FY 2006 and 2007 Targeted Watersheds Grant Program: Availability of Funds and Request for Proposals for Implementation Projects (CFDA 66.439-Funding Opportunity Number EPA-OW-OWOW-06-3), 46901-46911 [06-6898]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 157 (Tuesday, August 15, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46901-46911]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-6898]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8209-8]


FY 2006 and 2007 Targeted Watersheds Grant Program: Availability 
of Funds and Request for Proposals for Implementation Projects (CFDA 
66.439--Funding Opportunity Number EPA-OW-OWOW-06-3)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Availability of Funds and Request for Proposals for 
Targeted Watersheds Implementation Projects.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of funds for grants and 
cooperative agreements under EPA's Targeted Watersheds Grant Program. 
The Targeted Watersheds Grant Program is a competitive grant program 
designed to support the protection and restoration of the country's 
water resources through a holistic watershed approach to water quality 
management. In fiscal year (FY) 2006 Congress appropriated over $16 
million for the program. The Agency is soliciting proposals under this 
announcement for implementation projects, and under a separate 
announcement for capacity building projects. The Agency anticipates 
additional funding for the Targeted Watersheds Grant Program in FY 
2007.
    Under this announcement, EPA will award approximately 9 to 20 
grants or cooperative agreements for restoration and/or protection 
efforts. Anticipated awards will range from approximately $600,000 to 
$900,000 each and have a project period of three to five years. The 
total amount anticipated to be awarded under this announcement will 
range from $7.1 million to about $16 million (these totals represent 
combining a portion of both 2006 and anticipated 2007 Targeted 
Watersheds Grant funds)--the total amount to be awarded under this 
announcement will depend upon the FY 2007 funds and the quality of 
proposals received. Under this announcement, EPA is providing 
applicants the option of submitting their proposals either directly to 
EPA in hard copy or electronically via Grants.gov. (See Section IV for 
additional submission information and requirements.)

DATES: Proposals must be received by EPA or electronically through 
Grants.gov by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time November 13, 2006. Proposals 
received after this deadline will not be considered.

ADDRESSES: Erin Collard; USEPA; Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and 
Watersheds; Room 7136G; Mail Code 4501T; 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW. 
Washington, DC 20004; telephone: 202-566-2655.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions regarding this action, 
please contact the appropriate regional contact person listed in 
Section VII of this notice. A copy of this full announcement and 
additional information on the program can be found on the Targeted 
Watersheds Grant Web site at https://www.epa.gov/twg. The announcement 
is also synopsized on https://www.grants.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Overview Information

    The Targeted Watersheds Grant Program encourages watershed 
practitioners to examine local water related problems in the context of 
the larger watershed in which they exist, to develop solutions to those 
problems by creatively applying the full array of available tools, 
including Federal, State, and local programs, and to restore and 
preserve water resources through strategic planning and coordinated 
project management that draw in public and private sector partners. 
Both the watershed approach and the Targeted Watersheds Grant Program 
focus on multi-faceted plans for protecting and restoring water 
resources that are developed using partnership efforts of diverse 
stakeholders. Hence, the goal of the Targeted Watersheds Grant Program 
is to advance successful partnerships and coalitions that have 
completed the necessary watershed assessments and have a technically 
sound watershed plan ready to implement.
    Federal Agency Name: Environmental Protection Agency.
    Funding Opportunity Title: FY 2006/2007 Targeted Watersheds Grant 
Program: Request for Proposals for Implementation Projects.
    Announcement Type: Request for Proposals.
    Funding Opportunity Number: EPA-OW-OWOW-06-3.
    Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 66.439.
    Dates: Proposals must be received by EPA or electronically through 
Grants.gov by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, November 13, 2006. 
Proposals received after this deadline will not be considered.

I. Funding Opportunity Description

A. Targeted Watersheds Grant Program Objectives

    To achieve environmental goals, EPA encourages the adoption of a 
watershed approach as a broad coordinating process for focusing on 
priority water resource problems. Using a watershed approach, multiple 
stakeholders integrate regional and locally led activities with local, 
State, tribal, and Federal environmental management programs. These 
environmental goals should ultimately protect and restore the health of 
the nation's aquatic resources, which not only includes but goes beyond 
meeting water quality standards.
    The Targeted Watersheds Grant Program encourages watershed 
organizations and practitioners to examine local water related problems 
in the context of the larger watershed in which they exist, to develop 
solutions to those problems by creatively applying the full array of 
available tools, including Federal, State, and local programs, and to 
restore and preserve water resources through strategic planning and 
coordinated project management that draw in public and

[[Page 46902]]

private sector partners. Both the watershed approach and the Targeted 
Watersheds Grant Program focus on multi-faceted plans for protecting 
and restoring water resources that are developed using partnership 
efforts of diverse stakeholders. Hence, the goal of the Targeted 
Watersheds Grant Program is to advance successful partnerships and 
coalitions that have completed the necessary watershed assessments and 
have a technically sound watershed plan ready to implement.
    In accordance with the President's focus on building a cooperative 
ethic in all environmental conservation and protection activities, the 
Targeted Watersheds Grant Program empowers watershed organizations and 
practitioners to collaborate and implement environmental change. 
Overcoming many water quality problems requires the involvement of 
local citizens who have a vested interest in the creeks, rivers, lakes, 
estuaries, wetlands, and groundwater flowing through their 
neighborhoods and towns. Moreover, it is organized and sustainable 
partnerships comprised of an array of governmental and non-governmental 
entities that are the most successful in improving water resources and 
achieving on-the-ground results. The program is intended to encourage 
the kind of proactive and incentive based protection and restoration 
measures that will yield cleaner water and protect ecosystems. By 
furnishing funds to watershed organizations or practitioners, the 
Agency can foster the President(s cooperative conservation ideal by 
ensuring that affected stakeholders have the means necessary to 
actively participate in the watershed restoration process at local, 
State, and Federal levels.

