on the project? None specified.

The 20% is a combined cumulative cap across all participating FFRDCs. Added text to the top of page 5 in the BAA.

Can a faculty member participate in multiple proposals submitted by different teams under this solicitation? For example, can they participate in one proposal led by their home institution and another proposal as a subcontractor on a different team? None specified.

Yes, as long as the faculty member is not submitting the white paper as the prime offeror; if they are submitting as a prime offeror, they can only submit one white paper under each priority outcome area. None.

Could you please tell us if we are allowed to submit our proposal for the Missouri River (instead of the Colorado River)? None specified.

Yes, proposals focused on other basins are allowed, but an explanation of how the outcomes might have applicability to the CRB should be included. None

Can individuals participate in multiple whitepapers under the same priority outcome area as co-PIs, if they are not the Primary Investigator?

None specified.

Yes-this is assuming "co-PI" is synonymous with subcontractor and primary investigator is synonymous with prime offeror for purposes of this BAA solicitation. None.

The solicitation does not list references as a section in the white paper, Are references included in the 5-page limit? Or can they be added to the 5 pages? None specified. References should not be included in the white paper. Text added to the top of page 6 in the BAA.

May an organization participate as a subcontractor on more than one White Paper submission under this solicitation? None specified. Yes. None.

To what extent are agriculture-related topics within the scope of this solicitation? Would a White Paper centered on agricultural-water issues align with the program's priorities and review criteria?

None specified.

Yes. Agriculture topics could align with program priorities if they tie in directly with the Priority Outcome areas. None

21 Is this a limited submission? None specified.

See BAA solicitation that specifies what types of entities can submit a white paper and requirements for the entities (i.e.-Active SAM registration). None.

22 Can you clarify the priority outcome areas? None specified.

Please see illustrative examples in the BAA, section

1.2. The first five (5) bullets are illustrative of the

first outcome priority area; the remaining bullets are illustrative of the second outcome priority area. None

In the proposed step-1 white papers, should the references/bibliography be part of the 5-page limit? None specified. References should not be included in the white paper. None.

24 Section III states that this BAA is issued on an unrestricted basis and lists eligible entity types on a non-exhaustive basis. Please confirm whether a Federal agency, bureau, or other Federal entity may submit a white paper as a prime offeror under this BAA. If a Federal entity may not serve as prime offeror, please identify the mechanism NSF prefers for direct Federal participation in a consortium (for example, interagency agreement, unfunded collaborator, or subcontractor).

Section III, Eligibility Information

It is preferred that the Federal entity not serve as a prime offeror but may participate in the consortium as a collaborator/partner; we defer to the prime offeror on proposing the mechanism for federal involvement in the consortium. None.

25 Section 5.1.2 states a preference for offerors located in EPSCoR jurisdictions.

Please clarify how this preference is applied in evaluation: does it attach to the location of the prime offeror, to the locations of consortium members and subcontractors, or to the geographic distribution of proposed work? If consortium membership in an EPSCoR jurisdiction is sufficient to receive consideration, please indicate whether any minimum level of participation is expected.

Section 5.1.2, Offeror's Capabilities

There is a preference for offerors located in EPSCoR jurisdictions. None.

26 Section 4.1 limits the white paper to five single-sided pages, excluding the cover page and ROM estimate. Letters of collaboration and utility MOUs are described in Sections 4.2.1(iv) and 4.2.1(v) as Full Proposal content, while Sections 5.1.2 and 4.2.1(d) indicate that partner capability and federal infrastructure adjacency are considered. May offerors attach letters of collaboration or MOUs to the Phase 1 white paper, and if so, are such attachments excluded from the five-page limit?

Sections 4.1, 4.2.1(iv), 4.2.1(v), 5.1.2

No, letters of collaboration or MOUs should not be included in the white papers; they should only be included in the full proposal. None.

27 Section III states that an offeror may submit multiple white papers but only one white paper under each priority outcome area. Please clarify whether this restriction applies only to submissions in which the entity is the prime offeror, or whether it also limits an entity's participation as a named consortium partner or subcontractor on white papers submitted by other offerors.

