[Federal Register: October 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 206)]
[Notices]
[Page 62441-62457]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr25oc06-43]
[[Page 62441]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[FRL-8234-5]
Guidelines for Awarding Clean Water Act Section 319 Base Grants
to Indian Tribes and Request for Proposals From Indian Tribes for
Competitive Grants Under Clean Water Act Section 319 in FY 2007 (CFDA
66.460--Nonpoint Source Implementation Grants; Funding Opportunity
Number EPA-OW-OWOW-07-1)
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of Guidelines for Section 319 Base Grants and Request
for Proposals for Section 319 Competitive Grants.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice publishes EPA's national guidelines for the award
of base grants and EPA's Request for Proposals (RFP) for the award of
supplemental funding in the form of competitive grants under the Clean
Water Act (CWA) section 319(h) nonpoint source (NPS) grants program to
Indian Tribes in FY 2007. Section 319 of the CWA authorizes EPA to
award grants to eligible Tribes for the purpose of assisting them in
implementing approved NPS management programs developed pursuant to
section 319(b). The primary goal of the NPS management program is to
control NPS pollution through implementation of management measures and
practices to reduce pollutant loadings resulting from each category or
subcategory of NPSs identified in the Tribe's NPS assessment report
developed pursuant to section 319(a). EPA anticipates, pending
enactment of its FY 2007 appropriations, awarding a total of $7,000,000
to eligible Tribes which have approved NPS assessments and management
programs and (treatment-as-a-state'' (TAS) status as of October 13,
2006. EPA expects the allocation of funds will be similar to the amount
distributed in FY 2006, which included approximately $3.2 million in
base grants awarded to 95 Tribes and $3.8 million awarded to 28 Tribes
through a competitive process. Section A includes EPA's national
guidelines which govern the process for awarding base grants to all
eligible Tribes, and section B is the national RFP for awarding the
remaining funds on a competitive basis. In future years, EPA intends to
post the RFP for competitive grants under section 319 at http://www.grants.gov and on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/
tribal.
DATES: These guidelines are effective October 25, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrea Matzke, U.S. EPA, Office of
Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Assessment and Watershed Protection
Division, telephone: (202) 566-1155; fax: (202) 566-1331; e-mail:
matzke.andrea@epa.gov. Also contact the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal
NPS Coordinator identified in section B.VII and also listed on EPA's
website under ``EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators'' at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal
.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
EPA anticipates that Congress will, for the eighth year in a row,
authorize EPA to award NPS control grants to Indian Tribes in FY 2007
in an amount that exceeds the statutory cap (in section 518(f) of the
CWA) of \1/3\ of 1 percent of the total section 319 appropriation.
There is continuing recognition that Indian Tribes need increased
financial support to implement NPS programs that address critical water
quality concerns on Tribal lands. EPA will continue to work closely
with the Tribes to assist them in developing and implementing effective
Tribal NPS pollution programs.
EPA was pleased by the quality of the Tribes' work plans that
formed the basis of the grants awarded to Tribes in FY 2006, which
included approximately $3.2 million in base grants awarded to 95 Tribes
and $3.8 million awarded to 28 Tribes for specific watershed projects
through a competitive process. We believe that the FY 2006 grants were
directed towards high-priority activities that will produce improved
water quality. We look forward to working with Tribes again in FY 2007
to implement successful projects addressing the extensive NPS control
needs throughout Indian country.
Guidelines for Awarding CWA Section 319 Base Grants to Indian Tribes
(See Section A Below)
Overview Information
Section 319 of the CWA authorizes EPA to award grants to eligible
Tribes for the purpose of assisting them in implementing approved NPS
management programs developed pursuant to section 319(b). The primary
goal of the NPS management program is to control NPS pollution through
implementation of management measures and practices to reduce pollutant
loadings resulting from each category or subcategory of NPSs identified
in the Tribe's NPS assessment report developed pursuant to section
319(a). EPA anticipates awarding section 319 base grants to eligible
Tribes in the amount of $30,000 or $50,000 of Federal section 319
funding (depending on land area). Section 319 base funds may be used
for a range of activities that implement the Tribe's approved NPS
management program, including: Hiring a program coordinator; conducting
NPS education programs; providing training and authorized travel to
attend training; updating the NPS management program; developing
watershed-based plans; and implementing, alone or in conjunction with
other agencies or other funding sources, watershed-based plans and on-
the-ground watershed projects.
Request for Proposals From Indian Tribes for Competitive Grants Under
Clean Water Act Section 319 in FY 2007 (See Section B Below)
Overview Information
This RFP is issued pursuant to section 319(h) of the CWA. Section
319 of the CWA authorizes EPA to award grants to eligible Tribes for
the purpose of assisting them in implementing approved NPS management
programs developed pursuant to section 319(b). The primary goal of the
NPS management program is to control NPS pollution through
implementation of management measures and practices to reduce pollutant
loadings resulting from each category or subcategory of NPSs identified
in the Tribe's NPS assessment report developed pursuant to section
319(a). EPA anticipates setting aside a portion of section 319 funds
for competitive grant awards to Tribes for the purpose of funding the
development and implementation of watershed-based plans and other on-
the-ground projects that result in a significant step towards solving
NPS impairments on a watershed-wide basis. Tribes are strongly
encouraged to submit proposals that develop and/or implement watershed-
based plans designed to protect unimpaired waters and restore NPS-
impaired waters. EPA believes that watershed-based plans provide the
best means for preventing and resolving NPS problems and threats.
Watershed-based plans provide a coordinating framework for solving
water quality problems by providing a specific geographic focus,
integrating strong partnerships, integrating strong science and data,
and coordinating priority setting and integrated solutions. EPA
anticipates awarding approximately 25 competitive grants, subject to
availability of funds and the quality of proposals submitted. Eligible
Tribes may apply for competitive funding by submitting a proposal for
up to a maximum budget of $150,000 of Federal section 319 funding
[[Page 62442]]
(plus the additional required match of the total project cost).
Federal Agency Name: EPA.
Funding Opportunity Title: Tribal Nonpoint Source Implementation
Grants.
Announcement Type: Request for Proposals.
Funding Opportunity Number: EPA-OW-OWOW-07-1.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 66.460.
Dates: Deadline EPA uses to determine eligibility to receive
competitive 319 grants. October 13, 2006.
Deadline for receipt of proposals in hard copy by Region or
electronically through Grants.gov. December 19, 2006.
Headquarters notifies Regions/Tribes of selections for competitive
319 grants. March 5, 2007.
Tribes submit final grant application to Region for competitive 319
grants. April 5, 2007.
Other than the date EPA will use to determine eligibility to
receive 319 grants and the deadline for receipt of proposals in
response to the RFP (Section B), the dates above are the anticipated
dates for those actions.
Section A. Guidelines for Awarding Clean Water Act Section 319 Base
Grants to Indian Tribes
I. General
EPA has developed guidelines for awarding CWA section 319 base
grants to Indian Tribes. These guidelines apply to section 319 base
grants awarded from funds appropriated by Congress in FY 2007 and in
subsequent years.
1. Environmental Results
Grants awarded under these guidelines will advance the protection
and improvement of water quality in support of Goal 2 (Clean and Safe
Water), Objective 2 (Protect Water Quality), Sub-objective 1 (Protect
and Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis) of EPA's 2003-2008
Strategic Plan (see http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan/documents/Goal2.pdf
). In support of Sub-objective 2.2.1, and consistent with EPA
Order 5700.7, Environmental Results under EPA Assistance Agreements
(see http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/award/5700.7.pdf), it is anticipated
that grants awarded under these guidelines will be expected to
accomplish various environmental outputs and outcomes as described
below. All proposed work plans must include specific statements
describing the environmental results of the proposed project in terms
of well-defined outputs, and, to the maximum extent practicable, well-
defined outcomes that demonstrate how the project will contribute to
the overall protection and improvement of water quality.
Environmental outputs (or deliverables) refer to an environmental
activity, effort, and/or associated work product related to an
environmental goal or objective, that will be produced or provided over
a period of time or by a specified date. Outputs may be quantitative or
qualitative, but must be measurable during an assistance agreement
funding period. Examples of environmental outputs anticipated as a
result of section 319 grant awards may include but are not limited to:
a watershed-based plan, progress reports, or a particular number of on-
the-ground management measures or practices installed or implemented
during the project period.
Environmental outcomes mean the result, effect, or consequence that
will occur from carrying out an environmental program or activity that
is related to an environmental or programmatic goal or objective.
Outcomes may be environmental, behavioral, health-related or
programmatic in nature, must be quantitative, and may not necessarily
be achieved within an assistance agreement funding period. Examples of
environmental outcomes anticipated as a result of section 319 grants to
be awarded may include but are not limited to: an increased number of
NPS-impaired waterbodies that have been partially or fully restored to
meet water quality standards or other water quality-based goals
established by the Tribes; and/or an increased number of waterbodies
that have been protected from NPS pollution.
2. Allocation Formula
Each eligible Tribe will receive Federal section 319 base funding
in accordance with the following land area scale:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Square miles (acres) Base amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 1,000 sq. mi. (less than 640,000 acres)....... $30,000
Over 1,000 sq. mi. (over 640,000 acres)................. 50,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The land area scale is the same as used in previous years. EPA
continues to rely upon land area as the deciding factor for allocation
of funds because NPS pollution is strongly related to land use; thus
land area is a reasonable factor that generally is highly relevant to
identifying Tribes with the greatest needs (recognizing that many
Tribes have needs that significantly exceed available resources).
3. Eligible Activities
Section 319 base funds may be used for a range of activities that
implement the Tribe's approved NPS management program, including:
Hiring a program coordinator; conducting NPS education programs;
providing training and authorized travel to attend training; updating
the NPS management program; developing watershed-based plans; and
implementing, alone or in conjunction with other agencies or other
funding sources, watershed-based plans and on-the-ground watershed
projects. In general, base funding should not be used for general
assessment activities (e.g., monitoring the general status of
reservation waters, which may be supported with CWA section 106
funding). EPA encourages Tribes to use section 319 funding, and explore
the use of other funding such as CWA section 106 funding, to support
project-specific water quality monitoring, data management, data
analysis, assessment activities, and the development of watershed-based
plans.
II. Eligibility and Match Requirements
To be eligible for NPS base grants, a Tribe or intertribal
consortium must: (1) Be Federally recognized; (2) have an approved NPS
assessment report in accordance with CWA section 319(a); (3) have an
approved NPS management program in accordance with CWA section 319(b);
and (4) have ``treatment-as-a-state'' (TAS) status in accordance with
CWA section 518(e). To be eligible for base and competitive NPS grants
in FY 2007, Tribes must meet these eligibility requirements as of
October 13, 2006, as announced in the FY 2006 guidelines on January 17,
2006, at 71 FR 2531. To be eligible for NPS grants in years beyond FY
2007, Tribes must meet these eligibility requirements as of the second
Friday in October for the applicable fiscal year unless otherwise
announced. Tribes should contact their EPA Regional Tribal NPS
Coordinator for further information about the eligibility process (see
section B.VII for Agency contact information and also EPA's Web site
under ``EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators'' at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal
).