B. National Priorities

    Under this announcement, EPA is soliciting proposals for projects 
that will result in the protection, preservation, and restoration of a 
watershed that incorporates a watershed-based approach. Finding 
solutions to water quality problems requires sustainable approaches 
that can be aligned with core water programs. EPA is looking for 
innovative ways to address water quality problems that will result in 
tangible, measurable environmental results in a relatively short time 
frame. For example, market-based approaches can create social and 
economic incentives for implementing creative pollution reduction 
strategies and water protection measures. Market-based trading projects 
are considered an important component of innovation. One of the 
Assistant Administrator's key market-based priorities for protecting 
and restoring watersheds is the development of water quality trading 
pilots with states and other partners.
    Proposals for watershed restoration and/or protection projects must 
include a monitoring component. Activities proposed for funding are not 
required to address the entire watershed, but are expected to have been 
based on a comprehensive assessment and plan for the watershed. As 
such, all activities should directly support the described watershed 
plan and Targeted Watersheds Grant funds should be used in accordance 
with the plan. Examples of successful proposals from past competitions 
can be found on the Web site at https://www.epa.gov/twg.
    Watershed proposals must be nominated by Governors or Tribal 
Leaders. A Governor or Tribal Leader nomination letter must be provided 
as part of each proposal package submitted to EPA. Governors or Tribal 
Leaders may nominate any number of proposals, either those that are 
entirely within their State or tribal boundaries or interjurisdictional 
watersheds (i.e., those that encompass several States or Tribes). For 
interjurisdictional watersheds, any of the engaged Governors/Tribal 
Leaders may nominate the proposal. To be considered an 
interjurisdictional watershed (and be scored as such) the proposal must 
include a letter of support from all partnering States, Tribes or local 
government entities in the proposal package (this can include a second 
nomination letter from an engaged Governor/Tribal Leader, letters from 
local government elected officials, or letters from the appropriate 
water agency in the adjacent State, Tribe, or local government entity).

C. EPA's Strategic Plan and Anticipated Environmental Results

    The Targeted Watersheds Grant program is linked to EPA's Strategic 
Plan (2003-2008 EPA's Strategic Plan). It is predicated on the concept 
that watersheds are improved most effectively and efficiently by 
managing water resource use and water quality on a watershed basis. The 
Targeted Watersheds Grant Program supports EPA's strategic goals 
(https://www.epa.gov/ocfo/plan/plan.html) to improve and restore 
impaired water quality on a watershed basis and facilitate ecosystem-
scale protection and restoration under EPA Strategic Plan Goal 2--Clean 
and Safe Water, Objective 2.2 (Protect Water Quality), Sub-objective 
2.2.1 (Protect and Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis) and Goal 
4--Healthy Communities and Ecosystems, Objective 4.3 (Ecosystems), Sub-
objective 4.3.1 (Protect and Restore Ecosystems).
    By supporting the implementation of comprehensive watershed 
projects, these grants will also support the Administrator's 
Sustainable Infrastructure priority to develop innovative, market-
based, and sustainable solutions for water infrastructure financing and 
management.
    In accordance with the goals and objectives in the Strategic Plan, 
the Targeted Watersheds Grant Program aims to advance projects beyond 
the planning stage to the point of producing tangible environmental 
results. Therefore, a high priority is to support projects that are 
likely to achieve quantifiable outcomes within the project period. 
Applicants for the FY 2006/2007 funds 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''.
    All proposed projects must be linked to environmental results and 
demonstrate how they will contribute to the ultimate goals of clean and 
safe water and healthy communities and ecosystems. Environmental 
results are used as a way to gauge a project's performance and are 
described in terms of output measures and outcome measures. The term 
``output'' means an activity, effort, and/or associated work product 
related to an environmental goal or objective that will be produced or 
provided over the period of time or by a specific date. The term 
``outcome'' means an environmental 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 short-term (i.e., changes in learning, knowledge, 
attitude, skill), intermediate (i.e., changes in behavior, practice, or 
decisions), or long-term (i.e., changes in condition of natural 
resources).
    In addition to environmental outcomes, other relevant outcomes can 
be behavioral, health-related, or programmatic in nature and need to be 
identified. An example is increasing the watershed approach information 
available to local and State decisionmakers who write and implement 
laws, ordinances, and permits. In this context, certain efforts 
designed to increase the watershed approach knowledge of decisionmakers 
can be viewed as environmental outcomes (results) if the grantee can 
show or measure the improvement in

[[Page 46903]]

the knowledge of decisionmakers who are in the position to create 
institutional changes that are necessary to restore or protect the 
environment. In such instances, ``outcomes'' are not measured typically 
by environmental or water quality indicators, but rather by 
institutional indicators related to the adoption and application of 
laws and regulations, and the active management of programs necessary 
to provide environmental protection.
    Additional information regarding EPA(s definition of environmental 
results in terms of ``outputs'' and ``outcomes'' can be found at: 
https://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/awards/5700.7.pdf or https://www.epa.gov/
water/waterplan/documents/FY06NPGappendix-b.pdf.
    Outcomes expected as a result of the awards under this announcement 
could include:
     Actual on-the-ground water restoration or protection 
projects put in place.
     Baseline and resulting water quality monitoring data that 
indicate measurable environmental improvement.
     Local ordinances passed aimed at protection and 
restoration of water quality.
     Enhanced public participation and awareness of water 
quality issues at the community level.
     Transfer of knowledge among watershed groups across the 
nation.
     Improved water quality, Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 
303(d) delisting of streams, or increased recreational use of water 
bodies.
    For example, for a project aimed at reducing in-stream sediment 
loads, an expected output under this announcement could be the number 
of trees planted, the miles of riparian buffer restored, the number of 
culverts repaired, or other best management practices (BMPs) installed. 
The expected outcome of the particular activity would indicate the 
expected sediment reduction to be achieved (e.g., cubic yards) in a 
specified time period relative to the overall goal (e.g., achieving a 
water quality standard, delisting a stream segment listed as impaired 
under CWA Section 303(d), or attaining a milestone under a TMDL).
    In another example, a proposal for an urban watershed may be 
focused on reducing stormwater runoff and bacterial contamination. The 
anticipated output of this activity could be the number of septic 
systems retrofitted, the number of farmers who install livestock 
fencing, or the number of homeowners who participate in a rain barrel 
program. Anticipated outcomes of this project could be a reduction in 
fecal coliform concentration, a rise in macroinvertebrate populations, 
or the number of days a waterbody displays a ``blue flag'' (i.e., is 
safe for swimming, fishing, or boating).