Section III, Eligibility Information; Section 4.1

This restriction only applies to submissions in which the entity is the prime offeror. See response to question 56

Are research activities primarily outside of the Colorado River Basin fundable under this call? If yes, are projects with foci outside the Colorado River Basin given preference if they have a translation pieve for the Colorado River? None specified.

Yes, proposals focused on other basins are allowed, but an explanation of how the outcomes might have applicability to the CRB should be included. None

Should we have already formed a consortium prior to submitting the white paper? None specified.

The funding opportunity is focused on the development of consortia. Key stakeholders from multiple kinds of organization should be members of the project team and fully integrated into the project. None

How do we access teaming partners especially relevant to the Colorado river basin?

None specified.

You can view the Interested Vendors List (IVL) for a solicitation on SAM.gov by creating an account and accessing the specific solicitation page, but the list is only viewable online and cannot be downloaded.

None

Will there be any consideration of an extension to the concept paper submission considering that the BAA was only released on the 23rd of July? None specified.

Yes; due date for white papers is now August 10, 2026 at 10 am ET. Due date updated accordingly.

Can the team add members between the white paper stage and the full proposal stage? Or should teams be finalized at the white paper deadline? None specified.

As long as the prime offeror does not change between the white paper stage and the full proposal stage, team members can be added between stages. None

Is it an NSF program requirement that the water is beneficially re-used in the Colorado River Basin itself, or that the water is hydrologically connected to the Colorado River? None specified. Both are fine. None

Can we get an invitation for a full proposal without formally engaging partners, perhaps including engineering and construction to “produce measurable reductions”? None specified. See Response to Question #32. None

The solicitaiton lists a total of 11 "illustrative technical workstreams under the priority program outcome areas". Should the white paper's scope be limited to these 'technical workstreams'? None specified.

These are illustrative workstreams, the white paper's scope can be outside of these workstreams but should still fit within the Priority Outcome areas. None

What is the desired technical readiness levels for the proposed project? None specified.

The team should be able to develop consortia that are ready to begin work on research and development of technical solutions right away. None

Given a short notice of this BAA, is it OK to list potential partners that may be subject to change (later on) in the Stage-1 white paper? None specified. See Response to Question #32. None

38 Section 5.1.2 states that the Energy Water Security initiative “has a preference for Offerors located in EPSCoR jurisdictions.” Will this preference be evaluated solely on the location of the prime Offeror, or will substantial participation by team members located in EPSCoR jurisdictions — for example, as major subcontractors with significant workshare — also be credited?

Section 5.1.2, Offeror's Capabilities, page 9 This will depend on the nature of the proposed project.

None 39 Section 5.1.2 states that Offerors able to partner with existing federal water and power infrastructure “would be optimal,” and Section 4.2.1(d) states that selection may prioritize recipients able to leverage proximity to federal facilities and the Colorado River Basin. Will proximity be assessed based on the location of the prime Offeror, or across the proposed team as a whole?

Section 5.1.2, page 9; Section 4.2.1(d), Operational Proximity, page 6 This will be based on the nature of the proposed project.

None 40 May a Federal agency participate as an unfunded collaborator providing data access, site access, and a technical point of contact? If so, is a Letter of Collaboration executed by Federal personnel in the format prescribed in Section 4.2.1(iv) an acceptable means of documenting that participation?

Section 4.2.1(iv), Letters of Collaboration, page 6; Section 5.1.2, page

Yes.

None 41 Section III provides that an FFRDC may not “perform more than 20% of work under any subsequent award as a subcontractor.” Please clarify the basis on which the 20% threshold is measured (e.g., dollar value of the award, direct labor hours, or another metric), and whether the threshold applies to each FFRDC individually or in the aggregate where more than one FFRDC participates on a team.

Section III, Eligibility Information, page 3 The basis is dollar value; the value is the aggregate FFRDC total.

None.