Section 319(h)(3) of the CWA requires that the match for NPS grants
is 40 percent of the total project cost. In general, as required in 40
CFR 31.24, the match requirement can be satisfied by any of the
following: allowable costs incurred by the grantee, subgrantee, or a
cost-type contractor, including those allowable costs borne by non-
Federal
[[Page 62443]]
grants; by cash donations from non-Federal third parties; or by the
value of third party in-kind contributions.
EPA's regulations also provide that EPA may decrease the match
requirement to as low as 10 percent if the Tribe can demonstrate in
writing to the Regional Administrator that fiscal circumstances within
the Tribe or within each Tribe that is a member of the intertribal
consortium are constrained to such an extent that fulfilling the match
requirement would impose undue hardship (see 40 CFR 35.635). In making
grant awards to Tribes that provide for a reduced match requirement,
Regions must include a brief finding in the final award package that
the Tribe has demonstrated that it does not have adequate funds to meet
the required match.
III. Application Requirements for Base Grants
1. Address To Request Application Package for Base Grants
Grant application forms, including Standard Form (SF) 424, are
available at http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/how_to_apply.htm and by
mail upon request by calling the EPA Headquarters Grants Administration
Division at (202) 564-5320. Tribes may also contact their EPA Regional
Tribal NPS Coordinator for further information about the application
process (see section B.VII for Agency contact information and also
EPA's Web site under ``EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators'' at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal
).
2. Content and Form of Application Submission for Base Grants
Please note that only the proposed work plan, including all of the
components outlined in the section immediately below, needs to be
included in the initial application for base grants (see section A.VIII
for deadlines and milestones for FY 2007 base grants).
To apply for section 319 base grants, you must submit a proposed
work plan to the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator (see
section B.VII for Agency contact information and also EPA's Web site
under ``EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators'' at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal
). You may submit the proposed work plan as either a hard copy or
an electronic submission. If you submit a hard copy proposed work plan,
you have the option to submit it by U.S. Postal Mail, express delivery
service, hand delivery, or courier service only. EPA will not accept
faxed submissions. If you submit a hard copy proposed work plan, you
are encouraged (not required) to include a compact disc (CD) with the
electronic version of the proposed work plan. If you submit your
proposed work plan electronically, it should be sent to the appropriate
EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator at the e-mail address listed in
section B.VII of this announcement and also on EPA's Web site under
``EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators'' at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal.
The specific content and form of the proposed work plan for the
award of section 319 base grants is as follows:
a. Proposed Work Plan. Tribes must submit a work plan to receive
base funding. All work plans must be consistent with the Tribe's
approved NPS management program and conform to legal requirements that
are applicable to all environmental program grants awarded to Tribes
(see 40 CFR 35.507 and 35.515) as well as the grant requirements which
specifically apply to NPS management grants (see 40 CFR 35.638). As
provided in those regulations, and in accordance with EPA Order 5700.7,
Environmental Results under EPA Assistance Agreements, all work plans
must include:
i. Description of each significant category of NPS activity to be
addressed;
ii. Work plan components;
iii. Work plan commitments for each work plan component, including
anticipated environmental outputs and outcomes (as required by EPA
Order 5700.7) and the applicant's plan for tracking and measuring its
progress towards achieving the expected outputs and outcomes;
iv. Estimated funding amounts for each work plan component;
v. Estimated work years for each work plan component;
vi. Roles and responsibilities of the recipient and EPA in carrying
out the work plan commitments; and
vii. Reporting schedule and a description of the performance
evaluation process that will be used that accounts for: (a) A
discussion of accomplishments as measured against work plan commitments
and anticipated environmental outputs and outcomes; (b) a discussion of
the cumulative effectiveness of the work performed under all work plan
components; (c) a discussion of existing and potential problem areas;
and (d) suggestions for improvement, including, where feasible,
schedules for making improvements.
b. Work Plan to Develop a Watershed-Based Plan. If a Tribe submits
a work plan to develop a watershed-based plan, it must include a
commitment to incorporate the nine components of a watershed-based plan
identified in section A.V.1 below.
c. Work Plan to Implement a Watershed-Based Plan. If a Tribe
submits a work plan to implement a watershed-based plan, it must be
accompanied by a statement that the Region finds that the watershed-
based plan to be implemented includes the nine components of a
watershed-based plan identified in section A.V.1 below.
IV. Submission Dates and Times for Proposed Work Plans for Base Grants
In FY 2007, eligible Tribes must submit to the appropriate EPA
Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator proposed work plans for base funding by
December 19, 2006 (see section B.VII for Agency contact information;
Agency contact information is also posted on EPA's Web site under ``EPA
Tribal NPS Coordinators'' at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal). Each
EPA Region will review the proposed work plan for base funding and,
where appropriate, recommend improvements to the plan by January 19,
2007. The Tribe must submit a final work plan by February 20, 2007. If
a Tribe has not submitted an approvable work plan for base funding by
February 20, 2007, its allocated amount will be added to the
competitive pool which will be used to fund Tribal NPS competitive
grants (see section B).
Submission dates and times for proposed work plans for NPS base
grant funding for years beyond FY 2007 are described in section A.IX
below.
V. Watershed-Based Plans
EPA strongly encourages Tribes to use section 319 funding for the
development and/or implementation of watershed-based plans to protect
unimpaired waters and restore NPS-impaired waters. EPA also encourages
Tribes to explore the use of other funding such as CWA section 106
funding to support the development of watershed-based plans. EPA
believes that watershed-based plans provide the best means for
preventing and resolving NPS problems and threats. Watershed-based
plans provide a coordinating framework for solving water quality
problems by providing a specific geographic focus, integrating strong
partnerships, integrating strong science and data, and coordinating
priority setting and integrated solutions. This section outlines the
specific information that should be included in all watershed-based
plans that are developed or implemented using section 319 funding. This
information correlates with the elements of a watershed-based plan
outlined in the NPS grants guidelines for States (see FY 2004 Nonpoint
Source
[[Page 62444]]
Program and Grants Guidelines for States and Territories, available at
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/cwact.html). One significant difference
from the State guidelines is that a watershed-based plan for Tribes
provides for the integration of ``water quality-based goals'' (see
element (c) below), whereas the State guidelines call for specific
estimates of load reductions that are expected to be achieved by
implementing the plan. EPA has incorporated this flexibility for Tribes
in recognition that not all Tribes have yet developed water quality
standards and many Tribes may need additional time and/or technical
assistance in order to develop more sophisticated estimates of the NPS
pollutants that need to be addressed. Where such information does
exist, or is later developed, EPA expects that it will be incorporated
as appropriate into the watershed-based plan.
To the extent that information already exists in other documents
(e.g., NPS assessment reports or NPS management programs), the
information may be incorporated by reference into the watershed-based
plan. Thus, the Tribe need not duplicate any existing process or
document that already provides needed information.
1. Components of a Watershed-Based Plan
a. An identification of the causes and sources or groups of similar
sources that will need to be controlled to achieve the goal identified
in element (c) below. Sources that need to be controlled should be
identified at the significant subcategory level with estimates of the
extent to which they are present in the watershed (e.g., X number of
dairy cattle feedlots needing upgrading, including a rough estimate of
the number of cattle per facility; Y acres of row crops needing
improved nutrient management or sediment control; or Z linear miles of
eroded streambank needing remediation).
b. A description of the NPS management measures that will need to
be implemented to achieve a water quality-based goal described in
element (c) below, as well as to achieve other watershed goals
identified in the watershed-based plan, and an identification (using a
map or a description) of the critical areas for which those measures
will be needed to implement the plan.
c. An estimate of the water quality-based goals expected to be
achieved by implementing the measures described in element (b) above.
To the extent possible, estimates should identify specific water
quality-based goals, which may incorporate, for example: load
reductions; water quality standards for one or more pollutants/uses;
NPS total maximum daily load allocations; measurable, in-stream
reductions in a pollutant; or improvements in a parameter that
indicates stream health (e.g., increases in fish or macroinvertebrate
counts). If information is not available to make specific estimates,
water quality-based goals may include narrative descriptions and best
professional judgment based on existing information.
d. An estimate of the amounts of technical and financial assistance
needed, associated costs, and/or the sources and authorities that will
be relied upon to implement the plan. As sources of funding, Tribes
should consider other relevant Federal, State, local and private funds
that may be available to assist in implementing the plan.
e. An information and education component that will be used to
enhance public understanding and encourage early and continued
participation in selecting, designing, and implementing the NPS
management measures that will be implemented.
f. A schedule for implementing the NPS management measures
identified in the plan that is reasonably expeditious.
g. A description of interim, measurable milestones for determining
whether NPS management measures or other control actions are being
implemented.
h. A set of criteria that can be used to determine whether the
water quality-based goals are being achieved over time and substantial
progress is being made towards attaining water quality-based goals and,
if not, the criteria for determining whether the watershed-based plan
needs to be revised.
i. A monitoring component to evaluate the effectiveness of the
implementation efforts over time, measured against the criteria
established under element (h) above.
EPA recognizes the difficulty of developing the information
described above with precision and, as these guidelines reflect,
believes that there must be a balanced approach to address this
concern. On one hand, it is absolutely critical that Tribes make, at
the subcategory level, a reasonable effort to identify the significant
sources; identify the management measures that will most effectively
address those sources; and broadly estimate the expected water quality-
based goals that will be achieved. Without such information to provide
focus and direction, it is much less likely that a project that
implements the plan can efficiently and effectively address the NPSs of
water quality impairments. On the other hand, EPA recognizes that even
with reasonable steps to obtain and analyze relevant data, the
available information at the planning stage (within reasonable time and
cost constraints) may be limited; preliminary information and estimates
may need to be modified over time, accompanied by mid-course
corrections in the watershed plan; and it often will require a number
of years of effective implementation to achieve the goals. EPA fully
intends that the watershed planning process described above should be
implemented in a dynamic and iterative manner to assure that projects
implementing the plan may proceed even though some of the information
in the watershed plan is imperfect and may need to be modified over
time as information improves.
2. Scale and Scope of Watershed-Based Plans
The watershed-based plan should address a large enough geographic
area so that its implementation addresses all of the significant
sources and causes of impairments and threats to the waterbody in
question. EPA recognizes that many Tribes may face jurisdictional
limitations outside reservation boundaries. To the extent possible, EPA
encourages Tribes to engage other partners and include mixed ownership
watersheds when appropriate to solve the water quality problems (e.g.,
Tribal, Federal, State, and private lands). While there is no rigorous
definition or delineation for this concept, the general intent is to
avoid single segments or other narrowly defined areas that do not
provide an opportunity for addressing a watershed's stressors in a
rational and economical manner. At the same time, the scale should not
be so large as to minimize the probability of successful
implementation.
