U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
National Center for Environmental Research
Science to Achieve Results (STAR) Program
CLOSED - FOR REFERENCES PURPOSES ONLY
Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms
National Center for Environmental Research (NCER), Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Coastal Ocean Program (COP) and Office of Protected Resources, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce
Division of Ocean Sciences, Directorate for Geosciences, National Science Foundation (NSF)
Office of Naval Research (ONR), Department of Defense
Office of Earth Science, National Aeronautics Space Administration
Interagency Announcement of Opportunity
Opening Date: October 5, 2001
Closing Date: January 10, 2002
SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS: GENERAL INFORMATION
Program Title: Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms
Sorting Code: 2002-STAR-C1
Synopsis of Program: The purpose of this notice is to advise the public that the participating agencies are soliciting individual research proposals of up to 3 years duration, and depending on appropriations, multi-disciplinary regional studies for up to 5 years duration for the Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms, (ECOHAB) program. This program provides support for research on algal species whose populations may cause or result in deleterious effects on ecosystems and human health. Studies of the causes of such blooms, their detection, effects, mitigation, and control in U.S. coastal waters (including estuaries and Great Lakes) are solicited. This document details the requirements for applications for research support that will be considered by the Federal research partnership.
Technical Information:Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s): 66.500
See full announcement for eligibility informationAward Information:
Anticipated Type of Award: GrantDeadline/Target Dates:
Anticipated Funding Amount: Approximately $5 million per year
Potential Funding per Grant per Year: Awards are typically on the order of $150,000 per year, total costs, for up to three years. Multi-disciplinary regional studies for up to 5 years duration at correspondingly appropriate budgets will also be considered, depending upon available appropriations.
Letter of Intent Due Date: None
Pre-application Due Date: None
Application Due Date: January 10, 2002
Harmful Algal Blooms (HABs) include toxic and noxious phytoplankton, some protists, cyanobacteria, and benthic algae. Evidence suggests that, over the last few decades, the frequency and duration of HABs have been increasing nationally and worldwide. Formerly, only a few regions of the U.S. were affected by HABs, but now virtually every coastal state has reported major blooms. In many cases, blooms extend over large geographic areas and are composed of more than one harmful or toxic species. Furthermore, HABs are not unique to the U.S. and have attracted interest from many countries that have commercial and recreational activities in the coastal ocean. Impacts from these blooms have resulted in international support for a global research effort on these organisms, i.e., the new international program, GEOHAB (Global Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms).
The list of affected resources continues to grow. Although several regional research efforts are underway, our understanding of the biological, physical, and chemical processes that regulate HABs remains limited. Toxic blooms can impact virtually all compartments of the marine foodweb, with adverse effects on metabolism, viability, growth, fecundity, and recruitment of marine organisms. HAB-produced toxins can have immediate acute impacts on marine populations, including marine mammals, birds, and several protected species, with little known about the effects of chronic low-level exposure. Dramatic shifts in structure of an ecosystem can accompany plankton blooms and macroalgal overgrowth in benthic systems. In this context, our present knowledge is inadequate to define the scale and complexity of many HAB phenomena.
HAB impacts on public health and local/regional economies are also dramatic and increasing. In a recent study, average annual economic losses in the U.S. from HABs were approximated at $42 million with costs attributable to maintenance of toxin monitoring programs, closures of shellfish beds, marine mammal stranding networks, collapse of some fisheries, mortality of fish, shellfish, turtles, birds, and mammals, disruptions in tourism, threats to public and coastal resource health, publication of watershed, health, and seafood advisories, and medical treatments (from Estimated Annual Economic Impacts from Harmful Algal Blooms in the United States by D.M. Anderson, Y. Kaoru, and A.W. White, 2000, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Technical Report WHOI-2000-11, Woods Hole, MA 97 pp). Despite greater public awareness and advisories, human illness and even fatalities continue to be reported. Some toxins may cause only a few documented illnesses but result in serious public reaction and temporary aversion to local seafood products and activities (e.g., $43 million in lost revenue from the 1997 Maryland fish health/Pfiesteria events).