42 Section 4.2.1(viii) notes that, per FAR 15.403-4(a), certified cost or pricing data is required for contract actions expected to exceed $2.5M. Is certified cost or pricing data required at the time of Phase 2 full proposal submission, or will it be requested during subsequent contract negotiation?

Section 4.2.1(viii), Price Proposal Budget and Budget Justification for Firm-Fixed Price Proposal, page 7

It will be requested during subsequent contract negotiations, if applicable.

Section 4.2.1(viii) updated accordingly.

43 Section 4.2 describes a Full Proposal as Step 2 of the Phase 1 process, while

Section IV states that NSF anticipates a later BAA for Phase 2 awards. Please confirm that a Step 2 Full Proposal, if requested, results in a Phase 1 award, and clarify whether eligibility to respond to the anticipated Phase 2 BAA will be limited to Phase 1 awardees.

Section IV, Submission Details, page 3; Section 4.2, Full Proposals (Step 2), page 5

In this BAA, Full proposals are for Phase 1 awards.

Detailed information regarding Phase 2 of the EWSI has not yet been released.

None 44 Section 4.1 states that the white paper submittal is limited to five single-sided pages excluding the cover page and the ROM estimate. Is there a page limit or prescribed format for the ROM estimate?

Section 4.1, Step 1 - White Papers, page 4 See Reponse to Question #6.

See Response to Question #6.

The Industry Day stated that an offeror may submit up to two white papers, one per priority outcome area. If an entity is named as a partner, team member, or proposed subcontractor on a white paper submitted by a different offeror, does that participation count against the named entity's own two-white-paper limit? Related, may a single entity be named as a partner on more than one consortium's white paper for the same priority outcome area?

Section reference: Step 1, white papers.

The solicitation states, "Offeror may submit multiple white papers in response to this BAA but may only submit one white paper under each priority outcome area". Each offeror may only submit one white paper under each priority outcome area as the prime offeror; there is no restriction on the number of white papers as the subcontractor. See response to question 56

The Industry Day encouraged offerors that partner with existing federal water and power infrastructure. For Phase 1, is a documented commitment from a federal facility owner expected at the white paper stage, or is a described intent sufficient with documentation deferred to the full proposal? The full proposal contents reference signed memoranda of understanding with regional utility providers, and clarification of whether federal power marketing administrations and federal water agencies fall within that definition would be helpful.

Section reference: eligibility and encouragements. Described intent is sufficient at the white paper stage. Documentation will be expected at the full proposal stage. Both federal power marketing administrations and federal water agencies fall within that definition. None

The Industry Day described a two-phase initiative, with Phase 2 focused on expanding project scale and accelerating technology transfer. Does participation in a Phase 1 award confer any preference, eligibility, or advantage for Phase 2, or will Phase 2 be openly competed without regard to Phase 1 participation?

Section reference: program structure, two-phase initiative.

Detailed information regarding Phase 2 of the EWSI has not yet been released. None

Is it OK to defer a company partner to Phase 2 to conduct product testing and/or production or is it a must or advisable that we have that in Phase I? None specified.

No. This BAA is solely focused on Phase 1 of the EWSI and proposals should only focus on Phase 1 activities. The details of Phase 2 will be released at a later date. None

Are references allowed in the white paper and, if so, do they count with the 5-page limit? None specified. References should not be included in the white paper. None.

Are the references and figure/table captions also bound by the Times New Roman size 12 font or can we use a smaller font size for them? None specified.

References should not be included in the white paper; figure/table captions shall be Times New Roman size 10 font.

Yes, font size for figure/table captions was updated accordingly.

Will you be able to send feedback on the appropriateness of a draft white paper?

None specified.

No, the Government will not provide feedback on DRAFT White Papers; White Papers submitted in response to the BAA solicitation will be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria outlined in the solicitation. None.

Section 4.2.1.vii encourages open-access or public-domain licensing models to minimize licensing barriers for regional utilities and industrial partners. Does this expectation apply to background intellectual property the offeror brings into the project (i.e., pre-existing technology and patents), or only to new foreground IP developed under the award? Additionally, what specific data rights and patent rights clauses will govern any resulting award?