Once a watershed-based plan that contains the information
identified above has been established, it can be used as the foundation
for preparing annual work plans. Like the NPS management program
approved under section 319(b), a watershed-based plan may be a multi-
year planning document. Whereas the NPS management program provides
overall program guidance to address NPS pollution on Tribal lands, a
watershed-based plan focuses NPS planning on a particular watershed
identified as a priority in the NPS management program. Due to the
greater specificity of a watershed-based plan, it will generally have
considerably more detail than a NPS management program, and identified
portions may be implemented through highly specific
[[Page 62445]]
annual work plans. While the watershed-based plan can be considered a
subset of the NPS management program, the annual work plan can be
considered a subset of the watershed-based plan.
A Tribe may choose to implement the watershed-based plan in
prioritized portions (e.g., based on particular segments, other
geographic subdivisions, NPS categories in the watershed, or specific
pollutants or impairments), consistent with the schedule established
pursuant to item (f) above. In doing so, Tribes may submit annual work
plans for section 319 grant funding that implement specific portions of
the watershed-based plan. A watershed-based plan is a strategic plan
for long-term success; annual work plans are the specific ``to-do
lists'' to achieve that long-term success.
VI. Base Grant Requirements
1. Grant Requirements
A listing and description of general EPA regulations applicable to
the award of assistance agreements may be viewed at http://www.epa.gov/ogd/
[fxsp0]AppKit/appplicable--epa[fxsp0]--regulations[fxsp0]--and--
[fxsp0]description.htm.
All applicable legal requirements including, but not limited to,
EPA's regulations on environmental program grants for Tribes (see 40
CFR 35.500 to 35.735) and regulations specific to NPS grants for Tribes
(see 40 CFR 35.630 to 35.638), apply to all section 319 grants.
2. Performance Partnership Grants
Performance Partnership Grants (PPG) enable Tribes to combine funds
from more than one environmental program grant into a single grant with
a single budget. If the Tribe includes the section 319 grant as a part
of an approved PPG, the match requirement may be reduced to 5 percent
of the allowable cost of the work plan budget for the first 2 years in
which the Tribe receives a PPG; after 2 years, the match may be
increased up to 10 percent of the work plan budget (as determined by
the Regional Administrator). (See 40 CFR 35.536).
Where the stated purpose is to include the section 319 base grant
in a PPG, a Tribe may prepare a budget and proposed work plan based
upon the assumption that EPA will approve the waiver amount for PPGs
under 40 CFR 35.536. If a proposed PPG work plan differs significantly
from the section 319 work plan approved for funding, the Regional
Administrator must consult with the National Program Manager. (See 40
CFR 35.535). The purpose of this consultation requirement is to address
the issue of ensuring that a project which is awarded section 319 base
funding is implemented once commingled with other grant programs in a
PPG.
If the Tribe does not or cannot include the section 319 base grant
as part of an approved PPG, or chooses to withdraw the section 319
grant from their PPG, the Tribe must then meet the match requirements
identified in section A.II above and, as applicable, negotiate a
revised work plan with the EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator.
3. Intertribal Consortia
Some Tribes have formed intertribal consortia to promote
cooperative work. An intertribal consortium is a partnership between
two or more Tribes that is authorized by the governing bodies of those
Tribes to apply for and receive assistance under this program. (See 40
CFR 35.502.) Individual Tribes who are a part of intertribal consortia
that is awarded a section 319 base grant may not also be awarded an
individual section 319 base grant. (Note that individual Tribes may
still be eligible to apply for competitive funds described in section B
if they do not also submit a proposal for competitive funds as part of
an intertribal consortium.)
The intertribal consortium is eligible only if the consortium
demonstrates that all its members meet the eligibility requirements for
the section 319 program and authorize the consortium to apply for and
receive assistance in accordance with 40 CFR 35.504. An intertribal
consortium must submit with their proposed work plan to EPA adequate
documentation of the existence of the partnership and the authorization
of the consortium by its members to apply for and receive the grant.
(See 40 CFR 35.504.) In making grant awards to Tribes who are part of
intertribal consortia, Regions must include a brief finding in the
final award package that the Tribes have demonstrated the existence of
the partnership and the authorization of the consortium by its members
to apply for and receive the grant.
4. Non-Tribal Lands
The following discussion explains the extent to which section 319
grants may be awarded to Tribes for use outside the reservation. We
discuss two types of off-reservation activities: (1) Activities that
are related to waters within a reservation, such as those relating to
sources upstream of a waterway entering the reservation; and (2)
activities that are unrelated to waters of a reservation. As discussed
below, the first type of these activities may be eligible; the second
is not.
a. Activities That Are Related to Waters Within a Reservation.
Section 518(e) of the CWA provides that EPA may treat an Indian Tribe
as a State for purposes of section 319 of the CWA if, among other
things, ``the functions to be exercised by the Indian Tribe pertain to
the management and protection of water resources which are * * * within
the borders of an Indian reservation'' (see 33 U.S.C. 1377(e)(2)). EPA
already awards grants to Tribes under section 106 of the CWA for
activities performed outside of a reservation (on condition that the
Tribe obtains any necessary access agreements and coordinates with the
State, as appropriate) that pertain to reservation waters, such as
evaluating impacts of upstream waters on water resources within a
reservation. Similarly, EPA has awarded section 106 grants to States to
conduct monitoring outside of State borders. EPA has concluded that
grants awarded to an Indian Tribe pursuant to section 319 may similarly
be used to perform eligible section 319 activities outside of a
reservation if: (1) The activity pertains to the management and
protection of waters within a reservation; and (2) just as for on-
reservation activities, the Tribe meets all other applicable
requirements.
b. Activities That Are Unrelated to Waters of a Reservation. As
discussed above, EPA is authorized to award section 319 grants to
Tribes to perform eligible section 319 activities if the activities
pertain to the management and protection of waters within a reservation
and the Tribe meets all other applicable requirements. In contrast, EPA
is not authorized to award section 319 grants for activities that do
not pertain to waters of a reservation. For off-reservation areas,
including ``usual and accustomed'' hunting, fishing, and gathering
places, EPA must determine whether the activities pertain to waters of
a reservation prior to awarding a grant.
5. Administrative Costs
Pursuant to CWA section 319(h)(12), administrative costs in the
form of salaries, overhead, or indirect costs for services provided and
charged against activities and programs carried out with the grant
shall not exceed 10 percent of the grant award. The costs of
implementing enforcement and regulatory activities, education,
training, technical assistance, demonstration projects, and technology
transfer are not subject to this limitation.
[[Page 62446]]
6. Satisfactory Progress
For a Tribe that received section 319 funds in the preceding fiscal
year, section 319(h)(8) of the CWA requires that the Region determine
whether the Tribe made ``satisfactory progress'' during the previous
fiscal year in meeting the schedule of activities specified in its
approved NPS management program. The Region will base this
determination on an examination of Tribal activities, reports, reviews,
and other documents and discussions with the Tribe in the previous
year. Regions must include in each section 319 base grant award (or in
a separate document, such as the grant-issuance cover letter, that is
signed by the same EPA official who signs the grant), a written
determination that the Tribe has made satisfactory progress during the
previous fiscal year in meeting the schedule of milestones specified in
its NPS management program. The Regions must include brief explanations
that support their determinations.
7. Operation and Maintenance
Each section 319 grant must contain a condition requiring that the
Tribe assure that any management practices implemented for the project
be properly operated and maintained for the intended purposes during
its life span. Operation includes the administration, management, and
performance of non-maintenance actions needed to keep the completed
practice safe and functioning as intended. Maintenance includes work to
prevent deterioration of the practice, repairing damage, or replacement
of the practice to its original condition if one or more components
fail. Management practices and projects that are damaged or destroyed
due to a natural disaster (e.g., earthquakes, storm events, floods,
etc.) or events beyond the control of the grantee are exempt from this
condition.
The condition must require the Tribe to assure that any
subrecipient of section 319 funds similarly include the same condition
in the subaward. Additionally, such condition must reserve the right of
EPA and the Tribe, respectively, to conduct periodic inspections during
the life span of the project to ensure that operation and maintenance
are occurring, and shall state that, if it is determined that
participants are not operating and maintaining practices in an
appropriate manner, EPA or the Tribe, respectively, will request a
refund for the project supported by the grant.
The life span of a project will be determined on a case-by-case
basis, tailored to the types of practices expected to be funded in a
particular project, and should be specified in the grant condition. For
assistance in determining the appropriate life span of the project,
Tribes may wish to examine other programs implementing similar
practices, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture's conservation
programs. For example, for conservation practices, it may be
appropriate to construct the life span consistent with the life span
for similar conservation practices as determined by the Commodity
Credit Corporation (pursuant to the implementation of the Environmental
Quality Incentives Program). Following the approach used in many
Federal funding programs, practices will generally be operated and
maintained for a period of at least 5 to 10 years.
8. Reporting
As provided in 40 CFR 31.40, 31.41, 35.507, 35.515, and 35.638, all
section 319 grants must include a set of reporting requirements and a
process for evaluating performance. Some of these requirements have
been explicitly incorporated into the required work plan components
that all Tribes must include in order to receive section 319 grant
funding.
The work plan components required for section 319 funding,
specifically those relating to work plan commitments and timeframes for
their accomplishment, facilitate the management and oversight of Tribal
grants by providing specific activities and outputs by which progress
can be monitored. The performance evaluation process and reporting
schedule (both work plan components) also establish a formal process by
which accomplishments can be measured. Additionally, the satisfactory
progress determination (for Tribes that received section 319 funding in
the preceding fiscal year) helps ensure that Tribes are making progress
in achieving the goals in their NPS management programs.
Regions will ensure that the required evaluations are performed
according to the negotiated schedule (at least annually) and that
copies of the performance evaluation reports are placed in the official
files and provided to the recipient.
VII. Technical Assistance to Tribes
In addition to providing NPS grant funding to Tribes, EPA remains
committed to providing continued technical assistance to Tribes in
their efforts to control NPS pollution. During the past ten years, EPA
has presented many workshops to Tribes nationwide to assist them in
developing: (1) NPS assessments to further their understanding of NPS
pollution and its impact on water quality; (2) NPS management programs
to apply solutions to address their NPS problems; and (3) specific
projects to effect on-the-ground solutions. The workshops have provided
information on related EPA and other programs that can help Tribes
address NPS pollution, including the provision of technical and funding
assistance. Other areas of technical assistance include watershed-based
planning, water quality monitoring, section 305(b) reports on water
quality, and section 303(d) lists of impaired waters. EPA intends to
continue providing NPS workshops to interested Tribes in FY 2007 (and
beyond) and to provide other appropriate technical assistance as
needed. EPA also intends to include special emphasis in the workshops
on the development and implementation of watershed-based plans that are
designed to address on-the-ground water quality improvements.
