**DRAFT FOA QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS**

**FOA NUMBER DE-PS26-07NT43136-DRAFT**

**SECA Coal-Based Systems**

**1. Question**: The SECA program is the single DOE program that
supports the full development of the Solid Oxide Fuel Cell technology.
Along with coal, biomass is another plentiful domestic energy resource.
The SOFC technology is highly suited to the generation of electricity
through the gasification of biomass (including the waste products of
those bio-crops that are targeted to supply the liquid fuel for
transportation in this country). Distributed SOFC generation systems
from 250kW to 5 MW in size would be well-matched to make use of this
distributed energy source for the generation of electricity for local
use or to support the long transmission line of the grid found in the
major agricultural regions of this country. I believe that the Solid
State Energy program at the DOE (SECA) is the place to support the
conversion of this domestic and renewable energy source into
electricity. I would urge that this FOA (DE-PS26-07NT43136) slated to be
issued on August 27, 2007 be extended to cover Biomass-Based SOFC
generation systems.

**1. DOE Response**: The Department agrees that biomass coupled with
SECA fuel cell technology will provide a substantial opportunity to
reduce the burden on the current electrical distribution system through
greater availability of localized power generation. Use of biomass in
distributed generation applications would substantially reduce the need
to import alternative fuels such as natural gas and enhance grid
stability in existing and new distribution regions. Given the existing
localized distribution of biomass resources this strategy would reduce
the transportation cost of delivering biomass derived fuels to dispersed
central locations. But first it is essential to achieve the SECA goals
in order to take advantage of the opportunity that biomass presents as a
distributed fuel. The Office of Fossil Energy's focus on delivering SECA
fuel cells for central generation is critical to ensure sufficient
volume of production, (e.g., DOE estimates a minimum 250 MW per year) to
drive the cost of fuel cells to the level of \$400/kW; well accepted as
necessary to ensure the cost of electricity will be on par with existing
generation. Many benefits will derive from the SECA fuel cell program
upon achievement of the base SECA targets. SECA fuel cells will ensure
that coal can be utilized in an Integrated Gasification Fuel Cell plant,
concurrently achieving carbon capture greater than 90%; nitrogen oxides
well less than regulated limits (i.e., \< 0.5 ppm); efficiencies greater
than 50% HHV and a cost of electricity comparable to today's levels,
goals critically important to a vibrant national economy. It is fully
anticipated that having achieved the cost and performance goals for each
succeeding scale from multi-kW through multi-hundred MW, SECA fuel cells
will be used in virtually any stationary power generation application
and in transportation applications as well (i.e., reduced idling
emissions with transportation auxiliary power units) simultaneously
addressing many, or in some cases, all concerns related to environmental
impacts and energy security. Given the available resources, it is
essential to focus on the primary objectives of the SECA fuel cell
program. Coal will remain a critical national resource, with 150 to 400
GW of new generation capacity required over the next two decades. It is
critical to achieve the Office of Fossil Energy goals for coal research
and development to ensure an environmentally friendly and energy secure
future. SECA fuel cell commercialization will achieve these objectives
through the large volumes of production and the large financial
incentives necessary to attract existing and new industry to undertake
the remaining hard work.

**2. Question**: We support the DOE goal to aid the development of large
(\>100MWe) fuel cell systems, and the technical approach criterion as
described in Part IV (\"Technical Approach and Fuel Cell Technology\"),
page 17, 2nd paragraph: \"The Applicant shall provide a definitive
discussion of the technical uncertainties and risks associated with the
effort to achieve the program objectives and Minimum requirements.
Relevant performance deltas between current and required major
component/subsystem performance and cost to achieve the Program\'s
targets must be explicitly addressed. Work addressing these performance
gaps will form the foundation of the Statement of the Project
Objectives. Proposed solutions, with supporting justification, to all
identified problem areas should be included in the discussion. Specific
research and development (R&D) needs should be categorized as follows:
(1) Materials and Manufacturing; (2) Fuel processing/Cleanup; (3)
Modeling and Simulation; (4) Power Electronics; (5) Thermal Systems; and
(6) Control System and Sensors.\" We highlight this because we believe
that it is imperative that the program support work to advance
technology and manufacture of all of the critical subsystems. This will
require extensive design and manufacturing development that will be
based upon existing manufacturing infrastructure and expertise. We also
support the flexible-fuel approach that would allow for early
introduction of MW-scaled systems by commercially available fuels such
as natural gas. Lastly, the solicitation the solicitation period should
be extended to 6 weeks rather than the 5-week period in the Draft.