None specified.

Please refer to FAR Part 27, which NSF must follow when making BAA contract awards. Any mandatory FAR Part 27 provisions will be included in any final BAA contract. None

ENERGY WATER SECURITY INITIATIVE_BAA SOLICITATION_QUESTION MATRIX

Note: Questions and Answers will be posted to SAM.gov via an amendment to the BAA Solicitation. Therefore, questions should be general in nature since they will be posted publicly.

https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/643cf86fd0cd439590f6f6dce2aaaa36/view

Would a project that has had some private company R&D completed at their facility but that has not been field tested by a large scale pilot/demonstration unit be included, as it would include hardware purchases and construction? Section 2.3 and Section IV limit award funds to basic/applied research and exclude "hardware procurement," "development related to a specific system," and "construction of new, federally owned test beds or research real estate." For an effort where the applied research requires fabricating a contractor-owned, instrumented test unit, used solely to generate the performance and cost-benefit data called for in the Scope of Work, and not delivered to the Government or retained as a standalone operational asset for an end user. Would fabrication and instrumentation costs for that R&D unit be treated as an allowable applied research cost, or would NSF consider that cost outside the scope of this BAA? None specified.

Please refer to the FAR and Solicitation definitions of Basic and Applied Research. NSF can only make awards that conform to those definitions. NSF cannot reimburse contractors for contract costs that are not considered Basic and Applied Research activities. NSF will carefully evaluate any submissions to ensure proposed activities are within the solicitation and FAR parameters. None

The solicitation states that the white paper is limited to five pages, excluding the cover page and the ROM cost estimate. Are references included within the five-page limit, or are they separate from the 5-page limit? None specified.

References should not be included in the white papers. None.

The BAA states, "An Offeror may submit multiple white papers in response to this BAA but may only submit one white paper under each priority outcome area". Could you please clarify whether this limitation applies at the institutional (Offeror) level or at the individual Principal Investigator (PI) level? In other words, may an institution submit multiple white papers within the same priority outcome area if each has a different PI, or is the institution limited to a single white paper per priority outcome area? None specified.

An institution would be limited to a single white paper per priority outcome area as the prime offeror--see next response.

clarified sentence to say "Offeror may submit multiple white papers in response to this BAA but may only submit one white paper as lead under each priority outcome area"

Are there any limits on the number of white papers that a single institution may submit, or can they submit unlimited papers? If there are limitations, are those tracked by UEI or other criteria?

None specified.

The solicitation states, "Offeror may submit multiple white papers in response to this BAA but may only submit one white paper under each priority outcome area". Each offeror may only submit one white paper under each priority outcome area as the prime offeror. see Q57 response

Can a regional state water or energy authority (i.e., state-level government) receive R&D support and staff time financial support from this program if they are involved in the proposal as partners or Co-PIs with a higher education institute as the lead?

None specified. Yes. None

How shall the estimated budget be described in the white paper?

None specified. There is not format requiremenet for the ROM. None.

So long as institutions adhere to the maximum one white paper per priority outcome area, is it allowable for individual investigators, including primary investigators, to participate as non-lead investigators/collaborators on additional projects? None specified.

Yes this is assuming "non-lead investigators/collaborators" is synonymous with subcontractor for purposes of this BAA solicitation. None

If an FFRDC does not have a sponsoring agency, will a Letter form the Director of the entity be sufficient in lieu of the requirement for documented approval from their sponsoring agency? None specified. Yes. Updated documentation requirement accordingly.

Is a Government-Owned, Government-Operated (GOGO) national lab eligible to receive funding from this opportunity as a subrecipient? None specified. Yes. None

When will white paper submitters hear whether they are invited for a full proposal? None specified.

It is anticipated the Government will contact offerors for Full Proposal Requests by 8/31/26 or sooner. None.

64 Will submitters receive feedback on their white papers? None specified.

No. The solicitation states, "NSF will provide notification of selection and non-selection. However, NSF will not provide feedback on non-selected offers as described in FAR 15.206-2 and 15.301-1". None

65 When is the anticipated due date for full proposals (a month if not a date)? None specified.

Anticipate due date for full proposals will be mid to late September 2026. None.