D. Key Program Changes From FY 2005

    This year, EPA is making several important changes to the Targeted 
Watersheds Grant Program to make it more effective in addressing the 
Agency(s goals and to streamline review procedures. Key changes are 
described below and are explained in greater detail in later Sections 
of this notice.
    First, in an effort to improve efficiencies, EPA is combining its 
FY 2006 and anticipated FY 2007 funds into one solicitation. The total 
amount to be awarded under this solicitation will depend upon the FY 
2007 funding level and the quality of the proposals received.
    Second, EPA is eliminating the limit on the number of proposals a 
Governor or Tribal Leader can nominate. In previous years, Governors 
and Tribal Leaders were only allowed to submit two nominations for 
proposals that resided entirely within their state/jurisdiction. This 
year however, Governors or Tribal Leaders may forward more than two 
proposals for consideration.
    Third, the Agency is restoring the geographic scope of the 
solicitation. While last year Chesapeake Bay watershed projects were 
excluded from the national competition, this year projects that are in 
the Chesapeake Bay watershed are eligible to compete.
    Fourth, EPA has amended the evaluation criteria. Environmental 
Significance has been added as a criterion. Applicants will be required 
to explain, and will be scored on, the importance, relevance, 
connection to, and applicability of the proposal to the Agency's 
strategic goals. In addition, two additional criteria related to the 
applicant's past performance have been added. Programmatic Capability 
and Qualifications of the Applicant will evaluate the extent to which 
the applicant possesses the technical experience and administrative 
ability to carry out the grant or cooperative agreement, and 
Environmental Results Past Performance will evaluate how the applicant 
documented and/or reported on its progress towards achieving the 
expected results (i.e., outputs and outcomes) under prior agreements. 
This year, aspects of the Innovation criterion (e.g., new technologies 
or market-based trading projects) will be addressed in the Quality of 
Proposal criterion.
    Fifth, the applicant will be allotted more space in which to 
describe its proposal. Instead of the 10-page, double-spaced limitation 
in the past, applicants will be allowed a total of 12 pages with no 
spacing limitations in which to present their proposals. All materials 
including the proposal narrative, budget narrative, grants management 
experience, tables, timelines, graphs, maps, and pictures must be 
included in the 12 pages. The 12-page limitation does not include the 
SF 424, the SF 424A, the Governor or Tribal Leader nomination letter(s) 
and the accompanying letters of support. See Section IV for more 
information.
    Sixth, EPA has extended the length of the grant period from three 
to a maximum of five years. The Agency, in general, expects project 
implementation to be completed within two to three years and the 
monitoring component conducted continuously throughout the project 
period.
    Finally, the Federal Government now provides the option to apply 
for many grants and submit materials through a standardized electronic 
grants application system called Grants.gov. In addition, this will be 
the last Targeted Watersheds Grant Program request for proposals that 
will be announced in the Federal Register.

E. Statutory Authority

    The grants or cooperative agreements funded as a result of this 
announcement will be awarded under the independent authority contained 
in the Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act, 2006 (Pub. L. 109-54) and the anticipated 
Department of the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Act for 2007.

F. Geospatial Information

    Grants awarded under this announcement may involve Geospatial 
Information. Geospatial data generally means information that 
identifies, depicts, or describes the geographic locations, boundaries, 
or characteristics of inhabitants and natural or constructed features 
on the Earth. This includes such information derived from, among other 
sources, socio-demographic analysis, economic analysis, land 
information records and land use information processing, statistical 
analysis, survey and observational methodologies, environmental 
analysis, critical infrastructure protection, satellites, remote 
sensing, airborne imagery collection, mapping, engineering, 
construction, global positioning systems, and surveying technologies

[[Page 46904]]

and activities. It also includes individual point or site-specific data 
that are referenced to a location on the earth and digital aerial 
imagery of the earth.
    This information may be derived from, among other things, 
Geographic Information Systems (GIS), Global Positioning Systems (GPS), 
remote sensing, mapping, charting, and surveying technologies, or 
statistical data. For purposes of EPA grants, this refers to 
geographically based information or data or the tools, applications or 
hardware that allow one to collect, manage, analyze, store or 
distribute data in a geographic manner.

II. Award Information

    Approximately $7.1 million to about $16 million is expected to be 
available for awards under this announcement (these totals represent 
combining a portion of both 2006 and anticipated 2007 Targeted 
Watersheds Grant funds) depending upon the amount of FY 2007 funds and 
the quality of proposals received. EPA plans to award approximately 9 
to 20 grants or cooperative agreements under this announcement. 
Anticipated awards will range from approximately $600,000 to $900,000 
each, depending on the amount requested, the overall size and scope of 
the project, and the total amount of funds available.
    Awards under this program can have up to a five-year project 
period, if warranted. Recipients should complete their project 
implementation within two to three years and continue to monitor water 
quality and other pertinent metrics for an additional one to two years, 
for a maximum of up to five years. The total project period, including 
any no-cost, one-year extensions provided to award recipients cannot 
exceed five years.
    EPA reserves the right to partially fund proposals/applications 
under this announcement by funding discrete activities, portions, or 
phases of proposed projects. If EPA decides to partially fund a 
proposal/application, it will do so in a manner that does not prejudice 
any applicants or affect the basis upon which the proposal/application, 
or portion thereof, was evaluated and selected for award, and that 
maintains the integrity of the competition and selection process. EPA 
also reserves the right to make no awards, or fewer awards than 
expected under this announcement.
    EPA reserves the right to make additional awards under this 
announcement consistent with Agency policy, if additional funding 
becomes available. Any additional selections for awards will be made no 
later than six months after the original selection decisions.
    Selected recipients will enter into a funding agreement with the 
applicable EPA Regional Office (see Section VII). The Targeted 
Watersheds Grant Program funds both grants and cooperative agreements. 
Although EPA will negotiate precise terms and conditions relating to 
substantial involvement as part of the award process, cooperative 
agreements permit substantial involvement between the EPA Project 
Officer and the selected applicant in the performance of work supported 
by program funds. Federal involvement for projects selected may include 
close monitoring of the recipient(s performance; collaboration during 
the performance of the scope of work; in accordance with 40 CFR 
31.36(g), review of proposed procurements; reviewing qualifications of 
key personnel (EPA does not have the authority to select employees or 
contractors employed by the recipient); and/or review and comment on 
the content of publications (printed or electronic) prepared (the final 
decision on the content of reports rests with the recipient).