**2. DOE Response**: As stated in the solicitation, DOE is in full
agreement that necessary attention must be focused on all areas of the
complete system to achieve the system cost of \$400/kW. The SECA program
is focused on a coal derived fuel that consists of both hydrogen and
carbon monoxide and not greater than 25% methane, representing a
reasonable estimate of the fuel composition produced by a high
efficiency coal gasification process optimized for use with fuel cell
systems. It is anticipated that natural gas will be available at future
test sites. Given the transient nature of such test facilities and the
multiple test operations in addition to fuel cell activities, natural
gas may be used when coal derived gas is not available to ensure
integrity of the fuel cell and avoid the need for a redundant "cover
gas". Research and development directed at natural gas fuel processing
will not be approved in the scope of this work. However, work related to
switching between coal-derived gas and natural gas is considered an
important feature as stated and will be considered when proposed.

It is essential to make any and all awards relative to this announcement
no later than December 31, 2007 in order to permit sufficient time to
meet the 2008 SECA metric essential to meeting future delivery dates
concurrent with other Office of Fossil Energy program elements.
Regrettably, no relief is possible regarding the currently scheduled
solicitation period.

**3. Question:** We support the DOE goal to aid in the development of
large (\>100 MWe) fuel cell systems, and the technical approach
criterion as described in the Technical Approach and Fuel Cell
Technology Potential section, paragraph 2, page 17: "The Applicant shall
provide a definitive discussion of the technical uncertainties and risks
associated with the effort to achieve the program objectives and the
Minimum Requirements. Relevant performance deltas between current and
required major components/subsystem performance and cot to achieve the
Program's targets must be explicitly addressed. Work addressing these
performance gaps will from the foundation of the Statement of Project
Objectives. Proposed solutions, with supporting justification, to all
identified problem areas should be included in the discussion. Specific
research and development (R&D) needs should be categorized as follows:
(1) Materials and Manufacturing; (2) Fuel Processing/Cleanup; (3)
Modeling and Simulation; (4) Power Electronics; (5) Thermal Systems; and
(6) Control Systems and Sensors." We highlight this because we believe
that it is imperative that the program support work to advance
technology and manufacture of all of the critical subsystems. This will
require extensive design and manufacturing development that will be
based upon existing manufacturing infrastructure and expertise. We also
support the flexible-fuel approach that allows for early introduction of
MW-scale systems, fueled by commercially available fuels such as natural
gas. Lastly, the solicitation period should be extended to six weeks
rather than the five-week period in the DRAFT.

**3. DOE Response:** See DOE Response to Question #2.

**4. Question:** We support the DOE goal to aid in the development of
large (\>100 MWe) fuel cell systems, and the technical approach
criterion as described in the FOA, especially as regards the need to
maintain a systems approach toward fuel cell solutions. We encourage an
emphasis on DOE\'s statement that \"Proposed solutions, with supporting
justification, to all identified problem areas should be included in the
discussion. Specific research and development (R&D) needs should be
categorized as follows: (1) Materials and Manufacturing; (2) Fuel
Processing/Cleanup; (3) Modeling and Simulation; (4) Power Electronics;
(5) Thermal Systems; and (6) Control Systems and Sensors." We highlight
this because we believe that it is imperative that the program support
work to advance technology and manufacture of all of the critical
subsystems. This will require extensive design and manufacturing
development that will be based upon existing manufacturing
infrastructure and expertise. This type of focus will draw in talent and
necessary insight from a broad array of sub-system and component
suppliers, resulting in a better and more comprehensive technology
solution and serve as important incentive for supply chain development
in the fuel cell space. We also support the flexible-fuel approach that
allows for early introduction of MW-scale systems, fueled by
commercially available fuels such as natural gas. Lastly, we encourage
DOE to extend the solicitation period to more than the five-week period
in the DRAFT FOA, in order to allow a broader range of collaboration
teams to develop and prepare. Six to eight weeks is more appropriate,
and might provide DOE a better and broader array of applications.

**4. DOE Response:** See DOE Response to Question #2.

**5. Question:** We support the DOE goal to aid in the development of
large (\>100 MWe) fuel cell systems, and the technical approach
criterion as described in the

Technical Approach and Fuel Cell Technology Potential section, paragraph
2, page 17: "The Applicant shall provide a definitive discussion of the
technical uncertainties and risks associated with the effort to achieve
the program objectives and the Minimum Requirements. Relevant
performance deltas between current and required major
components/subsystem performance and cot to achieve the Program's
targets must be explicitly addressed. Work addressing these performance
gaps will from the foundation of the Statement of Project Objectives.
Proposed solutions, with supporting justification, to all identified
problem areas should be included in the discussion. Specific research
and development (R&D) needs should be categorized as follows: (1)
Materials and Manufacturing; (2) Fuel Processing/Cleanup; (3) Modeling
and Simulation; (4) Power Electronics; (5) Thermal Systems; and (6)
Control Systems and Sensors." We highlight this because we believe that
it is imperative that the program support work to advance technology and
manufacture of all of the critical subsystems. This will require
extensive design and manufacturing development that will be based upon
existing manufacturing infrastructure and expertise. We also support the
flexible-fuel approach that allows for early introduction of MW-scale
systems, fueled by commercially available fuels such as natural gas.
Lastly, the solicitation period should be extended to at least six weeks
rather than the five-week period in the DRAFT.