If we submit in collaboration with other entities, how does this impact the limitation of one proposal per priority area per institution? Is each entity limited to *participating* in only one white paper proposal per priority area, or can an entity participate in multiple proposals if the lead offeror is different? None specified.

An entity can participate in multiple proposals, but can only be the lead in one proposal in each of the priority outcome areas. None

Does a Consortium proposal have to only cover one Priority Area, or could it include workstreams from both Priority 1 and Priority 2? None specified.

A consortium proposal can cover multiple priority areas. None

Can a Consortium proposal include multiple research projects covering various workstreams under the priority area? If not, should the Consortium proposal focus on a single workstream with multiple projects in the workstream, or only a single project in one workstream? None specified.

Yes. A proposal can include multiple research projects under a priority area. None

What technology readiness is this solicitation looking for: lab-scale, proof-of-concept, or pilot demonstration? None specified. Depends on the project proposal. None

70 What would be the necessary scale for eventual demonstration? None specified. Depends on the project proposal. None

Phase 1 is described as providing resources to develop consortia. At the White Paper stage, does NSF expect all consortium members to be identified and committed, or is it acceptable to describe a partially-formed consortium together with a plan for recruiting the remaining partners during the period of performance?

Section 1.1 (p. 1); Section 4.1, Cover Page - "Names and addresses for project partners, if applicable" (p. 4); Section 5.1.2 (p. 9)

It is acceptable to describe a partially formed consortium with a plan for recruiting remaining partners in the white paper. None

Section 5.1.2 states a preference for Offerors located in EPSCoR jurisdictions. Is this preference evaluated based on the location of the lead Offeror only, or may it be satisfied through the participation of consortium members located in EPSCoR jurisdictions?

Section 5.1.2 (p. 9)

Depends on the project proposal. None

Section 2.3 limits use of this BAA to basic and applied research and that part of development not related to a specific system or hardware procurement, while Sections 1.1 and 1.2 emphasize accelerated deployment. For Phase 1, may proposed activities include testing and validation at existing facilities owned by the Offeror or consortium members, and does such testing remain within the research scope contemplated by FAR 35.102(a)?

Section 2.3 (p. 2); Section 1.1 (p. 1); FAR 35.102(a) Please refer to the FAR and Solicitation definitions of Basic and Applied Research. NSF can only make awards that conform to those definitions. NSF cannot reimburse contractors for contract costs that are not considered Basic and Applied Research activities. NSF will carefully evaluate any submissions to ensure proposed activities are within the solicitation and FAR parameters. None

Would approaches involving cyber-physical security, digital modeling, operational decision support, or workforce development be considered responsive when these activities directly support measurable energy-water security outcomes in the Colorado River Basin? None specified. yes None

Is there anything that would preclude an organization from participating in multiple applications as a potential sub-contractor/sub-awardee so long as no conflicts of interest existed? None specified.

An organization can participate in multiple projects, but can only serve as lead in one proposal in each of the priority outcome areas. None

Could you please clarify the review process for Phase 1 white papers, including whether evaluations will be conducted by NSF program staff, contracting personnel, external ad hoc reviewers, or some combination of these groups? If external reviewers will be used, what selection criteria will guide those? None specified. No response provided. None.

Would NSF consider a Phase 1 project responsive if the primary technology-development and physical demonstration site is located outside the Colorado River Basin, provided that the consortium includes a substantive Colorado River Basin utility or industrial partner and completes basin-specific field validation, a field-calibrated digital twin, quantified basin water and energy impacts, and a deployment plan within the 12-month period of performance? None specified. Yes. That would be responsive to the call. None

Does NSF expect technologies developed under this BAA to be released into the public domain, or are commercial technologies with existing proprietary intellectual property eligible provided project-generated results and interfaces remain openly accessible?

None specified.