III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants

    States, local governments, public and private nonprofit 
institutions/organizations, federally recognized Indian tribal 
governments, U.S. territories or possessions, and interstate agencies 
are eligible to apply. For-profit commercial entities and all Federal 
agencies are ineligible. Nonprofit organizations described in Section 
501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code that engage in lobbying 
activities as defined in Section 3 of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 
1995 are not eligible to apply.

B. Cost Sharing/Match Requirement

    EPA is requiring applicants to demonstrate in their proposal 
submission how they will provide the minimum non-federal match of 25 
percent of the total cost of the proposal. This means EPA will fund a 
maximum of 75 percent of the total project cost. In addition to cash, 
matching funds can come from in-kind contributions, such as the use of 
volunteers and/or donated time, equipment, expertise, etc., consistent 
with the regulations governing matching fund requirements (40 CFR 31.24 
or 40 CFR 30.23). Federal funds may not be used to meet the match 
requirement for this grant program unless authorized by the statute 
governing their use.
    Federally recognized Indian tribal governments may be exempt from 
this match requirement if fulfilling the match requirement would impose 
undue hardship. Tribal governments wishing to be exempt from the 
minimum 25 percent match requirement must submit a one-page written 
request with justification within 30 calendar days from the date of 
this announcement. Match exemption requests should be sent directly to 
the EPA contact listed in Section IV.D. EPA will notify the potential 
applicant of its decision within 10 business days. If approved, the 
proposal will be scored as if it meets the minimum 25 percent match.
    To determine if the minimum match is met, the following formulas 
may be helpful:
    (1) Amount ($) requested from EPA/Cost ($) of entire project 
[gteqt] 0.75, or
    (2) Total cost ($) of proposal/4 = Amount ($) needed for match.
    For example, if the total cost of the project is $1 million, the 
applicant must be able to provide $250,000 in matching funds or 
services. In this example, the federally funded portion of the project 
would be $750,000.

C. Threshold Eligibility Criteria

    These are requirements which, if not met at the time of proposal 
submission, will result in elimination of the proposal from 
consideration for funding. Only proposals that meet all of these 
criteria will be evaluated against the ranking factors in Section V of 
this announcement. Applicants deemed ineligible for funding 
consideration as a result of the threshold eligibility review will be 
notified within 15 calendar days of the ineligibility determination.
    1. An applicant must meet the eligibility requirements as described 
in Section III.A.
    2. Applicants must demonstrate how they will provide a match of 25 
percent of the total project cost as described in Section III.B above.
    3. The proposal must be nominated by a State Governor or Tribal 
Leader.
    4. The proposal must contain the six components as described in 
Section IV.C.
    5. Submissions that are faxed or sent by standard U.S. Postal 
Service (USPS) parcel post will not be accepted, as described in 
Section IV.D.
    6. Proposals must be received by EPA or through Grants.gov on or 
before the solicitation closing date and time specified in Section IV. 
Proposals received after the closing date and time will be returned to 
the sender without

[[Page 46905]]

further consideration. In addition, pages submitted in excess of the 
12-page limitation described in Section IV.C will not be reviewed.

D. Funding Restrictions

    EPA has chosen to declare certain projects or activities ineligible 
for funding. These include activities required or regulated under the 
CWA. For example, activities for the development of Total Maximum Daily 
Loads (TMDLs) and Phase II Stormwater projects will not be funded. 
Activities implementing the non-regulatory component of TMDLs (e.g., 
the elements of a watershed plan that address non-point source 
pollution), however, are eligible. The construction of buildings or 
other major structures, or the purchase of major equipment or machinery 
will not be funded under this program. Proposals containing a sub-award 
project (also called mini-grants) are eligible, but the portion that is 
to be regranted to third parties within the watershed via a smaller-
scaled competition should account for no more than 20 percent of the 
requested funding amount. If proposals are submitted that have 
ineligible projects or activities, those projects or activities in the 
proposals will not be considered for funding.
    All costs incurred under this program must be allowable under the 
applicable Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Cost Circulars: A-87 
(States and local governments), A-122 (nonprofit organizations), or A-
21 (universities). Copies of these circulars can be found at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/. In accordance with EPA policy and 
the OMB circulars, as appropriate, any recipient of funding must agree 
not to use assistance funds for lobbying, fund-raising, or political 
activities (i.e., lobbying members of Congress or lobbying for other 
Federal grants, cooperative agreements, or contracts).

IV. Application and Submission Information

A. Address To Request Application Package

    Grant application forms, including Standard Forms SF 424 and SF 
424A, are available at https://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/how_to_apply.htm 
and by mail upon request by calling the Grants Administration Division 
at (202) 564-5320.