VIII. Anticipated Deadlines and Milestones for FY 2007 Base Grants
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deadline for Tribes to be eligible for 319 October 13, 2006.
grants.
Tribes submit base grant proposed work plan December 19, 2006.
to Region.
Region comments on Tribe's base grant January 19, 2007.
proposed work plan.
Tribes submit final base grant work plan to February 20, 2007.
Region.
Tribes submit final base grant application April 5, 2007.
to Region.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 62447]]
Other than the date EPA will use to determine eligibility to
receive 319 grants, the dates above are the anticipated dates for those
actions.
IX. Anticipated Deadlines and Milestones for Base Grants Beyond FY 2007
Listed below are the anticipated deadlines and milestones for NPS
base grants for years beyond FY 2007 unless otherwise announced. The
deadlines and milestones below refer to the dates within the particular
fiscal year for which the Tribe is applying for NPS base grants. Each
year, the specific dates will be posted on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal.
Tribes should also contact their EPA
Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator for further information about deadlines
and milestones for years beyond FY 2007 (see EPA's Web site under ``EPA
Tribal NPS Coordinators'' at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal for
Agency contact information).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deadline for Tribes to be eligible for 319 Second Friday in October.
grants.
Tribes submit base grant proposed work plan First Friday in December.
to Region.
Region comments on Tribe's base grant Second Wednesday in
proposed work plan. January.
Tribes submit final base grant work plan to Second Friday in February.
Region.
Tribes submit final base grant application First Wednesday in April.
to Region.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is therefore not
subject to OMB review. Because this grant action is not subject to
notice and comment requirements under the Administrative Procedures Act
or any other statute, it is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. Section 601 et seq.) or sections 202 and 205 of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1999 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4). In
addition, this action does not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. Although this action does not generally create new binding
legal requirements, where it does, such requirements do not
substantially and directly affect Tribes under Executive Order 13175
(63 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action will not have federalism
implications, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it
is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
This action does not involve technical standards; thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This action
does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The
Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides that
before certain actions may take effect, the Agency promulgating the
action must submit a report, which includes a copy of the action, to
each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United
States. Since this grant action contains legally binding requirements,
it is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and EPA will submit its
final action in its report to Congress under the Act. This applies only
to section A of this announcement.
Section B. Request for Proposals From Indian Tribes for Competitive
Grants Under Clean Water Act Section 319 in FY 2007 (Funding
Opportunity Number EPA-OW-OWOW-07-1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deadline EPA uses to determine eligibility October 13, 2006.
to receive competitive 319 grants.
Deadline for receipt of proposals in hard December 19, 2006.
copy by Region or electronically through
Grants.gov.
Headquarters notifies Regions/Tribes of March 5, 2007.
selections for competitive 319 grants.
Tribes submit final grant application to April 5, 2007.
Region for competitive 319 grants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other than the date EPA will use to determine eligibility to
receive 319 grants and the deadline for receipt of proposals in
response to this RFP, the dates above are the anticipated dates for
those actions.
I. Funding Opportunity Description for Competitive Grants
This RFP is issued pursuant to section 319(h) of the Clean Water
Act (CWA). Section 319 of the CWA authorizes EPA to award grants to
eligible Tribes for the purpose of assisting them in implementing
approved nonpoint source (NPS) management programs developed pursuant
to section 319(b). The primary goal of the NPS management program is to
control NPS pollution through implementation of management measures and
practices to reduce pollutant loadings resulting from each category or
subcategory of NPSs identified in the Tribe's NPS assessment report
developed pursuant to section 319(a). EPA anticipates, pending
enactment of its FY 2007 appropriations, setting aside a portion of
section 319 funds for competitive grant awards to Tribes for the
purpose of funding the development and implementation of watershed-
based plans and other on-the-ground projects that result in a
significant step towards solving NPS impairments on a watershed-wide
basis. Tribes are strongly encouraged to submit proposals that develop
and/or implement watershed-based plans designed to protect unimpaired
waters and restore NPS-impaired waters.
Grants awarded under this RFP will advance the protection and
improvement of water quality in support of Goal 2 (Clean and Safe
Water), Objective 2 (Protect Water Quality), Sub-objective 1 (Protect
and Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis) of EPA's 2003-2008
Strategic Plan (see http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan/documents/Goal2.pdf
). In support of Sub-objective 2.2.1, and consistent with EPA
Order 5700.7, Environmental Results under EPA Assistance Agreements
(see http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/award/5700.7.pdf), it is anticipated
that grants awarded under this RFP will accomplish various
environmental outputs and outcomes described below. All proposed work
plans must include specific statements describing the anticipated
environmental results of the proposed project in terms of well-defined
outputs, and, to the maximum extent practicable, well-defined outcomes
that demonstrate how the
[[Page 62448]]
project will contribute to the overall protection and improvement of
water quality.
Environmental outputs (or deliverables) refer to an environmental
activity, effort, and/or associated work product related to an
environmental goal or objective, that will be produced or provided over
a period of time or by a specified date. Outputs may be quantitative or
qualitative but must be measurable during an assistance agreement
funding period. Examples of environmental outputs anticipated as a
result of grants awarded under this RFP may include but are not limited
to: a watershed-based plan, progress reports, or a particular number of
on-the-ground management measures or practices installed or implemented
during the project period. Including the environmental output of a
watershed-based plan furthers progress towards achieving the specific
indicator measure for Sub-objective 2.2.1 in EPA's Strategic Plan which
measures the number of Tribes that have developed and begun to
implement a watershed-based plan for Tribal waters (see Measure WQ-28,
EPA's National Water Program Guidance for FY 2007 at http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan/#nwp07
).
Environmental outcomes mean the result, effect, or consequence that
will occur from carrying out an environmental program or activity that
is related to an environmental or programmatic goal or objective.
Outcomes may be environmental, behavioral, health-related or
programmatic in nature, must be quantitative, and may not necessarily
be achieved within an assistance agreement funding period. Examples of
environmental outcomes anticipated as a result of grants to be awarded
under this RFP may include but are not limited to: an increased number
of NPS-impaired waterbodies that have been partially or fully restored
to meet water quality standards or other water quality-based goals
established by the Tribes; and/or an increased number of waterbodies
that have been protected from NPS pollution.
II. Award Information
In FY 2006, EPA awarded approximately $3.8 million to 28 Tribes for
specific watershed projects through a competitive process. EPA
anticipates that the amount of competitive funding available in FY 2007
will be similar or slightly lower than the amount available in FY 2006,
since the availability of competitive funding is dependent, in part,
upon the amount of funding that remains after a portion is first
distributed as base grants to all eligible Tribes (which may increase
due to additional Tribes entering the NPS program).
EPA anticipates awarding approximately 25 competitive grants,
subject to availability of funds and the quality of proposals submitted
under this RFP. Eligible Tribes may apply for competitive funding by
submitting a proposal up to a maximum budget of $150,000 of Federal
section 319 funding (plus the additional required match of the total
project cost). Proposals evaluated, but not selected for this funding,
may be retained for consideration for possible future awards under this
RFP if additional funding materializes. Any additional selections for
award under this RFP based on additional funding will be in accordance
with the rankings developed by the review Committee (discussed below in
section B.V.2) and Agency policy, and must be made within six months of
the original competitive funding decisions.
EPA reserves the right to make partial awards by funding discrete
activities, portions, or phases of the proposal. If EPA decides to
partially fund the proposal, it will do so in a manner that does not
prejudice any applicants or affect the basis upon which the proposal,
or portion thereof, was evaluated and selected for award, and that
maintains the integrity of the competition and the evaluation/selection
process. EPA reserves the right to reject all proposals and make no
award as a result of this announcement, or make fewer awards than
anticipated. The EPA Award Official is the only official that can bind
the Agency to the expenditure of funds for selected projects resulting
from this announcement.
III. Eligibility Information
1. Eligible Applicants
To be eligible for NPS grants, a Tribe or intertribal consortium
must: (1) Be Federally recognized; (2) have an approved NPS assessment
report in accordance with CWA section 319(a); (3) have an approved NPS
management program in accordance with CWA section 319(b); and (4) have
``treatment-as-a-state'' (TAS) status in accordance with CWA section
518(e). To be eligible for NPS grants in FY 2007, Tribes must meet
these eligibility requirements as of October 13, 2006.
Some Tribes have formed intertribal consortia to promote
cooperative work. An intertribal consortium is a partnership between
two or more Tribes that is authorized by the governing bodies of those
Tribes to apply for and receive assistance under this program. (See 40
CFR 35.502.) Individual Tribes who are a part of an intertribal
consortia that is awarded a section 319 competitive grant may not also
be awarded an individual section 319 competitive grant.
The intertribal consortium is eligible only if the consortium
demonstrates that all its members meet the eligibility requirements for
the section 319 program and authorize the consortium to apply for and
receive assistance in accordance with 40 CFR 35.504. An intertribal
consortium must submit with its proposal to EPA adequate documentation
of the existence of the partnership and the authorization of the
consortium by its members to apply for and receive the grant. (See 40
CFR 35.504.)
2. Cost Sharing or Matching
Section 319(h)(3) of the CWA requires that the match for NPS grants
is 40 percent of the total project cost. In general, as required in 40
CFR 31.24, the match requirement can be satisfied by any of the
following: allowable costs incurred by the grantee, subgrantee, or a
cost-type contractor, including those allowable costs borne by non-
Federal grants; by cash donations from non-Federal third parties; or by
the value of third party in-kind contributions.
EPA's regulations also provide that EPA may decrease the match
requirement to as low as 10 percent if the Tribe can demonstrate in
writing to the Regional Administrator that fiscal circumstances within
the Tribe or within each Tribe that is a member of the intertribal
consortium are constrained to such an extent that fulfilling the match
requirement would impose undue hardship. (See 40 CFR 35.635.) Where the
stated purpose is to decrease the match requirement based upon undue
hardship, a Tribe may prepare a budget and proposal based upon the
assumption that EPA will approve the reduced match under 40 CFR 35.635.
If the Tribe does not demonstrate undue hardship, the Tribe must then
meet the 40 percent match requirement. The Tribe must also provide a
new budget with the final grant application based upon the program's 40
percent match requirement and the Federal award will be reduced to
reflect the work plan and budget provided in the original proposal. The
purpose of this requirement is to ensure that all work plan activities
for a project which is evaluated and competitively awarded will be
implemented as described in the original proposal.