Please refer to FAR Part 27, which NSF must follow when making BAA contract awards. Any mandatory FAR Part 27 provisions will be included in any final BAA contract. Those provisions govern how the Government can use intellectual property produced under a BAA contract. None

Would projects utilizing Bureau of Reclamation infrastructure, USGS monitoring assets, National Park Service lands, or Department of Energy facilities within the Colorado River Basin satisfy the operational proximity objective? None specified. Yes. None

Is NSF expecting the university partner to perform fundamental research, independent validation, modeling, or workforce development, or may its primary role focus only on scientific validation and performance assessment? None specified.

Those are all options. It depends on the proposed project and partners. None

May a consortium include multiple complementary technologies addressing a common Energy-Water Security objective, or should each consortium focus on a single primary technology platform? None specified. It is fine to include multiple technologies None

Is Phase 1 intended to support consortia focused on technologies already at pilot or demonstration readiness (TRL 5-7), or are earlier-stage research technologies also competitive if they have a credible deployment pathway? None specified. This is dependent on the proposed project. None

Would NSF consider a structure whereby a national laboratory's contribution could be supported through an interagency agreement (IAA) with NSF rather than through a traditional subcontract? None specified. Yes, this could be an option. None

Besides forming consortia, is it possible to provide some specific examples of what will be expected in the 12 months? A demonstration of a prototype or deployment of some system? Some more details will be helpful. None specified. This is dependent on the proposed project. None

The BAA mentions that budget can be up to $10 Millions for one year. Will smaller budgets, say $100K will be considered non competitive? None specified.

Smaller projects and budgets are welcomed. $10M is the upper limit. None

Is there an expected balance of members between industry, government, national lab, and academic partners? None specified. No expected balance. None

Is there an expected balance between delivering new research into usable software and doing ground-breaking applied research only? None specified. No expected balance. None

Is there an expectation that a) leads and b) most team members be at a university or company already in the Colorado River Basin? None specified. No. None

89 Will projects that target other systems be considered for funding? None specified.

Yes. [The proposal would still need to address relevance to issues in the CRB--see Q16 also] None

The BAA states that an offeror may submit only one white paper under each priority outcome area. Does this limitation apply only to the lead organization (offeror), or may an organization participate as a consortium partner on multiple white papers submitted by different lead organizations?

Section III (Eligibility Information); Section 4.1 (Step 1 – White Papers)

Yes. This limitation applies to the lead organization/submitting offeror None

What outcomes does NSF expect Phase 1 awardees to achieve by the end of the 12-month award period?

Section 1.1 (Description); Section 4.1 (White Papers – Scope of Work); Section 4.2.1(ii)(a) (Background and Approach) This is dependent on the proposed project. None

Is NSF seeking technologies that are already demonstrated and ready for deployment, or are earlier-stage technologies appropriate if they have a credible pathway toward deployment?

Section 1.1 (Description); Section 1.2 (Overview); Section 4.1 (Proposed Project Approach)

This is dependent on the proposed project. None

Can projects include economic, policy, workforce, or technology-adoption research when these activities directly support deployment of the proposed technology?

Section 1.1 (Description); Section 4.1 (Project's Relative Importance)

Yes. None

The BAA states a preference for offerors located in EPSCoR jurisdictions.

Does this preference apply only to the lead organization, or can substantive participation by EPSCoR partners within a consortium also qualify?

Section 5.1.2 (Offeror's Capabilities)

Leads and participants from EPSCoR states are all encouraged None

The BAA states a preference for open-access or public-domain licensing models that minimize barriers to adoption. What types of intellectual property or licensing approaches would NSF consider responsive to this preference?

Section 4.2.1(vii) (Flexibility to Ensure Public Sector Sovereignty over IP)

Please refer to FAR Part 27 and the solicitation terms. None

“After receiving a prospective solicitation award and if necessary, may the applying business entity update its legal structure and registration to support associated contractual agreements, required capital restructuring, jurisdiction, and confidentiality (i.e., transferring registration to the State of XXXXX, changing the existing business entity name, or merging with an existing private or public business entity)?” None specified.