B. Form of Application Submission

    Applicants must submit their proposal using one of the two methods 
outlined below. All proposals must be prepared and include the 
information as described in Section IV.C regardless of mode of 
submission.
1. Hard Copy and Compact Disc (CD)
    Two hard copies of the complete proposal package as described below 
in Section IV.C, and a CD of the complete proposal package, are 
required to be sent by express mail or courier service, or hand 
delivered. Please mark all submissions: ATTN: TWG--Implementation (see 
Section IV.D for address). The CD may be in Adobe Portable Document 
Format (.pdf), Microsoft Word (.doc), or WordPerfect (.wpd). Nomination 
letter(s), letters of support, and maps will need to be scanned so that 
they can be submitted as part of the CD. Pictures and/or computer 
generated maps may be included as separate files using .jpg or .tif 
format.
2. Grants.gov Submission
    Applicants who wish to submit their materials electronically 
through the Federal Government's Grants.gov Web site may do so. 
Grants.gov allows an applicant to download a proposal or application 
package template and complete the package offline based on agency 
instructions. After an applicant completes the required proposal or 
application package, it can submit the package electronically to 
Grants.gov, which transmits the package to the funding agency. 
Nomination letter(s), letters of support, pictures, and maps will need 
to be scanned so that they can be submitted electronically as part of 
the proposal package. Pictures and/or computer generated maps must also 
be in an electronic format and submitted along with the proposal 
package.
    If you wish to apply electronically via Grants.gov, the electronic 
submission of your proposal package must be made by an official 
representative of your institution who is registered with Grants.gov 
and authorized to sign applications for Federal assistance. For more 
information, go to https://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 AOR and ask that individual to begin the registration 
process as soon as possible.
    To begin the application process for this grant program, go to 
https://www.grants.gov and click on the ``Apply for Grants'' tab on the 
left of the page. Then click on ``Apply Step 1: Download a Grant 
Application Package and Instructions'' to download the PureEdge viewer 
and obtain the application package and instructions for applying under 
this announcement using grants.gov (https://apply.grants.gov/forms_
apps_idx.html). You may retrieve the application package and 
instructions by entering the Funding Opportunity Number, EPA-OW-OWOW-
06-3, or the CFDA number, in the space provided. Then complete and 
submit the application package as indicated. 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 
https://www.grants.gov (to find the synopsis page, go to https://
www.grants.gov and click on the ``Find Grant 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).
    Application/proposal materials submitted through Grants.gov will be 
time/date stamped electronically. Complete instructions on applying 
through Grants.gov are provided in Attachment A to this announcement.

C. Content of Application Submission

    Apart from the SF 424, the SF 424A, the Governor or Tribal Leader 
nomination letter(s), and the accompanying letters of support, the 
remaining parts of the proposal package (comprised of items 2-3 below) 
must not exceed 12 pages in length and should use a 12-point font. 
Pages in excess of 12 will not be reviewed. All materials including the 
project narrative, budget, tables, timeline, charts, graphs, maps, and 
pictures must be included within the 12 pages. Moreover, any appendices 
aside from the nomination letter and support letters will not be 
reviewed. Applicants are responsible for the contents of their 
proposals.
    Each proposal package must contain all of the components listed in 
this section. Failure to submit any of the six components will result 
in disqualification and removal from the selection process.
1. Nomination letter
    A letter signed by the Governor or Tribal Leader formally 
nominating the watershed for consideration for funding must accompany 
each proposal package.
2. Proposal Narrative
    a. Cover page. The cover page should include:
    (1) The name of the watershed along with the designated 8-digit 
Hydrological Unit Code(s) (HUCs);

[[Page 46906]]