[[Page 62449]]
Performance Partnership Grants (PPG) enable Tribes to combine funds
from more than one environmental program grant into a single grant with
a single budget. If the Tribe includes the section 319 competitive
grant as a part of an approved PPG, the match requirement may be
reduced to 5 percent of the allowable cost of the work plan budget for
the first 2 years in which the Tribe receives a PPG; after 2 years, the
match may be increased up to 10 percent of the work plan budget (as
determined by the Regional Administrator). (See 40 CFR 35.536).
Where the stated purpose is to include the section 319 grant in a
PPG, a Tribe may prepare a budget and proposal based upon the
assumption that EPA will approve the waiver amount for PPGs under 40
CFR 35.536. If a proposed PPG work plan differs significantly from the
section 319 work plan approved for funding under this RFP, the Regional
Administrator must consult with the National Program Manager. (See 40
CFR 35.535). The purpose of this consultation requirement is to address
the issue of ensuring that a project which is competitively awarded is
implemented once commingled with other grant programs in a PPG. If the
Tribe does not or cannot include the section 319 grant as part of an
approved PPG, or chooses to withdraw the section 319 grant from their
PPG, the Tribe must then meet the 40 percent match requirement (or 10
percent if undue hardship is demonstrated). The Tribe must also provide
a new budget with the final grant application based upon the program's
match requirement and the Federal award will be reduced to reflect the
budget provided in the original proposal. The purpose of this
requirement is to ensure that all work plan activities for a project
which is competitively awarded will be implemented in accordance with
the same budget and as described in the original proposal.
3. Threshold Evaluation Criteria
In addition to applicant eligibility and cost-share (discussed
above in sections B.III.1 and B.III.2, respectively), all of the
following threshold evaluation criteria must be met in order for a
Tribe's proposal to be evaluated under section B.V and be considered
for award. The appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator will
notify applicants who do not meet the threshold eligibility criteria
under this section within 15 calendar days of EPA's decision on
applicant eligibility.
a. An individual Tribe (or intertribal consortium) may not be
awarded competitive funding for more than one competitive grant
proposal in a given year.
b. An individual Tribe (or intertribal consortium) may apply for
competitive funding by submitting a proposal up to a maximum budget of
$150,000 of Federal section 319 funding (plus the additional required
match of the total project cost). If a Tribe submits a proposal that
exceeds $150,000 of Federal section 319 funding, it will be rejected
from further consideration.
c. All proposals must propose to fund activities that are related
to waters within a reservation or they will be rejected. Section 319
grants may be awarded to Tribes for use outside the reservation only if
they fund activities that are related to waters within a reservation,
such as those relating to sources upstream of a waterway entering the
reservation.
i. Activities That Are Related to Waters Within a Reservation.
Section 518(e) of the CWA provides that EPA may treat an Indian Tribe
as a State for purposes of section 319 of the CWA if, among other
things, ``the functions to be exercised by the Indian Tribe pertain to
the management and protection of water resources which are * * * within
the borders of an Indian reservation'' (see 33 U.S.C. 1377(e)(2)). EPA
already awards grants to Tribes under section 106 of the CWA for
activities performed outside of a reservation (on condition that the
Tribe obtains any necessary access agreements and coordinates with the
State, as appropriate) that pertain to reservation waters, such as
evaluating impacts of upstream waters on water resources within a
reservation. Similarly, EPA has awarded section 106 grants to States to
conduct monitoring outside of State borders. EPA has concluded that
grants awarded to an Indian Tribe pursuant to section 319 may similarly
be used to perform eligible section 319 activities outside of a
reservation if: (1) the activity pertains to the management and
protection of waters within a reservation; and (2) just as for on-
reservation activities, the Tribe meets all other applicable
requirements.
ii. Activities That Are Unrelated to Waters of a Reservation. As
discussed above, EPA is authorized to award section 319 grants to
Tribes to perform eligible section 319 activities if the activities
pertain to the management and protection of waters within a reservation
and the Tribe meets all other applicable requirements. In contrast, EPA
is not authorized to award section 319 grants for activities that do
not pertain to waters of a reservation. For off-reservation areas,
including ``usual and accustomed'' hunting, fishing, and gathering
places, EPA must determine whether the activities pertain to waters of
a reservation prior to awarding a grant.
d. All work plans must address one of the following four factors:
i. The work plan develops a watershed-based plan and implements a
watershed-based plan;
ii. The work plan develops a watershed-based plan and implements a
watershed project (that does not implement a watershed-based plan);
iii. The work plan implements a watershed-based plan; or
iv. The work plan implements a watershed project that is a
significant step towards solving NPS impairments or threats on a
watershed-wide basis.
e. All work plans must be consistent with the Tribe's approved NPS
management program and conform to legal requirements that are
applicable to all environmental program grants awarded to Tribes (see
40 CFR 35.507 and 35.515) as well as the legal requirements that
specifically apply to NPS management grants (see 40 CFR 35.638). As
provided in those regulations, and in accordance with EPA Order 5700.7,
Environmental Results under EPA Assistance Agreements, all work plans
must include:
i. Description of each significant category of NPS activity to be
addressed;
ii. Work plan components;
iii. Work plan commitments for each work plan component, including
anticipated environmental outputs and outcomes (as required by EPA
Order 5700.7) and the applicant's plan for tracking and measuring its
progress towards achieving the expected outputs and outcomes including
those identified in section B.I of this RFP;
iv. Estimated funding amounts for each work plan component;
v. Estimated work years for each work plan component;
vi. Roles and responsibilities of the recipient and EPA in carrying
out the work plan commitments;
vii. Reporting schedule and a description of the performance
evaluation process that will be used that accounts for: (a) A
discussion of accomplishments as measured against work plan commitments
and anticipated environmental outputs and outcomes; (b) a discussion of
the cumulative effectiveness of the work performed under all work plan
components; (c) a discussion of existing and potential problem areas;
and (d) suggestions for improvement, including, where feasible,
schedules for making improvements; and
[[Page 62450]]
viii. Description of past performance on reporting environmental
results, including a description of Federally funded assistance
agreements performed within the last 3 years (no more than 5
agreements, and preferably EPA agreements) and how progress towards
achieving the expected results (i.e., outputs and outcomes) under those
agreements was documented and/or reported. If there was no progress,
please indicate whether, and how, this was documented. If information
on relevant or available environmental results past performance does
not exist, please indicate this in the proposal and a neutral score
will be given for this factor under Section B.V.
f. Except as stated above in sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e,
proposals must substantially comply with the proposal submission
instructions and requirements set forth below in section B.IV of this
announcement or they will be rejected.
g. Proposals submitted in hard copy must be received by the
appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator (identified in section
B.VII) or received electronically through Grants.gov on or before the
submission closing date and time published in section B.IV.3. EPA will
not accept faxed or e-mail submissions and they will be rejected from
consideration. Proposals received after the published closing date and
time will be returned to the sender without further consideration.
IV. Application and Submission Information
EPA will respond to questions from individual applicants regarding
threshold eligibility criteria, administrative issues related to the
submission of the proposal, and requests for clarification about this
announcement. Questions must be submitted before December 5, 2006 in
writing to the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator and
written responses will be posted on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal.
In accordance with EPA's Competition
Policy (EPA Order 5700.5A1), EPA staff will not meet with individual
applicants to discuss draft proposals, provide informal comments on
draft proposals, or provide advice to applicants on how to respond to
ranking criteria. Applicants are responsible for the contents of their
proposals.
1. Address to Request Application Package
Grant application forms, including SF 424s, are available at http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/how_to_apply.htm
and by mail upon request by
calling the EPA Headquarters Grants Administration Division at (202)
564-5320. Tribes may also contact their EPA Regional Tribal NPS
Coordinator for further information about the application process (see
section B.VII for Agency contact information).
2. Content and Form of Application Submission
You may submit either a hard copy proposal or an electronic
proposal through http://www.grants.gov (but not both) for this
announcement. If you submit a hard copy proposal, you have the option
to submit it by express delivery service, hand delivery, or courier
service. EPA will not accept faxed submissions and they will be
rejected from consideration. If you submit a hard copy proposal, you
are encouraged (not required) to include with it a CD with the
electronic version of the narrative work plan. If you submit your
proposal electronically, it must be submitted through http://www.grants.gov.
EPA will not accept submissions by e-mail and they will
be rejected from consideration.
All proposal packages, regardless of how submitted, must include
the following documents:
a. Complete narrative work plan addressing the requirements
described above in sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e.
b. Signed SF 424.
c. Any supplemental information, if applicable, relating to:
i. Eligibility (e.g., adequate documentation to demonstrate
eligibility of intertribal consortium);
ii. Documentation of a finding from the Region that the watershed-
based plan to be implemented includes the nine components identified in
Attachment A (if the work plan includes a component to implement a
watershed-based plan); and
iii. Any other supplemental information that may be relevant or
applicable to the proposal.
3. Submission Dates and Times for Proposals for Competitive Funding
If you submit a hard copy proposal, the appropriate EPA Regional
Tribal NPS Coordinator must receive the signed SF 424, work plan, and
any other supplemental information that may be relevant or applicable
to the proposal by 5 p.m. local time on December 19, 2006 (see section
B.VII for Agency contact information). If you submit your proposal
electronically through http://www.grants.gov, you must meet the
requirements for electronic submission outlined in section B.IV.6 below
and your proposal must be received through http://www.grants.gov no
later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on December 19, 2006. Any
hard copy or electronic proposals received after the due date and time
will not be considered for funding.
4. Funding Restrictions
The use of competitive funding for the development of a watershed-
based plan will be limited to 20 percent of the total competitive grant
(e.g., up to $30,000 of a $150,000 grant) to assure that these
competitive funds are primarily focused on implementation activities.
If a Tribe submits a work plan to develop a watershed-based plan, it
must be submitted as a component of the overall work plan for
implementing a watershed project (i.e., a Tribe will not receive
competitive funding only for the development of a watershed-based
plan).
5. Confidential Business Information
In accordance with 40 CFR 2.203, applicants may claim all or a
portion of their proposal as confidential business information. EPA
will evaluate confidentiality claims in accordance with 40 CFR part 2.
Applicants must clearly mark proposals or portions of proposals they
claim as confidential. If no claim of confidentiality is made, EPA is
not required to make the inquiry to the applicant otherwise required by
40 CFR 2.204(c)(2) prior to disclosure.
6. Submission Instructions for Electronic Applications Using Grants.gov
In lieu of hard copy submission, you may submit the proposal
electronically through http://www.grants.gov as explained below. The
electronic submission of your proposal must be made by an official
representative of your institution who is registered with Grants.gov
and is authorized to sign applications for Federal assistance. For more
information, go to http://www.grants.gov and click on ``Get
Registered'' on the left side of the page. Note that the registration
process may take a week or longer to complete. If your organization is
not currently registered with Grants.gov, please encourage your office
to designate an Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) and ask
that individual to begin the registration process as soon as possible.