Please consult with your attorneys on the legal parameters of corporate restructurings. NSF will evaluate any corporate restructuring during contract performance in accordance with applicable law and regulation.

None

The requirements for the Proposed Project Approach do no specifically indicate that offerors must include details on the proposed team, inncluding key personnel, and their appropriate experience. However, the evaluation criteria do state that offerors will be evaluated on the "degree to which the offeror’s team, including key personnel, and team organization partners have the appropriate experience that relates to the proposed work and will support a successful outcome."

Can NSF kindly clarify if the Proposed Project Approach in the white paper submission must include a section on proposed team and key personnel?

Page 4: Proposed Project Approach - Background, Scope of Work, Project's Relative Importance, Schedule and Price Estimate

Page 9: 5.1 White Paper Evaluation Criteria, 5.1.2 Offeror's Capabilities, Third Bullet

See the Cover page and Scope of work descriptions in Section 4.1 None

Would a consortium led by a university, with the startup serving as the technology owner and funded technical-development and commercialization partner, satisfy the program’s contemplated multi-sector consortium structure? None specified. Yes. None

Regarding Section 4.2.1(vii), would the following approach be responsive to NSF’s preference for public-sector sovereignty and minimized licensing barriers: public availability of nonconfidential performance data, evaluation methods, environmental and economic findings, and deployment guidance, together with accessible licensing or procurement pathways for public utilities, while the startup retains ownership of its pre-existing patents, patent applications, trade secrets, process designs, and other Background IP? None specified.

We cannot comment on whether this approach is viable/responsive at this time. We will evaluate all approaches upon white paper submissions in accordance with the evaluation criteria outlined in the BAA solicitation. None.

Does NSF expect the underlying proprietary recovery technology itself to be placed in the public domain, or may an offeror retain proprietary Background IP while making specified project outputs and deployment information broadly accessible? None specified.

Please refer to FAR Part 27 and the solicitation terms. None.

Is the intellectual-property flexibility discussion required in the initial five-page white paper, or only in an invited full proposal? None specified.

Not in the White Paper, but will be needed in the full proposal. See Section 4 on submission details None

May a university-led consortium request a cost-reimbursement contract or other arrangement in place of a firm-fixed-price contract when the work includes early-stage research, field validation, and technology development? If so, what justification would NSF expect? None specified.

Per the solicitation, offerors may request any other type of contract other than FFP. The justification should consider both program requirements and reasonability for other than FFP. None.

If a startup initially submits the white paper, may a university or other institution become the prime offeror at the invited full-proposal stage, or must the same entity serve as prime throughout both steps?

None specified.

No, the same entity must serve as the prime throughout Phase 1. None

The BAA states that the five-page limit excludes the Rough Order of Magnitude cost estimate. However, the required format groups the project schedule, milestones, and ROM estimate together under “Schedule and Price Estimate.”

Should the schedule and milestones be included within the five-page narrative, with only the ROM cost estimate submitted outside the page limit?

Or may the entire “Schedule and Price Estimate” section be excluded from the five-page limit? 49100426R0009

The schedule and milestones shall be included within the five-page limit; the ROM is excluded from the 5-page limit. None.

Does the white paper require any accompanying documents such as biosketches, letters of commitment, etc.? None specified. No, not for the white paper. None.

What do we need to do to document partnerships/consortium members?

None specified.

Please see the BAA solicitation that discusses Letters of Collaboration; the solicitation also discusses requirement documentation for FFRDCs. None.

Page 8 of BAA indicates that ROM is outside the 5-page limit. Can you clarify if this applies to the entire “schedule and price estimate section” (page 4) or a part of this. None specified

The schedule and summary of the price estimate is include in the 5-page count; the ROM is excluded from the 5-page count. None.

Page 4 under scope of work says, “Major progress milestones and associated deliverables are not required”. But in the Schedule and Price estimate section it says “Major milestones must be included.” What is the expectation, and how does this relate to the page limit with ROM outside the page limit (question above)? None specified.

Major milestones shall be included in the "Schedule and Price Estimate" section of the white paper. None.

Sheet1