    (2) The impaired waters, such as any degraded stream segments 
within the project area that are on the State's 303(d) list;
    (3) Nominee contact information (i.e., name, affiliation, address, 
telephone, and E-mail of the person with whom the Agency should 
correspond);
    (4) Tax status or other description of organization; and
    (5) Internet Web site (i.e., URL) of the organization, if 
available.
    HUCs (also known as USGS Cataloging Units) and State 303(d) 
listings can be found on EPA(s Surf Your Watershed Web site at https://
www.epa.gov/surf/.
    b. Abstract. Provide a brief (approximately 150-word) executive 
summary of the proposal. This should include a brief description of the 
perceived need for the work, the proposed work, and the anticipated 
outputs and outcomes.
    c. Project Narrative. The narrative description of the proposed 
tasks and activities must include the following sections:
    (1) Characterization of the watershed. Describe the watershed, 
including any critical or significant natural resources, such as 
wetlands. Include a description of the physical, chemical, biological, 
ecological, socioeconomic, and cultural characteristics, including 
rural, urban, and environmental justice areas. Briefly describe the 
environmental problems and threats facing the watershed and the 
existing watershed plans and planning efforts addressing the problems 
and threats, including demographics of the impacts.
    (2) Project need. Describe the environmental significance of the 
project, that is, the problem or conservation issue(s) to be addressed, 
why it is a priority, and the context relevant to the overall watershed 
plan. The objectives of the proposal and the immediate and long-term 
desired outcomes should be described relative to the overall 
environmental conditions. An assessment of the natural resource and 
environmental conditions and evidence of problem sources, along with 
the prioritization of the threats and impairments facing the watershed 
should be included. The prioritization should focus on those threats 
and impairments that will be addressed by the proposal.
    (3) Project plan. Describe the work that will be done using 
Targeted Watersheds Grant funding. Identify the specific deliverables 
and the anticipated outcomes (i.e., quantifiable results) associated 
with the major project components.
    (i) Project components: Describe in detail the tasks and activities 
for each project for each year of the project period. Include 
milestones and/or timelines for accomplishing tasks for the project 
period. Explain how the projects fit together to benefit the watershed 
as a whole and are ready for implementation (i.e., feasibility). 
Include in this section why the proposal will work and what makes it 
innovative. If the proposal is a market-based trading project, describe 
the drivers, the buyers and sellers, and the scheme already in place so 
that a trade can begin.
    (ii) Partnering: Describe how you will engage partners and other 
stakeholders in your project. Interjurisdictional watershed 
partnerships (i.e., those that encompass abutting areas and thus 
neighboring political authorities) are encouraged. Watershed proposals 
that encompass more than one governmental authority will be considered 
interjurisdictional provided that the Governor, Tribal Leader or local 
government elected official, or the appropriate water agency in the 
adjacent State, Tribe, or local government entity is a partner or 
otherwise supports the project(s).
    (iii) Financial Integrity/Budget: Explanations of the costs 
associated with each project should be included. Description of costs 
should correspond to figures presented in the SF 424A (see item 6).
    (4) Anticipated Outputs and Outcomes. Applicants 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'' (See Section I 
for details on outputs and outcomes).
    (i) Monitoring and measuring: Describe the water quality monitoring 
and assessment that will be conducted consistent with the project 
components. Identify appropriate environmental indicators that will be 
monitored, and describe the method for evaluating environmental 
improvements. Describe the methodology (i.e., sampling, survey models, 
etc.) and time table that will be used to measure progress, including 
your approach to measuring progress towards achieving the expected 
project outcomes and outputs including those identified in Section I.
    (ii) Environmental Results Past Performance: Identify federally 
funded assistance agreements that your organization performed within 
the last three years (no more than five and preferably EPA agreements) 
and briefly describe how you documented and/or reported on whether you 
were making progress towards achieving the expected results (i.e., 
outputs and outcomes) under those agreements. If you were not making 
progress, please indicate whether, and how, you documented why not. If 
you do not have any relevant or available environmental results past 
performance information, please indicate this in the proposal and you 
will receive a neutral score for this factor under Section V.
    (5) Peer Outreach and Information Transfer. Describe the outreach 
component of the project. Describe the strategy for disseminating the 
results, including lessons learned, of the project among watershed 
organizations and governmental agencies with similar environmental 
challenges within the project watershed and to a wider (i.e., regional 
or national) audience. Describe how the project will promote and 
actively conduct technology transfer or provide technical assistance 
that improves the knowledge of state and local decision-makers.
    (6) Programmatic Capability/Technical Experience. Identify 
federally funded assistance agreements similar in size, scope, and 
relevance to the proposed project that your organization performed 
within the last three years (no more than five and preferably EPA 
agreements) and briefly describe (i) whether, and how, you were able to 
successfully complete and manage those agreements and (ii) your history 
of meeting the reporting requirements under those agreements including 
submitting acceptable final technical reports. If you do not have any 
relevant or available past performance or reporting information, please 
indicate this in the proposal and you will receive a neutral score for 
these factors under Section V.
    In addition, provide information on your organizational experience 
and plan for timely and successfully achieving the objectives of the 
proposed project, and your staff expertise/qualifications, staff 
knowledge, and resources or the ability to obtain them, to successfully 
achieve the goals of the proposed project.

    Note: The proposal narrative should also include any additional 
information, to the extent not otherwise addressed above, that 
addresses the selection criteria found in Section V.A.

3. Map(s)
    A map of the watershed and the proposed work areas must accompany 
the narrative text.
4. SF 424A
    In addition to the narrative text, applicants must provide a 
detailed

[[Page 46907]]

breakdown of cost by category for each project on the SF 424A. All 
project costs including grant administration costs, matching funds, 
other leveraged funds, and travel, including travel to the annual 
conference (see Section VIII.B), should be included.
5. Letter(s) of Support
    To substantiate the information contained in the narrative portion 
of the submission, letters verifying partnerships and matching funds 
are required. Applicants are encouraged to demonstrate active 
involvement of both public and private partners via letters of support. 
All letters must be on the official letterhead of the agency or 
organization.
    (a) Signed letter(s) from active partners indicating their 
commitment to implementing the workplan or specific proposed projects.
    (b) A minimum of one letter signed by an authorizing official from 
an entity committing to provide matching funds, either in cash or in-
kind contributions, including the total value of its commitment toward 
the projects.
    (c) For interjurisdictional consideration, a signed letter(s) from 
the Governor, Tribal Leader or local government elected official, or 
the appropriate water agency in the adjacent State, Tribe, or local 
government entity expressing its support and participation in the 
proposed project(s).
6. Signed SF 424

D. Submission Dates and Times

    Applicants who choose to submit their materials in hard copy form 
must send two copies of their complete proposal packages and the CD to 
Erin Collard, Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds; U.S. EPA; Room 
7136G; 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW.; Washington, DC 20004; telephone: 
202-566-2655. Proposals submitted to the above address will be 
considered if received through courier, hand-delivery, or by express 
delivery service by 5 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, November 13, 2006. 
Due to security measures, EPA cannot accept submission packages sent by 
standard U.S. Postal Service parcel post; however, USPS overnight or 
two-day express delivery is acceptable.
    Submissions through Grants.gov must be received by Grants.gov by 5 
p.m., Eastern Standard Time, November 13, 2006.

E. Intergovernmental Review

    If selected for award, applicants must comply with the 
Intergovernmental Review Process and/or consultation provisions of 
Section 204, Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act, if 
applicable, which are contained in 40 CFR part 29. Applicants should 
consult the office or official designated as the single point of 
contact in his or her state for more information on the process the 
state requires to be followed in applying for assistance if the state 
has selected the program for review. Further information regarding this 
requirement will be provided if your application is selected for 
funding.

F. Confidential Business Information

    In accordance with 40 CFR 2.203, applicants may claim all or a 
portion of their application/proposal as confidential business 
information. EPA will evaluate such claims in accordance with 40 CFR 
part 2. Applicants must clearly mark applications/proposals or portions 
of applications/proposals they claim as confidential. If no claim of 
confidentiality is made, EPA is not required to make the inquiry to the 
applicant which is otherwise required by 40 CFR 2.204(2) prior to 
disclosure.