**5. DOE Response:** See DOE Response to Question #2.

**6. Question:** This is a comment on the Technical Approach and Fuel
Cell Technology Potential section (on Page 17). First, we strongly
support DOE\'s goal to aid in the development of large (\>100 MWe) fuel
cell systems. Not only is large-scale development of power-plant sized
fuel cells critical, it is very important to support work to advance
technology of all related subsystems to make the fuel cell system work.
Syngas, even relatively cleaned syngas, offers numerous system-wide
challenges. Second, while we clearly support the long-term goal of
operation of the fuel cell system on coal-derived syngas, truly
commercial system must be fuel flexible. In fact, it will probably be
easier to get operational knowledge on less complex fuels, such as
natural gas, and then make the transition to syngas. Finally, we are
planning to work with a team to address this solicitation. However, a
five week window is extraordinary narrow. We would greatly appreciate
the solicitation period should be extended to six weeks if at all
possible.

**6. DOE Response:** See DOE Response to Question #2.

**7. Question:** We work closely and extensively with industry and other
Universities in fuel cell research, and have significant resources
committed to this important research area in areas ranging from
materials to systems development and applications. Therefore, we
strongly support the DOE\'s goal to aid in the development of large fuel
cell systems, and the technical approach as described in the Technical
Approach and Fuel Cell Technology Potential section, paragraph 2, page
17. We highlight this because we believe that it is essential that the
program support work to advance technology and the manufacture of all
critical subsystems, which will require extensive design and
manufacturing development. We also support the flexible-fuel approach
that allows for early introduction of MW-scale systems fueled by
commercially available fuels such as natural gas. Thank you.

**7. DOE Response:** See DOE Response to Question #2.

**8. Question:** We support the DOE goal to aid in the development of
large (\>100 MWe) fuel cell systems, and the technical approach as
described in paragraph 2, page 17: "The Applicant shall provide a
definitive discussion of the technical uncertainties and risks
associated with the effort to achieve the program objectives and the
Minimum Requirements. Relevant performance deltas between current and
required major components/subsystem performance and cost to achieve the
Program's targets must be explicitly addressed. Work addressing these
performance gaps will from the foundation of the Statement of Project
Objectives. Proposed solutions, with supporting justification, to all
identified problem areas should be included in the discussion. Specific
research and development (R&D) needs should be categorized as follows:
(1) Materials and Manufacturing; (2) Fuel Processing/Cleanup; (3)
Modeling and Simulation; (4) Power Electronics; (5) Thermal Systems; and
(6) Control Systems and Sensors." We believe that it is imperative that
the program support work to advance all of the critical subsystems so as
to better enable commercially-viable fuel cell system deployment in
real-world applications, not just laboratory improvements for individual
components or subsystems. This will require extensive design and
manufacturing development work, which in turn needs to be based upon
existing manufacturing infrastructure and expertise. We also support a
flexible-fuel approach that allows for early introduction of MW-scale
fuel cell systems that can be fueled by commercially available fuels
other than coal, such as natural gas.

**8. DOE Response:** See DOE Response to Question #2.

**9. Question:** The state of Ohio has had a targeted focus on
supporting the fuel cell industry for the past five years, having
invested over \$63 million to date to help advance the technology. As
such, we support the DOE goal to aid in the development of large (\>100
MWe) fuel cell systems, and the technical approach criterion as
described in the Technical Approach and Fuel Cell Technology Potential
section, paragraph 2, page 17: "The Applicant shall provide a definitive
discussion of the technical uncertainties and risks associated with the
effort to achieve the program objectives and the Minimum Requirements.
Relevant performance deltas between current and required major
components/subsystem performance and cot to achieve the Program's
targets must be explicitly addressed. Work addressing these performance
gaps will from the foundation of the Statement of Project Objectives.
Proposed solutions, with supporting justification, to all identified
problem areas should be included in the discussion. Specific research
and development (R&D) needs should be categorized as follows: (1)
Materials and Manufacturing; (2) Fuel Processing/Cleanup; (3) Modeling
and Simulation; (4) Power Electronics; (5) Thermal Systems; and (6)
Control Systems and Sensors." We highlight this because we believe that
it is imperative that the program support work to advance technology and
manufacture of all of the critical subsystems. This will require
extensive design and manufacturing development that will be based upon
existing manufacturing infrastructure and expertise. We also support the
flexible-fuel approach that allows for early introduction of MW-scale
systems, fueled by commercially available fuels such as natural gas.
Lastly, the solicitation period should be extended to six weeks rather
than the five-week period in the DRAFT.