These large impacts have increased public awareness and demand for intervention in HABs to reduce or eliminate bloom impacts on coastal resources, local economies, and threats to public health. As a result, there needs to be increased focus on early detection of bloom species, environmental conditions supporting blooms, and toxins associated with some of the toxin-producing species. Further, there is increasing emphasis on manipulating coastal waters to prevent or control the blooms, common in management practices of other nations but practically non-existent in U.S. coastal waters. And finally, there needs to be increased emphasis on ensuring that coastal managers and the public are provided the most current information available in a manner that will maximize its usefulness in mitigating HAB impacts. This would include projections of bloom landfall that may be feasible in the development of HAB forecasts.
The national urgency for developing a nationwide approach to the increasing impacts of HABs in U.S. coastal waters was assessed in a report that is now the basis of the U.S. national HAB program. The 1993 report, Marine Biotoxins and Harmful Algae: A National Plan (Anderson, D.M., S.B. Galloway, and J.D. Joseph. 1993. WHOI Technical Report 93-02, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA 44 pp.), outlines the nations comprehensive Federal approach to the U.S. problem and can be examined at http://www.redtide.whoi.edu/hab/nationplan/s-kplan/s-kcontents.html . The Plan serves as the foundation for the continuing and expanding HAB research, monitoring, and event response programs in the U.S. This in turn was followed by publication of a report outlining the general approach to understanding and addressing the interactions of HAB species with their environment, leading to the formation of the interagency ECOHAB research program. The report,ECOHAB, the Ecology and Oceanography of Harmful Algal Blooms (Anderson, D.M. 1995. WHOI, Woods Hole, MA, 66 pp.; http://www.redtide.whoi.edu/hab/nationplan/ECOHAB/ECOHABhtml.html ), expands on the National Plan by addressing the need for long-term, large-scale, multi-disciplinary research on the relationships between HAB taxa and the surrounding environment. The prevention, control, and mitigation of HABs is also addressed in Harmful Algal Blooms in Coastal Waters: Options for Prevention, Control, and Mitigation (Boesch, D.F. et al 1997. NOAA COP Decision Analysis Series No.10, NOAA Coastal Ocean Office, Silver Spring, MD 46 pp.), as well as the recently completed workshop report Prevention, Control, and Mitigation of Harmful Algal Blooms: A Research Plan (NOAA National Sea Grant College Program. 2001. 28pp. http://www.nsgo.seagrant.org/research/hab/sg_hab_plan.html ).
ECOHAB is now sponsoring over 40 projects with topics ranging from molecular aspects of HAB detection to large-scale, multi-disciplinary regional studies of bloom formation, maintenance, and dissipation. Projects cover a wide spatial spectrum along the U.S. coastline and its territories. ECOHAB sponsored projects also address the detection, prevention, control, and mitigation of HABs and their impacts, as well as economic assessments of these recurring events.
To address the increased need for research on HABs, NOAA, NSF, EPA, ONR, and NASA combine each agencys unique interests and missions into this coordinated research program. The interests and objectives of each agency are defined in the following paragraphs:
NOAA -- HABs and related biotoxin risk must be managed if we are to ensure public health, build viable and valuable sustainable fisheries, protect living marine resources including threatened and endangered species, and effectively manage coastal activities and resources. NOAAs interest is in developing general understanding of HABs and their relationships to the surrounding environment. Additionally, interest also includes development and application of effective techniques for prevention, control, and mitigation to assist in reducing the impacts of HABs on coastal ecosystems (living marine resources and coastal habitats) and public health, and ensuring that the information is delivered to the public and the coastal management community in a timely and effective manner. Multi-disciplinary investigations of regional factors responsible for development of recurrent blooms along the U.S. coast continue to be a major interest and include development of possible HAB forecasts for early warning in this area.PROGRAM GOALS AND TOPIC AREAS
EPA -- To protect the integrity of ecosystems that are affected by HABs, EPA seeks to support the development of detection, control, and mitigation technologies. Also of interest are studies of factors that initiate the production of toxins by HAB species and the ecological fate and transport of toxins produced during HABs, including impacts on threatened or endangered species. A third area of emphasis is the role of environmental factors (e.g., nutrients from agricultural activities and other non-point sources of pollutants) on the persistence and proliferation of HABs.
NSF -- Many aspects of species-specific dynamics of plankton, macroalgal populations, and species succession that contribute to bloom formation are poorly understood. NSFs interest is in increasing our understanding of the direct and indirect causes of HABs in our coastal regions and their ecological consequences through research on the physiological and ecological bases for bloom formation, the physical and chemical attributes of coastal oceans that facilitate them, the population attributes of bloom species, and the long-term consequences of ecosystem changes.
ONR -- Plankton blooms resulting from complex coupled physical/biological processes strongly affect the physical, optical, and acoustical properties of the coastal ocean. ONRs interest is in characterizing and forecasting these properties of blooms to improve the capability of the fleet to operate effectively within coastal environments worldwide.
NASA -- Algal pigments affect optical properties of the water in well-characterized ways. In the open ocean, it is possible to quantify pigment concentration using remote sensing techniques because phytoplankton are mostly responsible for variation in water color. In nearshore, estuarine, and inland waters, suspended sediments and dissolved organic compounds make the optical properties much more complex. The goal of detecting algal blooms in the presence of other colored materials is the subject of ongoing research. NASA is interested in developing remote sensing techniques that could be applied to the detection or tracking of harmful algal blooms in nearshore coastal environments.
This announcement provides an opportunity for investigators to propose activities that address areas in the national problem of HABs, as listed below. ECOHAB will support projects ranging from laboratory studies by individual investigators or small teams, up to larger teams of investigators conducting coordinated, well-integrated, multi-disciplinary regional field programs. For individuals and small teams, support may be requested for 1-3 years duration. Projects focused on multi-disciplinary regional studies may request support for up to 5 years duration. However, the size and duration of the latter studies are dependent on appropriations, and potential applicants are encouraged to correspond with the ECOHAB Coordinator (see Contacts in this announcement) prior to preparation of proposals.
All studies should address fundamental ecological and oceanographic questions related to HABs. Additionally, larger, regionally focused studies should attempt to determine the linkages between HAB species and their surrounding environments. Modeling efforts should be an integral part of these larger studies and these applications should also identify, with appropriate letters of support, potential user communities for models and results. Investigators are encouraged to list specific management needs identified in the regional community, document the management sources, and also document how research results will meet those needs.
Proposals are encouraged in the following areas: 1) the prevention, control, and mitigation of HABs and their impacts, 2) the transition of current biophysical models for HABs in specific regions into operational HAB forecasts, 3) biological and physical oceanographic regional studies that include the development of linked biophysical models of bloom development and transport, and 4) studies addressing gaps in general knowledge of HAB phenomena. These special emphasis areas are described in greater detail below.
1) Proposals addressing prevention, control, and mitigation strategies are encouraged to focus on research into key questions on the underlying mechanisms involved with HABs and their control and accompanying ecosystem impact. Prevention, control, and mitigation projects should detail direct impacts on the HAB and toxins as well as potential deleterious impacts on other parts of the ecosystem. Requests for support for 1-3 years duration by single investigators or small teams are appropriate for this area.In conjunction with the areas of special emphasis discussed, possible ECOHAB topics include, but are not limited to, the following:
2) Development of predictive models is a high priority, and investigators are encouraged to begin the development of specific coupled biological-physical models to forecast HAB events for identified user groups and their needs in a specific region. The investigators listed should include basic and applied modelers and management personnel in the list of participants, and detail academic, public, or private institutions where the operational models might be housed. Requests for support for 1-3 years duration by single investigators or small teams are appropriate for this area of research.
3) Regional studies are large, multi-disciplinary, multi-institutional studies that link the ecology, physiology, behavior, and toxin production of a HAB species with the chemistry, physics, bathymetry, and meteorology of the surrounding environment. These studies, up to 5 years in duration with a team of collaborating investigators, should include development of a linked biophysical model for bloom development and transport, as well as identify potential users in the region for the model. Participation of the latter group in the study is encouraged.
4) Individual studies or small interdisciplinary efforts investigating fundamental ecological and oceanographic questions related to HAB events will be considered. These studies should address gaps in the general knowledge of HAB phenomena, including factors causing and/or regulating bloom dynamics, physiology of HAB species, and the nature and extent of impacts.
(1) Characterization and detection of HAB cells, life stages, and toxins;
(2) The influence of human and natural factors on the mechanisms of initiation, distribution, and accumulation of individual bloom-forming species, including detection and tracking of conditions suspected of being conducive to bloom formation;
(3) The sources, fates, and consequences of HABs in foodwebs, fisheries, and protected species;
(4) Physiological and biochemical bases of the ecological role of toxins in bloom-forming species, including the physical and biological processes that influence the transport, fate, and effects of marine biotoxins;
(5) Enhancing predictive and early warning capability for the occurrence and impact of HABs, including development of models of the physical, biogeochemical, and ecological processes that can ultimately lead to HAB prediction;
(6) The transition of biophysical models of HAB development into operational models of HAB distributions and dynamics for specific regions/environments;
(7) The prevention, mitigation, and control of HABs; and
(8) Longer-term consequences of ecosystem changes brought about by the increasing frequency and persistence of planktonic blooms and community alterations that can accompany macroalgal overgrowth in benthic systems.
Funding is contingent upon receipt of fiscal years 2002-2006 Federal appropriations. The anticipated funding for ECOHAB activities under this announcement approximates $5M per year over 5 years (FY2002-FY2006). Awards are typically on the order of $150,000 per year, total costs, for up to three years. Multi-investigator and multi-institutional applications may include correspondingly higher budgets.
If an application is selected for funding, the agencies have no obligation to provide any additional prospective funding in connection with the award in subsequent years. Renewal of an award to increase funding or extend the period of the award is based on satisfactory performance and is at the total discretion of the funding agencies. Not all proposals selected will necessarily receive funding for the entire duration of the program.
Moreover, start dates for some proposals may be delayed, or proposals
may be funded for a portion of the project period only. Publication
of this notice does not obligate any agency to any specific award
or to obligate any part of the entire amount of funds available.
Recipients and subrecipients are subject to all Federal laws and
agency policies, regulations, and procedures applicable to Federal
financial assistance awards.
Academic and not-for-profit institutions located in the United States, and state, local, and Indian tribal governments, are eligible under all existing authorizations. Some participating agencies are authorized to make awards to profit-making firms and international institutions. NOAA and other permitted Federal partnering agencies may fund investigators from Federal laboratories that successfully compete through the ECOHAB Program announcement, but the funding of salaries of full time federal employees will be in accord with individual agency policies. Federal investigators will be required to submit certifications or documentation that clearly show they have specific legal authority to receive funds from another Federal agency in excess of their appropriations. Applications from non-Federal and Federal applicants will be evaluated together. Proposals selected for funding from non-Federal applicants will be funded through a project grant or cooperative agreement under the terms of this announcement. Proposals from Federal researchers deemed acceptable and selected for funding will be funded through a medium other than a grant or cooperative agreement, such as inter- or intra-agency transfers, where legal authority exists for such funding. Note that this announcement is not proposing to procure goods and services from Federal applicants; therefore the Economy Act (31 U.S.C. 1535) is not an appropriate legal basis.
Applications are welcome from Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic Serving Institutions, and Native American Tribal Colleges. Women and members of minority groups are particularly encouraged to participate in applications.
Applications will be submitted through the NOAA Coastal Ocean Program.
Proposals meeting the stated eligibility criteria will be evaluated
by a peer review panel. Final selection of awardees by the
participating agencies will be determined on the basis of the review
panels recommendations, applicability of the proposed effort to
the interests and objectives of an agency, and the availability
of funds. It is anticipated that each award will be granted
through and be administered by a single agency; however, several
agencies may participate in making grants to individual components
of multi-institutional projects. Applicants recommended for
funding may be requested to resubmit their proposal and modify their
budget and/or work plan to comply with special requirements of the
particular agency supporting their award. Awards will be subject
to the terms and conditions of the sponsoring agency.
This document requests full proposals only. The provisions for proposal/application preparation provided here are mandatory. Applications received after the published deadline or applications that deviate from the prescribed format will be returned to the sender without further consideration.
Application is made through the submission of the materials described
It is essential that the application contain all the information requested and be submitted in the formats described. If an application is considered for award (i.e., after external peer review and internal review), additional forms and other information may be requested by the agency making the award. Group and/or collaborative applications involving more than one institution must be submitted as a single administrative package from one of the institutions involved.
The original, signature copy of the application must not be stapled or bound in any way. Other copies should be secured with paper or binder clips.
The full application contains the following:
A. Standard Form 424: The applicant must complete Standard Form 424. This form will act as a cover sheet for the application and must be its first page. Instructions for completion of the SF424 are included with the form. The form must contain the original signature of an authorized representative of the applying institution. Please note that both the Principal Investigator and an administrative contact should be identified in Section 5 of the SF424.
B. Key Contacts: The applicant must complete the Key Contacts Form as the second page of the submitted application.
C. Abstract: The abstract is a very important document. Prior to attending the peer review panel meetings, some of the panelists may read only the abstract. Therefore, it is critical that the abstract accurately describe the research being proposed and convey all the essential elements of the research. The abstract, limited to one page, should include the following information, as indicated in the example format provided.
1. Research Category: Enter 2002-STAR-C1D. Research Plan: The proposed project must be completely described, including identification of the problem, scientific objectives, proposed methodology, relevance to the ECOHAB program goals, and its scientific priorities. This description must not exceed fifteen (15) consecutively numbered (center bottom), 8.5x11-inch pages of single-spaced standard 12-point type with 1-inch margins. In the case of proposals describing multi-disciplinary, multi-institutional regional studies, up to 20 pages are permitted. For projects with prior HAB funding, a section outlining the results of the prior work and its connection, if any, with the proposed work must be included. Page limits are inclusive of figures and other visual materials, but exclusive of references. The description must provide the following information:
2. Title: Use the exact title as it appears in the rest of the application. The title of the application must be brief, yet represent the major thrust of the project. Because the title will be used by those not familiar with the project, avoid highly technical words or phraseology. Do not use phrases such as "research on."
3. Investigators: Start with the Principal Investigator. Also list the names and affiliations of each major co-investigator who will significantly contribute to the project.
4. Institution: List the name and city/state of each participating university or other applicant institution, in the same order as the list of investigators.
5. Project Period: Provide the proposed project beginning and ending dates, with an approximate start date of September 1, 2002.
6. Project Cost: Provide the total request to the Federal Government for the entire project period.
7. Project Summary: This should summarize (a) the objectives of the study (including any hypotheses that will be tested), (b) the experimental approach to be used (which should give an accurate description of the project as described in the proposal), and (c) the expected results of the project and how it addresses the research needs identified in the solicitation.
8. Supplemental Keywords: A list of suggested keywords is provided for your use. Do not duplicate terms already used in the text of the abstract. Providing a complete set of keywords is very important.
1. Objectives: List the objectives of the proposed research and the hypotheses being tested during the project, and briefly state why the intended research is important. This section should also include any background or introductory information that would help explain the objectives of the study.The following sections are in addition to the Project Description.
2. Approach: Outline the methods, approaches, and techniques that you intend to employ in meeting the objective stated above (five to ten pages recommended).
3. Expected Results or Benefits: Describe the results you expect to achieve during the project, the benefits of success as they relate to the topic under which the proposal was submitted, and the potential recipients of these benefits. This section should also discuss the utility of the research proposed for addressing the objectives described in the solicitation (one to two pages recommended). Proposed projects may contribute directly or indirectly to training, education, outreach, and infrastructure, and may provide opportunities for under-represented groups. Such activities are encouraged by all participating agencies and the National Science Foundation, in particular, regards such broader impacts as an important criteria in evaluating support requests. Where appropriate, investigators are encouraged to summarize or highlight such activities as a short section in the project description.