V. Application Review Information

A. Evaluation Criteria

    All eligible proposals, based on the Section III threshold 
eligibility review, will be evaluated based on the following criteria 
and weights below. Points will be awarded based on how well each 
evaluation criterion and/or subcriterion is addressed.
    Weight based on a 65 point scale.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
20 points               1. Quality of Proposal. Under this criterion,
                         proposals will be evaluated based on the extent
                         and quality to which they describe project(s)
                         that are part of larger watershed assessments
                         and plans and reflect a watershed-based
                         approach to conservation and restoration.
                         Reviewers will evaluate whether the approach is
                         technically/scientifically sound and/or
                         innovative, if the methods are appropriate, and
                         whether there are clear project goals and
                         measurable objectives. Under this criterion,
                         reviewers will focus on the following
                         components:
                        (a) Feasibility. The extent and quality to which
                         the applicant demonstrates an understanding of
                         priority water resource problems within the
                         watershed, has substantially completed the
                         assessment and planning phase, and is prepared
                         to begin work. Reviewers will look at level of
                         project development (i.e., the readiness of the
                         project, technical merit, and expected
                         environmental improvements) (15 points).
                        (b) Innovation. The extent and quality to which
                         the proposal describes unique, creative or
                         novel approaches to environmental restoration
                         or protection. Emphasis will be placed on how
                         well the proposal demonstrates a thoughtful and
                         strategic approach to problem-solving
                         including, but not limited to, water quality
                         trading (5 points).
15 points               2. Anticipated Outputs and Outcomes. Under this
                         criterion, proposals will be evaluated based on
                         the extent and quality to which a proposal
                         clearly articulates a set of performance and
                         progress measures and identified and measurable
                         indicators as identified in Section I of this
                         announcement.
                        (a) Measuring and Monitoring. The extent and
                         quality to which the proposal demonstrates a
                         sound plan for measuring progress toward
                         achieving the expected outputs and outcomes
                         including those identified in Section I of the
                         announcement (10 points).
                        (b) Past Performance. The extent and quality to
                         which the applicant adequately documented and/
                         or reported on their progress towards achieving
                         the expected results (outcomes and outputs)
                         under Federal agency assistance agreements
                         performed within the last three years, and if
                         such progress was not being made whether the
                         applicant adequately documented and/or reported
                         why not (5 points).
                        Note: In evaluating applicants under this
                         factor, EPA will consider the information
                         provided by the applicant and may also consider
                         relevant information from other sources
                         including agency files and prior/current
                         grantors (to verify and/or supplement the
                         information supplied by the applicant).
                         Applicants with no relevant or available past
                         performance reporting history will receive a
                         neutral score for this factor of 2.5 points.
5 points                3. Environmental Significance. Under this
                         criterion, proposals will be evaluated based
                         on: (a) The extent and quality to which the
                         proposal demonstrates relevance to solving an
                         important environmental problem in that
                         watershed and reflects state and Federal
                         environmental priorities and goals (2.5 points)
                         and (b) the extent and quality to which the
                         proposed project(s) are interrelated to improve
                         the water quality and water resources,
                         including wetlands, within the watershed (2.5
                         points).

[[Page 46908]]

 
10 points               4. Broad Support. Under this criterion,
                         proposals will be evaluated based on how well
                         they show the applicant's ability to
                         demonstrate and substantiate strong
                         collaborative partnerships and document
                         effective working relationships among state,
                         tribal, local entities, and broad-based
                         community involvement. Scores will be based on
                         the extent and quality to which the applicant
                         can show a wide variety of public, private, and
                         non-profit participation, and the level to
                         which the applicant can demonstrate strong and
                         diverse stakeholder stewardship and support (5
                         points). Reviewers will also consider
                         interjurisdictionality, that is the extent and
                         quality to which the proposal actively involves
                         more than one governmental entity (i.e.,
                         Federal, state, tribal, or local government
                         entity) (5 points).
5 points                5. Peer Outreach and Information Transfer. Under
                         this criterion, proposals will be evaluated
                         based on the design and breadth of the outreach
                         component. The score will be based on the
                         extent and quality to which the applicant
                         demonstrates a clear strategy for transferring
                         the knowledge and experience garnered to other
                         watershed organizations and agencies with
                         similar environmental challenges both within
                         and beyond the affected watershed.
5 points                6. Financial Integrity. Under this criterion,
                         proposals will be evaluated based on the
                         adequacy of the budget information provided,
                         whether it is reasonable and clearly presented,
                         and the extent to which the applicant can
                         demonstrate a broad range of leveraging
                         capacity.
5 points                7. Programmatic Capability (Technical
                         Experience) and Qualifications of the
                         Applicant. Under this criterion, applicants
                         will be evaluated based on their ability to
                         successfully complete and manage the proposed
                         project taking into account the following
                         factors:
                        (i) Past performance in successfully completing
                         and managing federally funded assistance
                         agreements similar in size, scope, and
                         relevance to the proposed project within the
                         last three years (1 point);
                        (ii) History of meeting reporting requirements
                         under federally funded assistance agreements
                         similar in size, scope, and relevance to the
                         proposed project within the last three years
                         and submitting acceptable final technical
                         reports under those agreements (1 point);
                        (iii) Organizational experience and plan for
                         timely and successfully achieving the
                         objectives of the proposed project (1 point);
                         and
                        (iv) Staff expertise/qualifications, staff
                         knowledge, and resources or the ability to
                         obtain them, to successfully achieve the goals
                         of the project (2 points).
                        Note: In evaluating applicants under this
                         factor, the Agency will consider the
                         information supplied by the applicant and may
                         also consider relevant information from other
                         sources including agency files and prior/
                         current grantors (i.e., to verify and/or
                         supplement the information supplied by the
                         applicant). Applicants with no relevant or
                         available past performance information or
                         reporting history (i.e., items (i) and (ii)
                         under this criterion) will receive a neutral
                         score of one-half point for each of those
                         elements.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Review and Selection Process