**9. DOE Response:** See DOE Response to Question #2.

**10. Question:** 1) Please clarify the role of natural gas in this
project. 2) Referencing pages 8, 49 and 50: What is the composition of
the syngas during each phase? 3) Referencing pages 7 and 45: Please
clarify the minimum power rating for the POC. Page 7 refers to 10MW and
page 45 refers to a 5MW unit. Separately, is a 1 MW POC acceptable? 4)
Referencing pages 7, 8, 16, 46 and 48: The system is required to export
electrical power to the utility grid. Why is regulated DC power required
instead of an AC power output? 5) Reference page 6: Please define the
parameters of the stack test and test plan. 6) Reference page 44
(Appendix A): A 5,000 hour test in Phase 1 is too long given a 1-year
phase. Recommend Phase 1 test run for 1,000 hours; Phase 2 test run for
2,500 hours, and Phase 3 test run for 25,000 hours. 7) Reference page
20: Current SECA Program requires semi-annual reports. This solicitation
asks for quarterly reports. Recommend following the current SECA
semi-annual reporting frequency. 8) Reference page 15: \"\...The
Applicant shall explicitly address the Intellectual Property status of
the proposed fuel cell technology, manufacturing processes, etc. and
demonstrate that the Applicant has sufficient intellectual property
rights to commercialize said technology.\" Under a commercial
relationship between supplier and customer, IP is generally not
transferred to the customer (Applicant).

**10. DOE Response:**

1\) & 2) The SECA program is focused on a coal derived fuel that
consists of both hydrogen and carbon monoxide and not greater than 25%
methane representing a reasonable estimate of the fuel composition
produced by a high efficiency coal gasification process optimized for
use with fuel cell systems. It is anticipated that natural gas will be
available at future test sites. Given the transient nature of such test
facilities and the multiple test operations in addition to fuel cell
activities, natural gas may be used when coal derived gas is not
available to ensure integrity of the fuel cell and avoid the need for a
redundant "cover gas". Research and development directed at natural gas
fuel processing will not be approved in the scope of this work. However,
work related to switching between coal-derived gas and natural gas is
considered an important feature as stated and will be considered when
proposed.

3\) The Phase III POC system nameplate rating will be determined at the
beginning of each Phase. It is anticipated that a total of 10MW of fuel
cells will be manufactured.

4\) Test metrics will be reported relative to regulated DC output for
consistency of reporting.

5\) Potential applicants are referred to the Minimum Requirements,
Appendix A, for guidance on end-of-Phase deliverable testing.

6\) Phase I and II end-of-Phase deliverable testing shall be 5000 hours,
respectively. At least 1500 hours must be completed prior to the end of
the respective Phase, as part of the renewal application process.

7\) Progress Reports, to be submitted quarterly in accordance with the
Federal Assistance Reporting Checklist and Instructions, have replaced
semiannual Progress Reports as the standard reporting mechanism. This is
a federal government wide requirement and not subject to local
determination.

8\) The intent of this section is to verify that the Applicant is
capable, through IP ownership, licensing agreements, etc., to develop,
produce, and market the fuel cell technology.

**11. Question:** We support the DOE goal to aid in the development of
large (\>100MWe) fuel cell systems, and the technical approach criterion
as described in the Technical Approach and Fuel Cell Technology
Potential section, paragraph 2, page 17. We highlight this because we
believe that it is imperative that the program support work to advance
technology and manufacture of all of the critical subsystems. This will
require extensive design and manufacturing development that will be
based upon existing manufacturing infrastructure and expertise. We also
support the flexible-fuel approach that allows for early introduction of
MW-scale systems, fueled by commercially available fuels such as natural
gas.

**11. DOE Response:** See DOE Response to Question #2.

**12. Question:** Can intellectual property be protected by a
participating company?

**12. DOE Response:** A qualified answer to your question is yes.
However, the protection provided is governed by the Intellectual
Property (IP) Provisions applied as a result of the type of business
entity and type of award. Please refer to the following link to review
the applicable Cooperative Agreement IP set:

[www.gc.energy.gov/financial_assistance_awards.htm](http://www.gc.energy.gov/financial_assistance_awards.htm)