4. General Project Information: Discuss other information relevant to the potential success of the project. This should include facilities, personnel, project schedules, proposed management, interactions with other institutions, etc. (one to two pages recommended). For multi-investigator projects, project management should be clearly identified with a description of the functions of each investigator within a team.
5. Important Attachments: Appendices, letters of collaboration or support, and/or other information may be included but must remain within the 15-page limit (20-page limit for multi-disciplinary regional studies).
E. References Cited: Reference information is required. Each reference must include the name(s) of all authors in the same sequence in which they appear in the publication, the article title, volume number, page numbers, and year of publication. This section is for bibliographic citations only and is not to be used to provide parenthetical information outside of the project description.
F. Resumes: The resumes of all principal investigators and important co-workers are to be provided. Resumes must not exceed two consecutively numbered (bottom center), 8.5x11-inch pages of single-spaced standard 12-point type with 1-inch margins for each individual. Each resume should include the following information:
1. A listing of professional and academic essentials and mailing address;The material presented in (3),(4), and (5) is used to assist in identifying potential conflicts or bias in the selection of reviewers.
2. A list of up to five publications most closely related to the proposed project and five other significant publications, within the last five years. Additional lists of publications, lectures, etc., should not be included;
3. A list of all persons (including their organizational affiliations) in alphabetical order who have collaborated on a project or publication within the last 48 months, including collaborators on the proposal and persons listed in the publications. If there have been no collaborators, this should be indicated;
4. A list of persons (including their organizational affiliations) with whom the individual has had an association as thesis advisor or postdoctoral sponsor; and
G. Current and Pending Support: The applicant must identify any current and pending financial resources that are intended to support research related to that included in the proposal or which would consume the time of principal investigators. This should be done by completing the appropriate form (NCER FORM 5) for each investigator and other senior personnel involved in the proposal.
H. Budget: The applicant must present a detailed, itemized budget for the entire project. This budget must be in the format provided in the example and not exceed two consecutively numbered (bottom center), 8.5x11-inch pages with 1-inch margins. If you intend to cost-share, a brief statement concerning cost sharing can be added to the budget justification, which should include the estimated dollar amounts in the appropriate categories in the budget table. If a sub-agreement, such as a sub-contract is included in the application, provide a separate budget for the sub-contract in the same format. Include the total amount for the sub-contract under "Contracts" in the master budget. Multi-institution applications must include an itemized budget for each institution.
Support of ships required for field studies are a significant cost that will be evaluated in any proposals for funding, so the need should be adequately justified within the project description. NSF requests information on ship requirements in order to schedule time on University-National Oceanographic Laboratory System (UNOLS) vessels as NSF might fund any of the proposals submitted. As the funding mechanism for ship time is agency specific, ship costs must be included on the budget form as well as separately identified by submitting a NSF-UNOLS Ship Time Request Form. The investigator is responsible for sending copies to the UNOLS office and ship operators. If no ship time is required, submit the UNOLS form and indicate that no ship time is required. A UNOLS Ship Time Request Form is available in electronic format at: http://www.gso.uri.edu/unols/ship/shiptime.html . Paper copies may also be requested from UNOLS, but the electronic version is strongly preferred for ease of information exchange and processing.
Instructions for requesting ship support can be found in NSF 00-39; Proposal Submission Guidelines for Research Ship Operations, Instrumentation and Equipment, and Technical Services Support (http://www.nsf.gov/cgi-bin/getpub?nsf0039 ) (NSF 00-39 replaces NSF 94-124; OMB #3145-0058; expiration date August 2000).
I. Budget Justification: This section should describe the basis for calculating the personnel, fringe benefits, travel, equipment, supplies, contractual support, and other costs identified in the itemized budget and explain the basis for their calculation (special attention should be given to explaining the travel, equipment, and other categories). This should also include an explanation of how the indirect costs were calculated. This justification should not exceed two consecutively numbered (bottom center), 8.5x11-inch pages of single-spaced standard 12-point type with 1-inch margins.