    All proposals received by EPA or submitted electronically through 
Grants.gov by the solicitation deadline will be sent to the appropriate 
EPA regional office(s) based on project location. All proposals will be 
evaluated against the threshold criteria listed in Section III of this 
announcement. Proposals that do not pass the threshold review will not 
be considered for funding and the applicant will be so notified.
    All eligible proposals within each region will be reviewed and 
scored by a panel of EPA regional watershed experts using the 
evaluation criteria outlined in Section V.A. Based on the review, each 
regional panel will develop a list of the most highly rated proposals 
to submit to their Regional Administrator. Based on the panel's scores, 
each Regional Administrator can recommend up to four proposals to the 
national panel.
    The national panel, which will consist of representatives from 
agency programs and regional offices, will evaluate the (up to) 40 
semi-finalists based on: (1) Geographic diversity, (2) amount of funds 
leveraged, and (3) project diversity. Based on the review of the semi-
finalists against these factors, the panel will develop a list of 
proposals to recommend for funding to submit to the Selection Official 
(typically the Assistant Administrator for Water) for approval. In 
making the final award decisions, the Selection Official will consider 
the national panel's recommendation and may also take into account 
national program priorities.

VI. Award Administration Information

A. Award Notices

    All applicants, including those who are not selected for funding, 
will be notified by mail. Successful applicant(s) will be invited to 
submit a complete application package prior to award (see 40 CFR 30.12 
and 31.10) that will be due approximately 60 days after being notified. 
Required forms and instructions for preparing and submitting the 
completed application will be provided at that time.
    EPA expects to announce its selections early in calendar year 2007. 
The exact amount of funds to be awarded, specific activities, duration 
of the projects, and role of the EPA Project Officer will be determined 
in the pre-award negotiations between the selected applicant and EPA.
    EPA reserves the right to negotiate and/or adjust the final grant 
amount and workplan content prior to award, as appropriate and 
consistent with Agency policy including the Assistance Agreement 
Competition Policy, EPA Order 5700.5A1.
    An approvable workplan is required to include:
    1. Workplan components to be funded under the grant or cooperative 
agreement;
    2. Estimated work years and the estimated funding amounts for each 
workplan component;
    3. Workplan commitments for each workplan component and a timeframe 
for their accomplishment;
    4. Performance evaluation process and reporting schedule; and
    5. Roles and responsibilities of the recipient and EPA in carrying 
out the workplan commitments.
    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.
    A listing of successful proposals will be posted on https://
www.epa.gov/twg Web site address at the conclusion of the competition. 
This Web site may also contain information about this announcement 
including information concerning deadline extensions or other 
modifications.
    Applicants will receive a notice of award through postal mail. The 
notice of award signed by the Award Official (or equivalent) in the 
Grants Administration Division is the authorizing document, and will be 
mailed to the individual signing the original application.

B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

    The general award and administration process for all Targeted 
Watersheds Grants is governed by regulations at 40 CFR part 30 
(``Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements to 
Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-profit 
Organizations'') and 40 CFR part

[[Page 46909]]

31 (``Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative 
Agreements to State and Local Governments'').
DUNS Number
    All applicants are required to provide a number from the Dun and 
Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) when applying for 
Federal assistance agreements. Organizations can receive a DUNS number 
in one day at no cost by calling the dedicated toll-free request line 
at 1-866-705-5711 or by visiting the Web site at https://www.dnb.com.

C. Reporting

    Project monitoring and reporting requirements can be found in 40 
CFR 30.50-30.52, 40 CFR 31.40-31.41. In general, recipients are 
responsible for managing the day-to-day operations and activities 
supported by the grant or cooperative agreement to assure compliance 
with applicable Federal requirements, and for ensuring that established 
milestones and performance goals are being achieved. Performance 
reports and financial reports must be submitted quarterly and are due 
30 days after the reporting period. The format for these reports will 
be identified during the grant application time frame, and will include 
reporting on established performance measures indicated in the project 
description (i.e., goals, outputs and outcomes). The final report is 
due 90 days after the assistance agreement has expired.

D. Dispute Process

    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: https://
a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20051800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/
2005/05-1371.htm. 

E. Administrative Capability Requirement

    Nonprofit applicants that are recommended for funding under this 
announcement may be subject to pre-award administrative capability 
reviews consistent with Section 8b, 8c, and 9d of EPA Order 5700.8--
Policy on Assessing Capabilities of Non-Profit Applicants for Managing 
Assistance Awards (https://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/award/5700_8.pdf). In 
addition, nonprofit applicants that qualify for funding may, depending 
on the size of the award, be required to fill out and submit to the 
Grants Management Office the Administrative Capabilities Form with 
supporting documents contained in Appendix A of EPA Order 5700.8.

VII. Agency Contacts

    Note to Applicants: 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 the announcement. Questions must be submitted in 
writing and received by EPA before October 30, 2006 to the appropriate 
EPA Regional Contact and written responses will be posted on EPA's Web 
site at: https://www.epa.gov/twg. In accordance with EPA's Competition 
Policy (EPA Order 5700.5A1), EPA staff will not meet with individual 
applicants or discuss draft proposals, provide informal comments on 
draft proposals, or provide advice to applicants on how to respond to 
ranking criteria.

EPA Regional Contacts

    Region I--Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Vermont, 
New Hampshire: Rob Adler or Jerry Potamis; telephones 617-918-1396 and 
617-918-1651; E-mails adler.robert@epa.gov and potamis.gerald@epa.gov, 
respectively.
    Region II--New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands: 
Cyndy Kopitsky; telephone 212-637-3832; E-mail kopitsky.cyndy@epa.gov.
    Region III--Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West 
Virginia, Washington, DC: Ralph Spagnolo; telephone 215-814-2718; E-
mail spagnolo.ralph@epa.gov.
    Region IV--Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, 
South Carolina, Kentucky, Tennessee: William L. Cox; telephone 404-562-
9351; E-mail cox.williaml@epa.gov.
    Region V--Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin: 
Paul Thomas; telephone 312-886-7742; E-mail thomas.paul@epa.gov.
    Region VI--Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, New Mexico: Brad 
Lamb; telephone 214-665-6683; E-mail lamb.brad@epa.gov.
    Region VII--Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebr