The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
U.S. Department of Transportation Research Announcement # 693JK324RA0001 Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration Questions & Response
| # |
| RFP Section # / Page # |
| Question |
| Government Response |
| 1 |
| N/A |
| I could not find the funding amount info at the PHMSA website. |
| PHMSA anticipates issuing up to $12.3 million in total awards contingent on the quality of proposals and available funds. |
| 2 |
| N/A |
| Is there a specific fund amount allocated to each topic? |
| No. Funding is determined based on the quality of the proposals and available funds. |
| 3 |
| N/A |
| What is the co-funding requirement, if any? |
| All research topics require resource sharing. For research topics developing technology, the mandatory minimum cost share is 50% from non-federal sources. For research topics developing knowledge, the mandatory minimum cost share is 20% from non-federal sources. Firm letters of commitment for resource sharing should be provided with the proposals. Proposals that do not contain all commitment letters will not be awarded. |
| 4 |
| N/A |
| Are technology providers in Western Europe or Canada eligible? |
| In the “Eligibility” section on page 2 of the announcement, it states that “[a]ny responsible source (excluding foreign entities, federal, state, and local governments) may submit proposals for consideration.” (Emphasis added). |
| 5 |
| N/A |
| Can you elaborate on what is considered to be a “foreign entity” vs. a “domestic entity”? Would incorporating in the United States be sufficient to qualify as a “domestic entity” under this call? |
| In the “Eligibility” section on page 2 of the announcement, it states that “[a]ny responsible source (excluding foreign entities, federal, state, and local governments) may submit proposals for consideration.” (Emphasis added). |
| 6 |
| N/A |
| While we have US based partners and contractors lined up to do the work, and all our materials that we use to make our systems are sourced in the US, we are wondering what PHMSA will be looking for to have us be the US primary applicant. We are looking into registering an entity in the US as a US corporation, and are wondering if that would satisfy PHMSA’s requirements for the grant process? |
| In the “Eligibility” section on page 2 of the announcement, it states that “[a]ny responsible source (excluding foreign entities, federal, state, and local governments) may submit proposals for consideration.” (emphasis added). |
To be eligible to submit a proposal under this solicitation, the primary recipient must be registered in the Federal Government’s System for Award Management (SAM) prior to submitting a proposal (www.sam.gov.) as a US domestic entity.
| 7 |
| Attachment 7 – Item 10 |
| Is the scope of this item inclusive of all possible line service conversion and/or repurposing possibilities or is the intent of the item for a more specific type of pipeline service conversion and/or repurposing scheme? |
| “The objective of this research project is to conduct an evaluation of pipelines undergoing a change of service and what can be done to minimize the risks involved.” Referenced code sections, “existing pipelines may be repurposed as product changes, flow reversals, conversion to natural gas service under the requirements of 49 CFR § 192.14, or conversion to hazardous liquid service under the requirements of 49 CFR § 195.5.” |
You may focus on a single system type (i.e. liquid or gas) and the proposal should identify this information. Submit your proposal if you feel it meets the required objective stated in the topic.
| 8 |
| Topic 6 |
| The topic description repeatedly references “leak prevention and mitigation” technologies. Are improved leak detection methods included in the request for standardization and testing? These are not directly prevention and mitigation, but are the primary tools used to day be natural gas operators to detect failures and minimize emissions and hazard from the failure. |
| “The objective of this research project is to test and validate existing leak prevention and mitigation technologies not currently accepted for use on regulated pipelines, pipeline facilities, and other pipeline equipment including, compressors and storage tanks. The project should encompass an assessment of current technological constraints or uses, strengths and weaknesses of each technology, and the formulation of strategies or optimal approaches for selecting the suitable technology to prevent and manage leaks in various situations or locations.” |
Submit your proposal if you feel it meets the required objective stated in the topic and be specific as to what system type it applies too.