To begin the application process under this grant announcement, go
to http://www.grants.gov and click on the ``Apply for Grants'' tab on the left
side of the page. Then click on ``Apply Step 1: Download a Grant
Application Package and Instructions'' to download the PureEdge viewer
and obtain the
[[Page 62451]]
application package for the announcement. To download the PureEdge
viewer click on the ``PureEdge Viewer'' link. Once you have downloaded
the viewer, you may retrieve the application package by entering the
Funding Opportunity Number, EPA-OW-OWOW-07-1, or the CFDA number that
applies to the announcement (CFDA 66.460). You may also be able to
access the application package by clicking on the button ``How To
Apply'' at the top right of the synopsis page for this announcement on
http://www.grants.gov (to find the synopsis page, go to http://www.grants.gov
and click on the ``Find Grants Opportunities'' button on
the left side of the page and then go to Search Opportunities and use
the Browse by Agency feature to find EPA opportunities.
Proposal Submission Deadline: Your organization's AOR must submit
your complete proposal electronically to EPA through Grants.gov (http://www.grants.gov
) no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on
December 19, 2006.
Proposal Materials
The application package must include the following materials:
a. Signed SF 424. Complete the form. There are no attachments.
Please be sure to include organization fax number and e-mail address in
Block 5 of the signed SF 424.
b. Narrative Work Plan. The work plan must include the components
set forth in sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e of this RFP and will be
evaluated based on the selection criteria set forth in section B.V.1 of
this announcement. Applicants who elect to use http://www.grants.gov to
apply will need to refer to sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e of this
RFP when preparing the work plan.
c. Supplemental Information. The work plan may include additional
required information, if applicable, relating to:
i. Eligibility (e.g., adequate documentation to demonstrate
eligibility of intertribal consortium);
ii. Documentation of a finding from the Region that the watershed-
based plan to be implemented includes the nine components identified in
Attachment A (if the work plan includes a component to implement a
watershed-based plan); and
iii. Any other supplemental information that may be relevant or
applicable to the proposal.
Application Preparation and Submission Instructions
Documents a and b listed under Proposal Materials above should
appear in the ``Mandatory Documents'' box on the Grants.gov Grant
Application Package page.
For document a, click on the SF 424 form and then click ``Open
Form'' below the box. The fields that must be completed will be
highlighted in yellow. Optional fields and completed fields will be
displayed in white. If you enter an invalid response or incomplete
information in a field, you will receive an error message. When you
have finished filling out the form, click ``Save.'' When you return to
the electronic Grant Application Package page, click on the form you
just completed, and then click on the box that says, ``Move Form to
Submission List.'' This action will move the document over to the box
that says, ``Mandatory Completed Documents for Submission.''
For document b, you will need to attach electronic files. Prepare
your work plan as described in sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e of the
RFP and save it to your computer as an MS Word, PDF, or WordPerfect
file. When you are ready to attach your work plan to the application
package, click on ``Project Narrative Attachment Form,'' and open the
form. Click ``Add Mandatory Project Narrative File,'' and then attach
your work plan (previously saved to your computer) using the browse
window that appears. You may then click ``View Mandatory Project
Narrative File'' to view it. Enter a brief descriptive title of your
project in the space beside ``Mandatory Project Narrative File
Filename;'' the file name should be no more than 40 characters long. If
there are other attachments that you would like to submit to accompany
your proposal (e.g., the supplemental information described above), you
may click ``Add Optional Project Narrative File'' and proceed as
before. When you have finished attaching the necessary documents, click
``Close Form.'' When you return to the ``Grant Application Package''
page, select the ``Project Narrative Attachment Form'' and click ``Move
Form to Submission List.'' The form should now appear in the box that
says, ``Mandatory Completed Documents for Submission.''
Once you have finished filling out all of the forms/attachments and
they appear in one of the ``Completed Documents for Submission'' boxes,
click the ``Save'' button that appears at the top of the Web page. It
is suggested that you save the document a second time, using a
different name, since this will make it easier to submit an amended
package later if necessary. Please use the following format when saving
your file: ``Applicant Name--FY07 Tribal 319 Competitive Grants--1st
Submission'' or ``Applicant Name--FY07 Tribal 319 Competitive Grants--
Back-up Submission.'' If it becomes necessary to submit an amended
package at a later date, then the name of the 2nd submission should be
changed to ``Applicant Name--FY07 Tribal 319 Competitive Grants--2nd
Submission.''
Once your application package has been completed and saved, send it
to your AOR for submission to U.S. EPA through Grants.gov. Please
advise your AOR to close all other software programs before attempting
to submit the application package through Grants.gov.
In the ``Application Filing Name'' box, your AOR should enter your
organization's name (abbreviate where possible), the fiscal year (e.g.,
FY07), and the grant category (e.g., Tribal 319 Grants). The filing
name should not exceed 40 characters. From the ``Grant Application
Package'' page, your AOR may submit the application package by clicking
the ``Submit'' button that appears at the top of the page. The AOR will
then be asked to verify the agency and funding opportunity number for
which the application package is being submitted. If problems are
encountered during the submission process, the AOR should reboot his/
her computer before trying to submit the application package again. [It
may be necessary to turn off the computer (not just restart it) before
attempting to submit the package again.] If the AOR continues to
experience submission problems, he/she may contact Grants.gov for
assistance by phone at 1-800-518-4726 or e-mail at http://www.grants.gov/help/help.jsp
or contact Andrea Matzke, EPA Headquarters, at 202-566-1155 or by e-mail at matzke.andrea@epa.gov.
Proposal packages submitted through Grants.gov will be time/date
stamped electronically.
If you have not received a confirmation of receipt from EPA (not
from Grants.gov) within 15 calendar days of the proposal deadline,
please contact Andrea Matzke, EPA Headquarters, at 202-566-1155 or by
e-mail at matzke.andrea@epa.gov. Failure to do so may result in your
proposal not being reviewed.
[[Page 62452]]
V. Application Review Information
1. Selection Criteria for Competitive Grants
Tribes submitting proposals for competitive grants must comply with
all of the threshold evaluation criteria described in section B.III.3
of this RFP in order to be considered for further evaluation under this
section. The EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator will determine whether
the proposals comply with the threshold evaluation criteria, and will
forward work plans that meet the threshold evaluation criteria to EPA
Headquarters NPS Control Branch for distribution to EPA's Watershed
Project Review Committee. Work plans that do not comply with the
threshold evaluation criteria will be rejected and not evaluated under
this section.
EPA's Watershed Project Review Committee will evaluate work plans
by assigning a value of 0 to 5 (with 5 being highest) for each factor
described below based upon how well the following list of specific
elements are addressed and represented in the work plan. Each factor
has been assigned a specific weight which will be multiplied (by a
value of 0 to 5) to calculate a total point score for the particular
factor. The scores for each factor are then combined to result in a
total score for the overall work plan--the total maximum score
available is 825.
EPA's Watershed Project Review Committee will evaluate work plans
for competitive grants based upon the following evaluation factors (and
corresponding weights):
a. The extent, and quality, to which the subcategories of NPS
pollution are identified and described. (Weight = 15; 75 points
maximum.). The work plan will be evaluated based upon the extent, and
quality, to which it identifies each significant subcategory of NPS
pollution. Since identifying the categories of NPS pollution (e.g.,
agriculture) is a threshold evaluation criteria, the work plan will be
evaluated based upon how well it identifies sources at the subcategory
level with estimates of the extent to which these subcategories are
present in the watershed (e.g., X number of dairy cattle feedlots
needing upgrading, including a rough estimate of the number of cattle
per facility; Y acres of row crops needing improved nutrient management
or sediment control; or Z linear miles of eroded streambank needing
remediation).
b. The extent, and quality, to which the water quality problems or
threats to be addressed are identified and described. (Weight = 15; 75
points maximum.) The work plan will be evaluated based upon the extent,
and quality, to which it identifies each water quality problem or
threat to be addressed caused by the subcategories of NPS pollution
identified in evaluation factor (a) above. EPA encourages Tribes to
incorporate specific descriptions of water quality problems or threats,
for example, in relation to impairments to water quality standards or
other parameters that indicate stream health (e.g., decreases in fish
or macroinvertebrate counts).
c. The extent, and quality, to which the goals and objectives of
the project specifically identify the project location and activities
to be implemented. (Weight = 20; 100 points maximum.)
The work plan will be evaluated based upon how well it specifically
identifies where the NPS project will take place and the waterbody
affected by the NPS pollutants; and the level of detail provided in
relation to the specific activities that will be implemented (e.g.,
identifies specific management measures and practices to be
implemented).
d. The extent to which significant water quality benefits will be
achieved as a result of the project. (Weight = 20; 100 points maximum.)
The work plan will be evaluated based upon the extent to which it
describes how significant water quality benefits will be achieved as a
result of the project, either through restoring NPS-impaired waters or
addressing threats to unimpaired waters. EPA encourages Tribes to
incorporate specific water quality-based goals that are linked to: load
reductions; water quality standards for one or more pollutants/uses;
NPS total maximum daily load allocations; measurable, in-stream
reductions in a pollutant; or improvements in a parameter that
indicates stream health (e.g., increases in fish or macroinvertebrate
counts). If information is not available to make specific estimates,
water quality-based goals may include narrative descriptions and best
professional judgment based on existing information.
e. The specificity of the budget in relation to each work plan
component. (Weight = 15; 75 points maximum.) The work plan will be
evaluated based upon the level of specificity of the budget in relation
to each work plan component, and the extent to which it outlines the
total operational and construction costs of the project (including
match). Budget categories may include, but are not limited to, the
following items: personnel; travel; equipment; supplies; contractual;
and construction costs.
f. The level of detail in relation to the schedule for achieving
the activities identified in the work plan. (Weight = 15; 75 points
maximum.) The work plan will be evaluated based upon the level of
detail and clarity that it includes in relation to the schedule of
activities for each work plan component. Such information includes, but
is not limited to, the following: Identifies a specific ``start'' and
``end'' date for each work plan component; an estimate of the specific
work years for each work plan component; and interim milestone dates
for achieving each work plan component. A work plan that includes a
schedule that can be implemented with minimal delay upon the award of
the grant (i.e., indicates a ``readiness to proceed'') will score
higher than work plans which may require significant further action
before the project can be implemented.
g. The extent to which the roles and responsibilities of the
recipient and project partners in carrying out the work plan activities
are specifically identified. (Weight = 15; 75 points maximum.) The work
plan will be evaluated based upon how specifically and clearly it
defines the roles and responsibilities of each responsible party in
relation to each work plan component, which may include, but is not
limited to, the following: defining the specific level of effort for
the responsible parties for each work plan component; identifying
parties who will take the lead in carrying out the work plan
commitments; and identifying other programs, parties, and agencies that
will provide additional technical and/or financial assistance.
h. The extent to which the performance evaluation process meets
each of the following sub-criteria: (Weight = 15; 75 points maximum.)