J. Quality Assurance Statement: For any project involving data collection or processing, conducting surveys, environmental measurements, and/or modeling, or the development of environmental technology (whether hardware-based or via new techniques) for pollution control and waste treatment, provide a statement on quality processes that will be used to assure that results of the research satisfy the intended project objectives. For awards that involve environmentally related measurements or data generation, a quality system that complies with the requirements of ANSI/ASQC E4, "Specifications and Guidelines for Quality Systems for Environmental Data Collection and Environmental Technology Programs," must be in place. The Quality Assurance Statement should not exceed two consecutively numbered, 8.5x11-inch pages of single-spaced standard 12-point type with 1-inch margins. This is in addition to the 15 pages permitted for the Project Description. This Statement should, for each item listed below, present the required information, reference the relevant portion of the project description containing the information, or provide a justification as to why the item does not apply to the proposed research.
1. Discuss the activities to be performed or hypothesis to be tested and criteria for determining acceptable data quality. (Note: Such criteria may be expressed in terms of precision, accuracy, representativeness, completeness, and comparability. These criteria must also be applied to determine the acceptability of existing or secondary data to be used in the project.)ANSI/ASQC E4, "Specifications and Guidelines for Quality Systems for Environmental Data Collection and Environmental Technology Programs," is available for purchase from the American Society for Quality, phone 1-800-248-1946, item T55. Only in exceptional circumstances should it be necessary to consult this document.
2. Describe the study design, including sample type and location requirements, any statistical analyses that were used to estimate the types and numbers of samples required for physical samples, or equivalent information for studies using survey and interview techniques.
3. Describe the procedures for the handling and custody of samples, including sample collection, identification, preservation, transportation, and storage.
4. Describe the procedures that will be used in the calibration and performance evaluation of the sampling and analytical methods and equipment to be used during the project.
5. Discuss the procedures for data reduction and reporting, including a description of statistical analyses to be used and of any computer models to be designed or utilized. Include a description of associated verification and validation techniques.
6. Describe the quantitative and/or qualitative procedures that will be used to evaluate the success of the project, including any plans for peer or other reviews of the study design or analytical methods prior to data collection.
K. Postcard: The Applicant must include with the application a self-addressed, stamped 3x5-inch post card which will be used to acknowledge receipt of the application and to transmit other important information to the applicant. If the applicant does not receive an acknowledgment within 30 days of the submission deadline, contact the project official listed under "Contacts" in this solicitation.
The original and eighteen (18) copies of the fully developed application (19 in all) and one (1) additional copy of the abstract, must be received by NOAA no later than 4:00 P.M. Eastern Time on the closing date, January 10, 2002. Facsimile transmissions and electronic mail submission of full proposals will not be accepted.
The application and abstract must be prepared in accordance with these instructions. Informal, incomplete, or unsigned applications will not be considered. The original, signature copy of the application must not be stapled or bound in any way. The required number of copies of the application should be secured with paper or binder clips.
Completed applications should be sent to:
Susan Banahan, ECOHAB Coordinator
NOAA Coastal Ocean Program, N/SCI2
1305 East-West Highway
Silver Spring, MD 20910-3281
For express mail-delivered applications, the following phone number
must be used:
(301) 713-3338, extension 148.
Projects which contain sub-contracts constituting more than 40% of the total direct cost of the assistance agreement for each year in which the subcontract is awarded will be subject to special review. Additional justification for extensive use of such sub-contracts must be provided in which the need is discussed in relation to the accomplishment of the specific objectives of the research project.
All applications are reviewed by an appropriate technical peer review panel and ad hoc reviewers by mail. This review is designed to evaluate each application according to its technical merit. In general, each review group is composed of scientists, engineers, social scientists, and economists, and outreach specialists who are experts in their respective disciplines and are proficient in the technical subjects they are reviewing. Reviewers use the following criteria of approximately equal weight to help them in their evaluations:
1) The originality and creativity of the proposed research project, the appropriateness and adequacy of the methods proposed, and the appropriateness and adequacy of the Quality Assurance Statement. Is the approach practical and technically defensible, and can the project be performed within the proposed time period? Will the project contribute to the generation and dissemination of scientific knowledge in the topic area of the solicitation? Is the proposal well-prepared with supportive information that is self-explanatory and understandable?Although budget information is not used by reviewers as the basis for their evaluation of scientific merit, the reviewers are asked to provide their view on the appropriateness and/or adequacy of the proposed budget and its implications for the potential success of the proposed research. Input on requested equipment is of particular interest.
2) The qualifications of the principal investigator(s) and other key personnel, including training for research, demonstrated knowledge of pertinent literature, experience, past performance, and publication records. Will all key personnel contribute a significant time commitment to the project?
3) The availability and/or adequacy of the facilities and equipment proposed for the project. Are there any deficiencies that may interfere with the successful completion of the research?
4) The responsiveness of the proposal to the needs identified for the area of emphasis and/or topic. Does the proposal adequately address the objectives specified?
Reviewers will also be asked to comment on other issues, including: how well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning? How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of under-represented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships? Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society?
Applications that receive scores of excellent and very good from the peer reviewers are subjected to a programmatic review by the sponsoring agencies in relation to program priorities. Recommendations are then made by the appropriate program managers to the sponsoring agencies, which then make the funding decision. Grants will be selected on the basis of technical merit, relevancy to the research areas and topics outlined, and budget.
At the conclusion of the peer review process, program managers from participating agencies will consider projects for funding based on the review process, agency program interests and research topics, and funds available. This process varies among the ECOHAB agencies. The ECOHAB Coordinator will serve as the contact point for investigators wishing to determine application status. For applications where an award recommendation is anticipated, investigators will be notified by an agency program manager directly, who, if necessary, will negotiate revisions in the proposed work and budget. Applications still under consideration by one of the agencies will be considered pending until the completion of the selection process. The ECOHAB Coordinator will notify all other applicants of the decision not to recommend support. Final awards will be issued by the agency responsible for a specific project after receipt and processing of any specific materials required by the agency.
Customarily, applicants are notified about award decisions within six months of the application deadline. A summary statement of the scientific review by the peer panel and copies of mail reviews will be provided to each applicant with the award or declination letter.
Applications selected for funding will require additional certifications, possibly a revised budget, responses to any comments or suggestions offered by the peer reviewers, and an electronic version of the revised project abstract. The sponsoring agency will contact the Principal Investigator to obtain required materials. Grant administration procedures will be in accordance with the policies of the awarding agency.
By submitting an application in response to this solicitation, the applicant grants the sponsoring agencies permission to share the application with technical reviewers both within and outside the agencies. Applications containing proprietary or other types of confidential information will be returned to the applicant without review.
The funding mechanism for the awards issued under this solicitation to a non-Federal applicant will consist of a grant or cooperative agreement from the funding agency. All award decisions are subject to the availability of funds. In accordance with the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act, codified at 31 U.S.C. § 6301 et seq., the primary purpose of an assistance agreement is to accomplish a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized by Federal statute rather than acquisition for the direct benefit of the Agency. In issuing a grant agreement, the funding agency anticipates that there will not be substantial agency involvement in the design, implementation, or conduct of the research. However, the funding agency will monitor research progress through annual reports provided by the grantee and contacts with the Principal Investigator.
Meetings: Each applicant must include in the budget funds for a meeting each year with sponsoring agency personnel and other grantees to discuss research progress. For planning purposes, assume that each meeting will be held in Washington, DC, and will require the attendance of principal investigator(s) and co-principal investigator(s). Each meeting will be up to three days in length, exclusive of travel time.
Reports: As a result of the award, the recipient will agree to provide to the Project Officer agency-specific annual progress reports with associated summaries and a final report with an executive summary. The recipient will be required to provide copies of any peer reviewed journal article(s) resulting from the research during the project period and continue to notify the Project Officer of any papers based on the research supported that are published after termination of the assistance agreement.
Other Requirements: NOAA and NSF have specific requirements that environmental data be submitted to the National Oceanographic Data Center. NOAA also encourages its funded investigators to share data and information developed during an award with the HAB research community. This includes: publications; mathematical model results, code, and documentation; cultures; assays and other results.
Further information, if needed, may be obtained from the Agency officials indicated below. E-mail inquiries are preferred.