| Is there a total amount of funding available for each topic area or for the FOA in general? |
| PHMSA anticipates issuing up to $12.3 million in total awards contingent on the quality of proposals and available funds. |
| Is there a maximum amount an entity can request? |
| No there is not a maximum amount an entity can request, however, all budget requests will be reviewed by PHMSA to determine the amount which it plans to fund. |
| Is the budget $100,000 or $1,000,000 or more or less? |
| PHMSA anticipates issuing up to $12.3 million in total awards contingent on the quality of proposals and available funds. Funding is determined based on the quality of the proposals and available funds. |
| Are there any limitations as to where the capital (cost share) is derived from? |
| See Notice, Section 6 Additional Information on Proposed Budget |
| Can cost share be in-kind services? |
| See Notice, Section 6 Additional Information on Proposed Budget |
| The Introduction/Background of the Research Announcement # 693JK324RA0001 states that: “For research topics developing technology, the mandatory minimum cost share is 50% from non-federal sources. For research topics developing knowledge, the mandatory minimum cost share is 20% from non-federal sources.” For Opportunity #11, the deliverables are a combination of both technology and developing knowledge. Does this mean the cost share will be a combination of 50 percent and the 20 percent, respectively. For example, if the technology portion is $1 million and the knowledge portion is $400,000, does that result in a total cost share of $500,000 (technology) and $80,000 (knowledge) for a total of $580,000 of the total $1.4 million budget? |
| Topics with a Combination of Technology Development and Knowledge Development will be funded at the lesser rate, mandatory minimum cost share is 50% from non-federal sources. |
| The proposal references the need to train “pipeline personnel”. What is the scope of pipeline personnel. Is it just control room and field personnel or does it extend to emergency responders, OSROs, and contractors? |
| Specify in your proposal who you consider to be “pipeline personnel.” |
| Is the goal of the training to replace the current regulated training in place or improve the training by enhancing it? |
| These details would be provided in your submitted proposal and dependent on the intent of your proposed training. |
| How much training does PHMSA expect the project to generate in minutes, components or other topics? What are the expectations for deliverables? |
| Not sure what topic is being referenced. Detail in your proposal what your intent is if unclear in the topic and define the deliverables. |
| For tech development projects, if one technology solution can address more than 1 topic area/sub-project, should we submit separate project proposals, or there's a rule for one response aimed for two topics/sub-project. |
| Submit separate proposal if it applies to more than one area, however project could be funded under one. |
| For certain Tech development projects, there's a requirement of " Focus on tools and technologies that have best potential for being used “as is,” modified, enhanced, or added onto, to perform reliably for all ". However, if certain challenges cannot be addressed by any commercially-off-the-shelf (COTS) solution, does this program allow a new tool/tech to be proposed by modified, enhanced, or added based on novel (non-COTS) technologies recently developed by a university or start-up company? |
| Yes |
| For non-fed cost-share, does University/Non-profit have a different requirement, such as a reduced cost share %, or is same as general guidance mentioned in the RA notice (50% for tech dev, 20% for knowledge dev) |
| No |
| Is there a hard total project cost limit for this RA? |
| PHMSA anticipates issuing up to $12.3 million in total awards contingent on the quality of proposals and available funds. Funding is determined based on the quality of the proposals and available funds |
All budget requests will be reviewed by PHMSA to determine the amount which it plans to fund.
| How should contingency costs be addressed in the project budget under this solicitation? “Contingency costs” refers to “the expenses set aside to deal with the uncertain or unexpected circumstances or events that may arise while on course to a business or project endeavor. It serves the purpose of providing a cushion or safety net against uncertainties and mitigating potential risks.” |
| For research topics developing technology, the mandatory minimum cost share is 50% from non-federal sources. For research topics developing knowledge, the mandatory minimum cost share is 20% from non-federal sources. |
“Contingency Cost” would need to be accounted for in your non-federal funding.