(i) Extent and quality to which the work plan demonstrates
potential environmental results (i.e., whether the project will result
in the protection of water resources), anticipated outputs and
outcomes, and how the outcomes are linked to EPA's Strategic Plan.
(Value = 2 points maximum.)
(ii) Extent and quality to which the work plan demonstrates a sound
plan for measuring progress toward achieving the expected outputs and
outcomes (examples of outputs and outcomes can be found in section B.I
of this announcement). (Value = 1 point maximum.)
(iii) Extent and quality to which the applicant adequately
documented and/or reported on progress towards achieving the expected
results (e.g., outputs and outcomes) under Federal agency assistance
agreements performed within the last 3 years, and if such progress was
not being made, whether
[[Page 62453]]
the applicant adequately documented and/or reported why not. (Value = 2
points maximum.)
Note: In evaluating applicants under (iii) above, EPA will
consider the information provided by the applicant and may also
consider relevant programmatic information from other sources
including Agency files and prior/current grantors (e.g., to verify
and/or supplement the information supplied by the applicant).
Applicants with no relevant or available past performance reporting
history will not be penalized for absence of this information (and
will receive 1 point for this factor).
i. The extent, and quality, to which the work plan addresses one of
the following four factors. (Weight = 35; 175 points maximum.)
(i) The work plan develops a watershed-based plan and implements a
watershed-based plan.
If a work plan includes a plan to develop a watershed-based plan,
it will be evaluated based on the extent to which it: Includes a
commitment to incorporate the nine components of a watershed-based plan
described in Attachment A; clearly identifies the geographical coverage
of the watershed; includes a specific schedule for developing the
watershed-based plan; and clearly identifies the estimated funds that
will be used to develop the watershed-based plan (not to exceed 20
percent of the total competitive grant).
If a Tribe submits a work plan to implement a watershed-based plan,
it will be evaluated based on the extent to which it: is accompanied by
a statement that the Region finds that the watershed-based plan to be
implemented includes the nine components of a watershed-based plan
identified in Attachment A; identifies and briefly summarizes the
watershed-based plan that will be implemented; and describes how the
work plan will make progress towards achieving the overall goals of the
watershed-based plan and the specific water quality-based goals
identified in the watershed-based plan.
(ii) The proposed work plan develops a watershed-based plan and
implements a watershed project (that does not implement a watershed-
based plan).
If a work plan includes a plan to develop a watershed-based plan,
it will be evaluated based on the extent to which it: Includes a
commitment to incorporate the nine components of a watershed-based plan
described in Attachment A; clearly identifies the geographical coverage
of the watershed; includes a specific schedule for developing the
watershed-based plan; and clearly identifies the estimated funds that
will be used to develop the watershed-based plan (not to exceed 20
percent of the total competitive grant).
If a work plan is designed to implement a watershed project that is
not implementing a watershed-based plan, it will be evaluated based on
the extent to which it can be linked to or expanded upon to address NPS
impairments or threats on a watershed-wide basis. For example, a work
plan that sets a precedent for future implementation on a watershed-
basis will be ranked higher than a work plan that implements an
individual demonstration project designed to address an individual
threat or problem.
(iii) The work plan implements a watershed-based plan.
If a Tribe submits a work plan to implement a watershed-based plan,
it will be evaluated based on the extent to which it: is accompanied by
a statement that the Region finds that the watershed-based plan to be
implemented includes the nine components of a watershed-based plan
identified in Attachment A; identifies and briefly summarizes the
watershed-based plan that will be implemented; and describes how the
work plan will make progress towards achieving the overall goals of the
watershed-based plan and the specific water quality-based goals
identified in the watershed-based plan.
(iv) The work plan implements a watershed project that is a
significant step towards solving NPS impairments or threats on a
watershed-wide basis.
If a work plan is designed to implement a watershed project that is
not implementing a watershed-based plan, it will be evaluated based on
the extent to which it can be linked to or expanded upon to address NPS
impairments or threats on a watershed-wide basis. For example, a work
plan that sets a precedent for future implementation on a watershed-
basis will be ranked higher than a work plan that implements an
individual demonstration project designed to address an individual
threat or problem.
2. Review and Selection Process for Competitive Funding
The EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinators will determine whether the
proposals comply with the threshold evaluation criteria described in
section B.III.3. The EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator will notify
applicants who do not meet the threshold eligibility criteria within 15
calendar days of EPA's decision on applicant eligibility. The EPA
Regional Tribal NPS Coordinators will forward those work plans that
meet the threshold evaluation criteria to EPA Headquarters NPS Control
Branch by approximately January 12, 2007.
EPA will establish a Watershed Project Review Committee (Committee)
comprised of 9 EPA staff, including 3 EPA Regional State NPS
Coordinators, 3 EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinators, 2 staff members
of the EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch, and 1 staff member of EPA's
American Indian Environmental Office.
EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch will forward copies of the work
plans for competitive funding to the Committee and hold a conference
call with the Committee on or around January 19, 2007, to ensure that
all Committee members fully understand how to objectively and
consistently apply the criteria discussed above. Scores for each work
plan will be developed by each Committee member based on evaluating the
work plans against the factors identified above in accordance with the
weighting system described in section B.V.1.
On or around February 16, 2007, each Committee member will forward
the scores for each work plan to EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch.
Based on these scores, EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch will
calculate the average score for each work plan and then rank the work
plans based on the resulting average scores. On or around February 23,
2007, EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch will send the resulting
average scores and rankings to the Committee and hold a conference call
to provide a final opportunity for members of the Committee to discuss
the rankings based on the average scores. The Committee will then make
funding recommendations to EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch; in
making the funding recommendations, in addition to considering the
rankings, the Committee may also give priority consideration to high
quality work plans that are designed to develop and/or implement a
watershed-based plan. EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch then will
make the final funding decisions based on the Committee's
recommendations.
The Committee will use the following ``Competitive Work Plan
Evaluation Review Sheet'' to score and rank work plans in accordance
with the evaluation criteria discussed above.
Competitive Work Plan Evaluation Review Sheet
Tribe Name------------------------
Reviewer------------------------
(Weight x Value = Score) (Value: 0 is Lowest; 5 is Highest)
(Maximum ``Max'' Score is 825)
[[Page 62454]]
1. Assign a value of 0 to 5 for each evaluation factor (refer to
section B.V.1 for further description of each factor). Use only whole
numbers.
2. Multiply the value by the designated weight to develop a score
for each evaluation factor (the maximum score for each factor is shown
in the score box).
3. Add the score for each evaluation factor to calculate the total
score at the end.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Value Score
Weight Evaluation factors (max) (max)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
15.......................... (1) The extent, and 5 75
quality, to which
the subcategories
of NPS pollution
are identified and
described.
COMMENTS (strengths,
weaknesses):
15.......................... (2) The extent, and 5 75
quality, to which
the water quality
problems or threats
to be addressed are
identified and
described.
COMMENTS (strengths,
weaknesses):
20.......................... (3) The extent, and 5 100
quality, to which
the goals and
objectives of the
project
specifically
identify the
project location
and activities to
be implemented.
COMMENTS (strengths,
weaknesses):
20.......................... (4) The extent to 5 100
which significant
water quality
benefits will be
achieved as a
result of the
project.
COMMENTS (strengths,
weaknesses):
15.......................... (5) The specificity 5 75
of the budget in
relation to each
work plan component.
COMMENTS (strengths,
weaknesses):
15.......................... (6) The level of 5 75
detail in relation
to the schedule for
achieving the
activities
identified in the
work plan.
COMMENTS (strengths,
weaknesses):
15.......................... (7) The extent to 5 75
which the roles and
responsibilities of
the recipient and
project partners in
carrying out the
work plan
activities are
specifically
identified.
COMMENTS (strengths,
weaknesses):
15.......................... (8) The extent to 5 75
which the
performance
evaluation process
meets each sub-
criteria:
Demonstrates
environmental
results,
anticipated outputs
and outcomes, and
how outcomes are
linked to EPA's
Strategic Plan.
(Value = 2 points
maximum.)
(b) Demonstrates a
sound plan for
measuring progress
towards achieving
expected outcomes
and outputs. (Value
= 1 point maximum.).
(c) Documentation of
progress towards
achieving expected
results under
Federal agency
assistance
agreements within
last 3 years.
(Value = 2 points
maximum.) Note:
Applicants with no
relevant or
available past
performance
reporting history
will not be
penalized for
absence of this
information (and
will receive 1
point for this
factor)..
COMMENTS (strengths,
weaknesses):
35.......................... (9) The extent, and 5 175
quality, to which
the work plan
addresses one of
the following four
factors:
(a) The work plan
develops a
watershed-based
plan and implements
a watershed-based
plan.
(b) The work plan
develops a
watershed-based
plan and implements
a watershed project
(that does not
implement a
watershed-based
plan)..
(c) The work plan
implements a
watershed-based
plan..
(d) The work plan
implements a
watershed project
that is a
significant step
towards solving NPS
impairments or
threats on a
watershed-wide
basis..
COMMENTS (strengths,
weaknesses):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Maximum Score.....................825...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Anticipated Selection Date
On or around March 5, 2007, EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch
will select the proposals for award and announce to the Regions which
Tribes' proposals have been selected for competitive funding.
VI. Award Administration Information
1. Award Notices
Following final selections, all applicants will be notified
regarding their proposal's status.
a. EPA anticipates notification to successful applicant(s) will be
made by the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator via e-mail
or U.S. Postal Mail on or around March 5, 2007. This notification,
which advises that the applicant's proposal has been selected and is
being recommended for award, is not an authorization to begin
performance. The award notice signed by the EPA Award Official is the
authorizing document and will be provided through U.S. Postal Mail. At
a minimum, this process can take 90 days from the date of selection
notification. EPA reserves the right to negotiate and/or adjust the
final grant amount and work plan prior to award, as appropriate and
consistent with Agency policy including the Assistance Agreement
Competition Policy, EPA Order 5700.5A1. In addition, successful
applicants will be required to certify that they have not been Debarred
or Suspended from participation in Federal assistance awards in
accordance with 40 CFR part 32.
b. EPA anticipates notification to unsuccessful applicant(s) will
be made by the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator via e-
mail or U.S. Postal Mail within 15 calendar days after final selection
of successful applicants. The notification will be sent
[[Page 62455]]
to the authorization official of the proposal.
c. The appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator will notify
applicants who do not meet the threshold eligibility criteria under
section B.III.3 via e-mail or U.S. Postal Mail within 15 calendar days
of EPA's decision on applicant eligibility.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
a. Grant Requirements. A listing and description of general EPA
regulations applicable to the award of assistance agreements may be
viewed at http://www.epa.gov[fxsp0]/ogd/AppKit/appplicable--
[fxsp0]epa--regulations--[fxsp0]and--description.htm.
All applicable legal requirements including, but not limited to,
EPA's regulations on environmental program grants for Tribes (see 40
CFR 35.500 to 35.735) and regulations specific to NPS grants for Tribes
(see 40 CFR 35.630 to 35.638), apply to all section 319 grants.
b. Dun and Bradstreet Number. All applicants are required to
provide a Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS) number when applying for a Federal grant or cooperative
agreement. Applicants can receive a DUNS number, at no cost, by calling
the dedicated tollfree DUNS Number request line at 1-866-705-5711, or
visiting the D&B Web site at: http://www.dnb.com.
c. Administrative Costs. Pursuant to CWA section 319(h)(12),
administrative costs in the form of salaries, overhead, or indirect
costs for services provided and charged against activities and programs
carried out with the grant shall not exceed 10 percent of the grant
award. The costs of implementing enforcement and regulatory activities,
education, training, technical assistance, demonstration projects, and
technology transfer are not subject to this limitation.
d. Satisfactory Progress. For a Tribe that received section 319
funds in the preceding fiscal year, section 319(h)(8) of the CWA
requires that the Region determine whether the Tribe made
``satisfactory progress'' during the previous fiscal year in meeting
the schedule of activities specified in its approved NPS management
program in order to receive section 319 funding in the current fiscal
year. The Region will base this determination on an examination of
Tribal activities, reports, reviews, and other documents and
discussions with the Tribe in the previous year. Regions must include
in each section 319 grant award (or in a separate document, such as the
grant-issuance cover letter, that is signed by the same EPA official
who signs the grant), a written determination that the Tribe has made
satisfactory progress during the previous fiscal year in meeting the
schedule of milestones specified in its NPS management program. The
Regions must include brief explanations that support their
determinations.
e. Operation and Maintenance. Each section 319 grant must contain a
condition requiring that the Tribe assure that any management practices
implemented for the project be properly operated and maintained for the
intended purposes during its life span. Operation includes the
administration, management, and performance of non-maintenance actions
needed to keep the completed practice safe and functioning as intended.
Maintenance includes work to prevent deterioration of the practice,
repairing damage, or replacement of the practice to its original
condition if one or more components fail. Management practices and
projects that are damaged or destroyed due to a natural disaster (i.e.,
earthquakes, storm events, floods, etc.) or events beyond the control
of the grantee are exempt from this condition.
The condition must require the Tribe to assure that any
subrecipient of section 319 funds similarly include the same condition
in the subaward. Additionally, such condition must reserve the right of
EPA and the Tribe, respectively, to conduct periodic inspections during
the life span of the project to ensure that operation and maintenance
are occurring, and shall state that, if it is determined that
participants are not operating and maintaining practices in an
appropriate manner, EPA or the Tribe, respectively, will request a
refund for the project supported by the grant.
The life span of a project will be determined on a case-by-case
basis, tailored to the types of practices expected to be funded in a
particular project, and should be specified in the grant condition. For
assistance in determining the appropriate life span of the project,
Tribes may wish to examine other programs implementing similar
practices, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture's conservation
programs. For example, for conservation practices, it may be
appropriate to construct the life span consistent with the life span
for similar conservation practices as determined by the Commodity
Credit Corporation (pursuant to the implementation of the Environmental
Quality Incentives Program). Following the approach used in many
Federal funding programs, practices will generally be operated and
maintained for a period of at least 5 to 10 years.
f. In making grant awards to Tribes who are part of an intertribal
consortia, Regions must include a brief finding in the final award
package that the Tribe has demonstrated the existence of the
partnership and the authorization of the consortium by its members to
apply for and receive the grant.
g. In making grant awards to Tribes that provide for a reduced
match requirement, Regions must include a brief finding in the final
award package that the Tribe has demonstrated that it does not have
adequate funds to meet the required match.
3. Reporting
As provided in 40 CFR 31.40, 31.41, 35.507, 35.515, and 35.638, all
section 319 grants must include a set of reporting requirements and a
process for evaluating performance. Some of these requirements have
been explicitly incorporated into the required work plan components
that all Tribes must include in order to receive section 319 grant
funding.
The work plan components required for section 319 funding,
specifically those relating to work plan commitments and timeframes for
their accomplishment, facilitate the management and oversight of Tribal
grants by providing specific activities and outputs by which progress
can be monitored. The performance evaluation process and reporting
schedule (both work plan components) also establish a formal process by
which accomplishments can be measured. Additionally, the satisfactory
progress determination (for Tribes that received section 319 funding in
the preceding fiscal year) helps ensure that Tribes are making progress
in achieving the goals in their NPS management programs.
Regions will ensure that the required evaluations are performed
according to the negotiated schedule (at least annually) and that
copies of the performance evaluation reports are placed in the official
files and provided to the recipient.
4. Dispute Resolution
Assistance agreement competition-related disputes will be resolved
in accordance with the dispute resolution procedures published in 70 FR
3629, 3630 (January 26, 2005) which can be found at http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2005/05-1371.htm.
Copies of these procedures may also be requested by
contacting the EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator listed in section
B.VII below.
[[Page 62456]]
VII. Agency Contacts: EPA Headquarters and Regional Tribal NPS
Coordinators
EPA Headquarters--Andrea Matzke, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and
Watersheds, Assessment and Watershed Protection Division, telephone:
202-566-1155; e-mail: matzke.andrea@epa.gov.
Region I--Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode
Island, Vermont
Warren Howard; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region I, 1 Congress
Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02203; telephone: 617-918-1587; e-
mail: howard.warren@epa.gov.
Region II--New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands
Donna Somboonlakana; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region II, 290
Broadway--24th Floor (MC DEPP:WPB), New York, NY 10007; telephone:
212-637-3700; e-mail: somboonlakana.donna@epa.gov.
Region III--Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia,
Washington, DC
Fred Suffian; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103; telephone: 215-814-5753; e-mail:
suffian.fred@epa.gov.
Region IV--Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee
Yolanda Brown; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region IV, Sam Nunn
Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, GA 30303;
telephone: 404-562-9451; e-mail: brown.yolanda@epa.gov.
Region V--Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin
Daniel Cozza; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region V, 77 West
Jackson Blvd. (MC: WS-15J), Chicago, IL 60604; telephone: 312-886-
7252; e-mail: cozza.daniel@epa.gov.
Region VI--Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas
George Craft; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region VI, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202; telephone: 214-665-6684; e-mail:
craft.george@epa.gov.
Region VII--Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska
Peter Davis; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region VII, 901 N 5th
Street, Kansas City, KS 66101; telephone: 913-551-7372; e-mail:
davis.peter@epa.gov.
Region VIII--Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah,
Wyoming
Mitra Jha; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region VIII, 999 18th
Street, Suite 300 (MC: EPR-EP), Denver, CO 80202; telephone: 303-
312-6895; e-mail: jha.mitra@epa.gov.
Region IX--Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, American Samoa, Mariana
Islands, Guam
Tiffany Eastman; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street (MC: WTR-10), San Francisco, CA 94105; telephone:
1-800-735-2922, relay 415-972-3404; e-mail:
eastman.tiffany@epa.gov.
Region X--Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington
Susan Ennes; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region X, 1200 6th Avenue
(MC: OWW-137), Seattle, WA 98101; telephone: 206-553-6249; e-mail:
ennes.susan@epa.gov.
VIII. Other Information
1. Anticipated Deadlines and Milestones for FY 2008 Competitive Grants
In future years, EPA intends to post the RFP for competitive grants
under section 319 at http://www.grants.gov and on EPA's Web site at
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal. The following estimated dates are
provided in order to assist Tribes in planning for EPA's FY 2008
funding cycle for competitive grants:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deadline EPA uses to determine eligibility Second Friday in October
to receive competitive 319 grants. 2007.
Date for receipt of proposals in hard copy December 7, 2007.
by Region or electronically through
Grants.gov.
Headquarters notifies Regions/Tribes of March 3, 2008.
selections for competitive 319 grants.
Tribes submit final grant application to April 2, 2008.
Region for competitive 319 grants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other than the date EPA will use to determine eligibility to
receive 319 grants, the dates above are the anticipated dates for those
actions.
2. Right to Reject All Proposals.
EPA reserves the right to reject all proposals and make no award as
a result of this announcement, or make fewer awards than anticipated.
The EPA Award Official is the only official that can bind the Agency to
the expenditure of funds for selected projects resulting from this
announcement.
Dated: October 19, 2006.
Benjamin H. Grumbles
Assistant Administrator for Water.
Attachment A--Components of a Watershed-Based Plan
1. An identification of the causes and sources or groups of similar
sources that will need to be controlled to achieve the goal identified
in element 3 below. Sources that need to be controlled should be
identified at the significant subcategory level with estimates of the
extent to which they are present in the watershed (e.g., X number of
dairy cattle feedlots needing upgrading, including a rough estimate of
the number of cattle per facility; Y acres of row crops needing
improved nutrient management or sediment control; or Z linear miles of
eroded streambank needing remediation).
2. A description of the NPS management measures that will need to
be implemented to achieve a water quality-based goal described in
element 3 below, as well as to achieve other watershed goals identified
in the watershed-based plan, and an identification (using a map or a
description) of the critical areas for which those measures will be
needed to implement the plan.
3. An estimate of the water quality-based goals expected to be
achieved by implementing the measures described in element 2 above. To
the extent possible, estimates should identify specific water quality-
based goals, which may incorporate, for example: load reductions; water
quality standards for one or more pollutants/uses; NPS total maximum
daily load allocations; measurable, in-stream reductions in a
pollutant; or improvements in a parameter that indicates stream health
(e.g., increases in fish or macroinvertebrate counts). If information
is not available to make specific estimates, water quality-based goals
may include narrative descriptions and best professional judgment based
on existing information.
4. An estimate of the amounts of technical and financial assistance
needed, associated costs, and/or the sources and authorities that will
be relied upon to implement the plan. As sources of funding, Tribes
should consider other relevant Federal, State, local and private funds
that may be available to assist in implementing the plan.
5. An information and education component that will be used to
enhance public understanding and encourage early and continued
participation in selecting, designing, and implementing the NPS
management measures that will be implemented.
6. A schedule for implementing the NPS management measures
identified in the plan that is reasonably expeditious.
7. A description of interim, measurable milestones for determining
whether NPS management measures or other control actions are being
implemented.
8. A set of criteria that can be used to determine whether the
water quality-based goals are being achieved over time and substantial
progress is being made
[[Page 62457]]
towards attaining water quality-based goals and, if not, the criteria
for determining whether the watershed-based plan needs to be revised.
9. A monitoring component to evaluate the effectiveness of the
implementation efforts over time, measured against the criteria
established under element 8 above.
[FR Doc. E6-17895 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P