vvEPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington DC 20460
EPA/600/F-96/019
November 1996
EPA/NASA JOINT PROGRAM
ON ECOSYSTEM
RESTORATION
Interagency Announcement
of Opportunity
Closing Date: February 28,1997
\
Environmental Protection Agency
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
EPA does not intend to mail this announcement in large quantities. Addi-
tional information, forms, etc., should be obtained by consulting our
homepage http://www.epa.gov/ncerqa and downloading what is needed.
-------
EPA/NASA Joint Program On Ecological Restoration
EPA/NASA
Joint Program on
Ecosystem Restoration
Interagency Announcement of Opportunity
CLOSING DATE: February 28, 1997
INTRODUCTION
The loss of essential natural resources which the
United States is experiencing presents a serious long-term
threat to the nation's economic prosperity and security and
the sustainability of remaining ecological systems. Resto-
ration of ecological systems has been recognized as a major
tool for reaching Clean Water Act goals. As a result, EPA's
Five Year Strategic Plan (July 1994) specifies that the
Agency will upgrade its ability to protect, maintain, and
restore the ecological integrity of the nation's land and
water, urban areas, and plant and animal species, including
human health, by adopting a place-based focus. NASA's
Mission to Planet Earth (MTPE) has the long term mission
of developing our understanding of the whole Earth system
and the effects on the global environment of natural and
human-induced changes (MTPE Strategic Enterprise Plan,
1996). MTPE comprises an integrated slate of spacecraft
and in situ measurement capabilities; data and information
management systems to acquire, process, archive, and
distribute global data sets; and research and analysis
programs to convert data into new knowledge of the Earth
system. Numerous users in academia, industry, and
Federal, State, and Local government tap this knowledge to
produce products and services essential to achieving
sustainable development.
By "place-based" we mean consideration of an area
or subregion from the standpoint of particular cultural,
physical, ecological, or other characteristics with which
people identify or assign value. A place-based approach is
best suited for decision-making at the local to state level.
Experience has taught that every ecosystem has its own
peculiar characteristics such that theoretical or generalized
studies frequently have little applicability to specific sites.
Thus, we are suggesting the need for research which
focuses on a specific site, but through which we can
establish general principles and approaches to other sites.
The National Research Council has defined "restora-
tion" in the ecosystem context as "the return of an ecosys-
tem to a close approximation of its condition prior to
disturbance." Ecosystem rehabilitation is seen as the
restoration of those ecosystem characteristics deemed
desirable by society with perhaps some new characteristics
that may not have been originally present. In this concept,
there is implicit the understanding that many watersheds
which have been disturbed can never return to their original
state but in fact may acquire new, socially acceptable
characteristics different from their original condition. The
challenge is to develop a framework whereby resource
managers can define realistic and achievable goals for
ecosystems at the watershed level.
Description
This solicitation complements the ongoing research
program in EPA Laboratories and is consistent with the
goals and objectives of the ecologically-based programs
within NASA's MTPE. The EPA Office of Research and
Development's (ORD) in-house program is focused (1) on
the development of ecosystem restoration practices and (2)
on technologies that facilitate cost effective decision-
making by local communities and stakeholder groups
engaged in watershed planning and place-based environ-
mental protection. The MTPE Research Strategy for Land-
Cover and Land-Use Change seeks to understand the
consequences of land-cover and land-use change for
continued provision of ecological goods and services and,
therefore, to develop the capability to perform repeated
global inventories of land-cover and land-use from space.
This would allow us to develop the scientific understanding
and models necessary to evaluate the consequences of
observed changes. Within this strategy, the Terrestrial
Ecology Program seeks to improve understanding of the
structure and function of global terrestrial ecosystems, their
interactions with the atmosphere and hydrosphere, and their
role in the cycling of the major biogeochemical elements
and water. Thus, research focused on how to restore
ecosystems' functionality is of substantial interest to MTPE.
The purpose of this solicitation is, therefore, to support the
development of the scientific framework required to
diagnose existing ecosystems, establish the basis to
prioritize ecosystems that should be restored, describe
effectiveness criteria for incremental improvements, and
describe desirable endpoints for ecosystem restoration/
rehabilitation.
The most competitive proposals will focus on the
urbanized or urbanizing watershed. While not excluding
other areas, this effort will place special emphasis on the
developing fringe upstream of urbanized areas character-
-------
EPA/NASA Joint Program On Ecological Restoration
izedby Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSAs).
These are the areas where conflicts between infrastructure
development and reasonably healthy but impacted ecosys-
tems are significant, and the greatest opportunity exists for
return on investments made in constructive change.
Rehabilitation potential is the least understood in such
areas, but rehabilitation would potentially benefit the
largest percentage of the population. Rehabilitation
potential in the urbanized or urbanizing watershed should
be viewed in the broad geomorphologic context. Land use
activities and riparian structure and function in the upland
reaches of the watershed are critically important in assess-
ing the restoration potential of downstream ecosystems.
These areas, in fact, may be the most important focus of an
urban watershed rehabilitation.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration seek
research proposals to address fundamental concepts of
ecosystem rehabilitation in the context of the larger
watershed. This competition emphasizes fundamental
research on important scientific principles related to
watershed rehabilitation. A framework based on a systems
approach should be developed that addresses some or all of
the following questions:
(1) What set of characteristics/functions of ecosys-
tems are amenable to being restored/rehabilitated from
specific environmental insults? How will the degree of
restoration be evaluated, monitored, and put into both
temporal and regional contexts?
(2) To what degree does knowledge of basic ecosys-
tem processes lead to practical rehabilitation programs/
projects? How can realistic rehabilitation/restoration goals
and priorities be set on the basis of process-level under-
standing?
(3) What are both environmentally and economically
appropriate approaches for setting restoration/rehabilitation
priorities at both system-levels and process-levels?
Additional Considerations
You must ensure that the research proposed is
significantly different from that in any other application
you have submitted to a current competition and/or from
any other grant you are currently receiving from EPA,
NASA, or any other federal government agency.
This competition will not support site-specific
projects for the sole purpose of restoration. As a general
rule, proposals with an empirical component should make
use of ongoing restoration efforts. New restoration efforts
may be implemented only if the primary purpose is R&D,
such as developing or validating models. Community
partnerships are encouraged where the community funds
the restoration effort and this grant funds the basic research
associated with questions 1-3 elaborated above.
Funding
Approximately $4 million will be made available for
this competition, with a projected award range of $100,000
to $300,000 per year and a duration of 3 years. Awards are
subject to the availability of funds
ELIGIBILITY
Not-for-profit scientific research and educational
institutions located in the U.S., and state or local govern-
ments are eligible to apply under this solicitation. Profit-
making firms are not eligible to receive assistance under
this program.
Researchers in federal agencies may submit applica-
tions, but federal employees may not request salary
reimbursement. Federal employees may cooperate or
collaborate with other eligible applicants within the limits
imposed by applicable legislation and regulations. Re-
searchers in the Department of Energy National Laborato-
ries are eligible to apply.
EPA and NASA welcome applications on behalf of
all qualified scientists, engineers, and other professionals,
and strongly encourage women, minorities, and persons
with disabilities to compete fully in this program.
In accordance with Federal statutes and regulations
and EPA and NASA policies, no person on grounds of race,
color, age, sex, national origin, or disability shall be
excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or be
subjected to discrimination under any program or activity
receiving financial assistance from the Environmental
Protection Agency or the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICATION
SUBMISSION
At various places within the application, applicants
will be asked to identify the topic area by using the Sorting
Code, 97-NCERQA-15. The Sorting Code must be placed
-------
EPA/NASA Joint Program On Ecological Restoration
at the top of the abstract (as shown in the abstract format),
on the title page (as shown in the title page format), and
should also be included in the address on the package that
is sent to EPA.
THE APPLICATION
The initial application is made through the submis-
sion of the materials described below. It is essential that
the application contain all the information requested
and be submitted in the formats described. If it is not,
the application may be rejected on administrative grounds.
If an application is considered for award (i.e., after external
peer review and internal review), additional forms and other
information will be requested by the Project Officer. The
application should not be bound or stapled in any way.
The Application contains the following:
A. Standard Form 424: The applicant must complete
Standard Form 424 (see attached form and instruc-
tions). This form will act as a cover sheet for the
application and should be its first page. Instructions
for completion of the SF424 are included with the
form. The form must contain the original signature of
an authorized representative of the applying institu-
tion. Please note that both the Principal Investigator
and an administrative contact should be identified in
section 5 of the SF424. The sorting code,
97-NCERQA-15, should be placed in section 10 of
the SF424.
B. Key Contacts: The applicant must complete the
Key Contacts Form (attached) as the second page of
the submitted application.
C. Abstract: The abstract is a very important
document. Prior to attending the peer review panel
meetings, some of the panelists may read only the
abstract. Therefore, it is critical that the abstract
accurately describe the research being proposed and
convey all the essential elements of the research.
Also, in the event of an award, the abstracts will form
the basis for an Annual Report of awards made under
this program. The abstract must be limited to one
page in the format shown in the attachment. The
abstract should include the following information:
1. Sorting Code: Use the correct code,
97-NCERQA-15.
2. Title: Use the exact title as it appears in the rest of
the application.
3. Investigators: List the names and affiliations of
each investigator who will significantly contribute to
the project. Start with the Principal Investigator.
4. Project Summary: This should summarize: (a)
the objectives of the study (including any hypotheses
that will be tested), (b) the experimental approach to
be used (which should give an accurate description of
the project as described in the proposal), (c) the
expected results of the project and how it addresses
the research needs identified in the solicitation, and
(d) the estimated improvement in risk assessment or
risk management that will result from successful
completion of the work proposed.
D. Project Description: This description must not
exceed fifteen (15) consecutively numbered (center
bottom), 8.5x11 inch pages of single-spaced standard
12-point type with 1 inch margins. The description
must provide the following information:
1. Objectives: List the objectives of the proposed
research and the hypotheses being tested during the
project and briefly state why the intended research is
important. This section can also include any back-
ground or introductory information that would help
explain the objectives of the study (one to two pages
recommended).
2. Approach: Outline the methods, approaches, and
techniques that you intend to employ in meeting the
objective stated above (five to 10 pages recom-
mended).
3. Expected Results or Benefits: Describe the
results you expect to achieve during the project and
the benefits of success as they relate to the topic under
which the proposal was submitted. This section
should also discuss the utility of the research project
proposed for addressing the environmental problems
described in the solicitation (one to two pages
recommended).
4. General Project Information: Discuss other
information relevant to the potential success of the
project. This should include facilities, personnel,
project schedules, proposed management, interactions
with other institutions, etc. (one to two pages recom-
mended).
5. Important Attachments: Appendices and/or
other information may be included but must remain
within the 15-page limit. References are in addition
to the 15 pages.
-------
EPA/NASA Joint Program On Ecological Restoration
E. Resumes: The resumes of all principal investigators
and important co-workers should be presented.
Resumes must not exceed two consecutively num-
bered (bottom center), 8.5x11 inch pages of single-
spaced standard 12-point type with 1 inch margins for
each individual.
F. Current and Pending Support: The applicant
must identify any current and pending financial
resources that are intended to support research related
to that included in the proposal or which would
consume the time of principal investigators. This
should be done by completing the appropriate form
(see attachment) for each investigator and other senior
personnel involved in the proposal. Failure to provide
this information may delay consideration of your
proposal.
G. Budget: The applicant must present a detailed,
itemized budget for the entire project. This budget
must be in the format provided (see attachment) and
not exceed two consecutively numbered (bottom
center), 8.5x11 inch pages with 1 inch margins.
Please note that institutional cost sharing is not
required and, therefore, does not have to be included
in the budget table. If desired, a brief statement
concerning cost sharing can be added to the budget
justification.
H. Budget Justification: This section should describe
the basis for calculating the personnel, fringe benefits,
travel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, and
other costs identified in the itemized budget and
explain the basis for their calculation (special atten-
tion should be given to explaining the travel, equip-
ment, and other categories). This should also include
an explanation of how the indirect costs were calcu-
lated. This justification should not exceed two
consecutively numbered (bottom center), 8.5x11 inch
pages of single-spaced standard 12-point type with 1
inch margins.
I. Quality Assurance Narrative Statement: For
awards that involve environmentally related measure-
ments or data generation, a quality system that
complies with the requirements of ANSI/ASQC E4,
"Specifications and Guidelines for Quality Systems
for Environmental Data Collection and Environmental
Technology Programs," must be in place. This
statement should not exceed two consecutively
numbered, 8.5x11 inch pages of single-spaced
standard 12-point type with 1 inch margins. This is in
addition to the 15 pages permitted for the Project
Description. The Quality Assurance Narrative
Statement should, for each item listed below, either
present the required information or provide a justifica-
tion as to why the item does not apply to the proposed
research.
1. The data collection activities to be performed or
hypothesis to be tested (reference may be made to the
specific page and paragraph number in the application
where this information may be found); acceptance
criteria for data quality (precision, accuracy, represen-
tativeness, completeness, comparability).
2. The study design including sample type and
location requirements and any statistical analyses that
were used to estimate the types and numbers of
samples required.
3. The procedures for the handling and custody of
samples, including sample identification, preserva-
tion, transportation, and storage.
4. The methods that will be used to analyze samples
collected, including a description of the sampling and/
or analytical instruments required.
5. The procedures that will be used in the calibration
and performance evaluation of the sampling and
analytical methods used during the project.
6. The procedures for data reduction and reporting,
including description of statistical analyses to be
used.
7. The intended use of the data as they relate to the
study objectives or hypotheses.
8. The quantitative and or qualitative procedures that
will be used to evaluate the success of the project.
9. Any plans for peer or other reviews of the study
design or analytical methods prior to data collection.
ANSI/ASQC E4, "Specifications and Guidelines for Quality Systems for
Environmental Data Collection and Environmental Technology Programs" is
available for purchase from the American Society for Quality Control, phone
1-800-248-1946, item T55. Only in exceptional circumstances should it be necessary
to consult this document.
J. Postcard: The Applicant must include with the
application a serf-addressed, stamped 3x5 inch post
card. This will be used to acknowledge receipt of the
application and to transmit other important informa-
tion to the applicant.
-------
EPA/NASA Joint Program On Ecological Restoration
RE VIEW AND SELECTION
All grant applications are initially reviewed by EPA
and NASA to determine their legal and administrative
acceptability. Acceptable applications are then reviewed by
an appropriate technical peer review group. This review is
designed to evaluate each proposal according to its scien-
tific merit. In general, each review group is composed of
non-EPA/ NASA scientists, engineers, social scientists,
and/or economists who are experts in their respective
disciplines and are proficient in the technical areas they are
reviewing. The reviewers use the following criteria to help
them in their reviews:
1. The originality and creativity of the proposed re-
search, the potential contribution the proposed
research could make to advance scientific knowledge
in the environmental area, the appropriateness and
adequacy of the research methods proposed, and the
appropriateness and adequacy of the Quality Assur-
ance Narrative Statement
2. The qualifications of the principal investigator(s) and
other staff, including knowledge of pertinent litera-
ture, experience, and publication records as well as
the probability that the proposed research will be
successfully completed
3. The availability and/or adequacy of the facilities and
equipment proposed for the project
4. The responsiveness of the proposal to the research
needs set forth in the solicitation
5. Although budget information is not used by the
reviewers as the basis for their evaluation of scientific
merit, the reviewers are asked to provide their view on
the appropriateness and/or adequacy of the proposed
budget and its implications for the potential success of
the proposed research. Input on requested equipment
is of particular interest.
Applications that receive scores of excellent and very
good from the peer reviewers are subjected to a program-
matic review within EPA or NASA, the object being to
assure a balanced research portfolio for each Agency.
Scientists from the agency Laboratories and Program and
Regional Offices review these applications in relation to
program priorities and their complementarity to intramural
programs and recommend selections for funding.
A summary statement of the scientific review of the
panel will be provided to each applicant. Funding decisions
are the sole responsibility of the sponsoring agencies.
Grants are selected on the basis of technical merit, rel-
evancy to the research priorities outlined, program balance,
and budget.
HOW TO APPLY
The original and ten (10) copies of the fully devel-
oped application and five (5) additional copies of the
abstract (15 in all) must be received by NCERQA no later
than 4:00 P.M. EST on the closing date, February 28, 1997.
The application and abstract must be prepared in
accordance with these instructions. Informal, incomplete,
or unsigned proposals will not be considered. Completed
applications should be sent via regular or express mail to:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Peer Review Research Division (8703)
Sorting Code: 97-NCERQA-15
Room 2411
401 M Street, SW
Washington DC 20460
Applications sent via express mail should have the
following telephone number listed on the express mail
label: (202)260-0563
Guidelines, Limitations, and Additional
Requirements
Subcontracts for research to be conducted under the
grant which exceed 40% of the total direct cost of the grant
for each year in which the subcontract is awarded will be
subject to special review.
Researchers will be expected to participate in an
annual All-Investigators Meeting with EPA and NASA
scientists and other grantees to report on research activities
and to discuss issues of mutual interest.
Proprietary Information
By submitting an application in response to this
solicitation, the applicant grants EPA and NASA permis-
sion to share the application with technical reviewers both
within and outside of the Agency. Applications containing
proprietary or other types of confidential information will
be returned to the applicant without review.
-------
EPA/NASA Joint Program On Ecological Restoration
Funding Mechanism
The funding mechanism for all awards issued under
this solicitation will consist of grants from either EPA or
NASA, at the option of the Agencies, and depends on the
availability of funds. In accordance with Public Law 95-
224, the primary purpose of a grant is to accomplish a
public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by
Federal statute rather than acquisition for the direct benefit
of the Government.
Grants awarded as a result of this announcement will
be administered in accordance with 40 CFR Part 30 and 40,
or the latest FDP terms and conditions, depending upon the
grantee institution.
In this competition awards will be provided for
research in the sciences and engineering related to environ-
mental protection. The awardee is solely responsible for the
conduct of such activities and preparation of results for
publication. EPA and NASA, therefore, do not assume
responsibility for such findings or their interpretation.
CONTACTS
Additional information on EPA grants programs,
forms used for applications, etc., may be obtained by
exploring our Web page at http://www.epa.gov/ncerqa
Information not available on the Internet may be obtained
by contacting:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Center for Environmental Research
and Quality Assurance (8703)
401 M Street, SW
Washington DC 20460
Phone: 1-800-490-9194
Contact persons from each agency are identified
below. They will respond to inquiries regarding the
solicitation and can respond to any technical questions
related to your application.
EPA: Barbara Levinson 202-260-5983
levinson.barbara@epamail.epa.gov
NASA: Tony Janetos 202-358-0276
anthony.janetos@hq.nasa.gov
-------
Application
D
Preapplication
D
D D
(give city, county, state, and zip code)
(give area code)
(specify):
(enter appropriate letter in box)
(cities, counties, states, etc.):
D
D
-------
INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE SF 424
This is a standard form used by applicants as a required facesheet for preapplications and applications submitted for Federal
Assistance. It will be used by Federal agencies to obtain applicant certification that States which have established a review
and comment procedure in response to Executive Order 12372 and have selected the program to be included in their process,
have been given an opportunity to review the applicant's submission.
Item:
Entry:
Item:
Entry:
1. Serf-explanatory.
2. Date application submitted to Federal agency (or
State, if applicable) & applicant's control number
(if applicable).
3. State use only (if applicable).
4. If this application is to continue or revise an
existing award, enter present Federal identifier
number. If for a new project, leave blank.
5. Legal name of applicant, name of primary
organizational unit which will undertake the
assistance activity, complete address of the
applicant, and name and telephone number of the
person to contact on matters related to this
application.
6. Enter Employer Identification Number (BIN) as
assigned by the Internal Revenue Service.
7. Enter the appropriate letter in the space provided.
8. Check appropriate box and enter appropriate
letter(s) in the space(s) provided:
— "New" means a new assistance award.
— "Continuation" means an extension for an
additional funding/budget period for a project
with a projected completion date.
— "Revision" means any change in the Federal
Government's financial obligation or contingent
liability from an existing obligation.
9. Name of Federal agency from which assistance is
being requested with this application.
10. Use the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
number and title of the program under which
assistance is required.
11. Enter a brief descriptive title of the project. If me
than one program is involved, you should append
an explanation on a separate sheet. If appropriate
(e.g., construction or real property projects), attach
a map showing project location. For
preapplications, use a separate sheet to provide a
summary description of this project.
12. List only the largest political entities affected (e.g.,
State, counties, cities.)
13. Serf-explanatory.
14. List the applicant's Congressional Districts and
any District(s) affected by the program or project.
15. Amount requested or to be contributed during the
first funding/budget period by each contributor.
Value of in-kind contributions should be included
on appropriate lines as applicable. If the action
will result in a dollar change to an existing award,
include only the amount of the change. For
decreases, enclose the amounts in parentheses. If
both basic and supplemental amounts are included,
show breakdown on an attached sheet. For
multiple program funding, use totals and show
breakdown using same categories as item 15.
16. Applicants should contact the State Single Point of
Contact (SPOC) for Federal Executive Order 12372
to determine whether the application is subject to
the State intergovernmental review process.
17. This question applies to the applicant
organization, not the person who signs as the
authorized representative. Categories of debt
include delinquent audit allowances, loans and
taxes.
18. To be signed by the authorized representative of
the applicant. A copy of the governing body's
authorization for you to sign this application as
official representative must be on file in the
applicant's office. (Certain Federal agencies may
require that this authorization be submitted as part
of the application.
-------
KEY CONTACTS FORM
Authorized Representative: Original awards and amendments will be sent
to this individual for review and acceptance, unless otherwise indicated.
Payee: Individual authorized to accept payments.
Administrative Contact: Individual from Sponsored Programs Office to
contact concerning administrative matters (i.e., indirect cost rate computation,
rebudgeting requests etc.)
Principal Investigator Individual responsible for the technical completion of
the proposed work.
-------
Abstract Format (Example Format)
1. Sorting Code:
2. Title:
3. Investigators:
4. Project Summary:
a. Objectives/Hypotheses:
b. Approach:
c. Expected Results:
d. Estimated Improvement in Risk Assessment
or Risk Management
U.S. EPA/ORD/NCERQA 1996-1997
-------
Itemized Budget for ORD Grant Applications (Example Format)
CATEGORIES
a. Personnel
Principal Investigator
Co-Pi
Research Scientists
Postdoctoral Scientists
Other Personnel
TOTAL PERSONNEL COSTS
b. Fringe Benefits
%of
c. Travel
Trip 1
Trip 1
Trip 1
...etc.
TOTAL TRAVEL COSTS
d. Equipment
Item 1
Item 2
Item 3
...etc.
TOTAL EQUIPMENT COSTS
e. Supplies
Item 1
Item 2
Item 3
...etc.
TOTAL SUPPLY COSTS
f. Contracts
i
2
3
...etc.
TOTAL CONTRACTUAL COSTS
g. Other
Item 1
Item 2
Item 3
...etc.
TOTAL OTHER COSTS
h. TOTAL DIRECT COSTS
(sum of a-g)
i. Indirect Costs/Charges
% of (base)
j. TOTAL PROJECT COSTS
(sum of i & j)
k. TOTAL REQUESTED
FROM EPA
YEAR ONE
YEAR TWO
YEAR THREE
TOTAL PROJECT
U.S. EPA/ORD/NCERQA 1996-1997
DO NOT USE THIS FORM SAMPLE ONLY
-------
------- |