| Can you clarify if the Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) is a group that PHMSA is putting together or if the applicant is responsible for organizing the TAP? If the applicant is responsible for assembling the TAP, can you elaborate further on what aspects of the TAP need to be included in the proposal? |
| Applicant organizes the TAP, “The TAP must be comprised of at least two to three pipeline/facility operators, having assets relevant to the proposed project scope, which must be fully identified in submitted proposals. The TAP can also include subject matter experts and other organizations as appropriate. Specifically addressing research quality, the TAP will also include a minimum of two representatives from academia.” Provide details you feel are pertinent in your proposal. |
| For the 50% cost sharing, is it okay if we the company contribute 50% and the government contributes the other 50%? |
| All research topics require resource sharing. For research topics developing technology, the mandatory minimum cost share is 50% from non-federal sources. For research topics developing knowledge, the mandatory minimum cost share is 20% from non-federal sources. |
| For the budget, we are planning to use the funding to (1) have third-party labs to do fracture toughness testing; (2) compensate operators for giving us in-ditch time to perform field testing of our tool. Are these qualified budget items (maybe under the subcontractor category)? |
| See Notice, Section 6 Additional Information on Proposed Budget |
| 26 |
| General |
| The Research Announcement Introduction/Background section references requiring a Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) for all awarded projects. It also suggests the TAP must be fully identified in submitted proposals. Please confirm if the DOT is developing a TAP that will be a 3rd party reviewer of the technical/knowledge that is shared from Company or if the proposer has to develop the TAP, including pipeline/facility operators (at least two to three) and academia (minimum of two). If it is required to be developed by the proposer, please confirm if it is required for all knowledge development and technology development categories. |
| A TAP is required on all projects and the applicant organizes the TAP, “The TAP must be comprised of at least two to three pipeline/facility operators, having assets relevant to the proposed project scope, which must be fully identified in submitted proposals. The TAP can also include subject matter experts and other organizations as appropriate. Specifically addressing research quality, the TAP will also include a minimum of two representatives from academia.” |
| 27 |
| General |
| The Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) requires at least two advisors from academia that “will adhere to a Non-Disclosure Agreement/Conflict of Interest requirement with signature asserting that they will not publicly share any project deliberations. In addition, the TAP members must be contractually independent from working on any related subject matters with PHMSA regulated companies. They must have the requisite education background related to the project subject matter.” If the proposing Company is to develop the TAP as part of the proposal, is the DOT able to share a list of qualified list of advisors that satisfy the required background? |
| Applicant organizes the TAP, “The TAP must be comprised of at least two to three pipeline/facility operators, having assets relevant to the proposed project scope, which must be fully identified in submitted proposals. The TAP can also include subject matter experts and other organizations as appropriate. Specifically addressing research quality, the TAP will also include a minimum of two representatives from academia.” PHMSA does not have a list to share, the academia need to be SME that are contractually independent from working on any related subject matters with PHMSA regulated companies. It is recommended at a minimum to approach your local university or college and identify an SME by educational discipline such as engineering or science relevant to the scope of the work completed within the project. |
| 28 |
| 1. Climate Change Mitigation |
3. Knowledge Development – Model Risk Assessment of H2, H2-Natural Gas Blend, and Natural Gas Releases
| There is a requirement to validate the models by undertaking several tests including full scale testing. We have identified a test facility that can undertake this work in the UK. Is it acceptable for the testing part of the work to be undertaken in the UK? |
| Provide details in your proposal, testing location is not limited by the topic scope. |
| 29 |
| 1. Climate Change Mitigation |
3. Knowledge Development – Model Risk Assessment of H2, H2-Natural Gas Blend, and Natural Gas Releases
| The testing to validate the models should include full scale testing. Can you confirm that an 8” diameter pipeline is adequate for full scale testing. |
| Provide detail in your proposal that 8” would be adequate for full scale testing. |
| 30 |
| 1. Climate Change Mitigation |
3. Knowledge Development – Model Risk Assessment of H2, H2-Natural Gas Blend, and Natural Gas Releases
| The large and full scale testing will require a large component of the costs for this work. In the event that the testing part of the project is subcontracted, can you confirm that it is acceptable that the costs for the testing part of this project exceed 50% of proposed amount of Federal contribution to project. |
| All research topics require resource sharing. For research topics developing technology, the mandatory minimum cost share is 50% from non-federal sources. For research topics developing knowledge, the mandatory minimum cost share is 20% from non-federal sources. (Emphasis added). |
| In the proposal instructions, it says to include “Additional budgetary information, broken out as described in subparagraphs a. through l.” in the proposal appendix, but there is no place specifically mentioned in the proposal format for this information. Should this be included as an Appendix C, following the “Other Related Proposals”? Or should this information be included as part of the Budget Summary in Attachment #4? |
| yes |
| Does Attachment 6 (Non-discrimination assurances) only need to be signed by the prime contractor, or should signed copies of this document be included in the proposal for each participating subcontractor/consultant as well? |
| Attachment 6 (Non-Discrimination assurances) only need to be signed by the prime recipient. |
