Grantee Research Project Results

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

Recipients List

Sustainable Chesapeake: A Collaborative Approach to Urban Stormwater Management

This is the initial announcement of this funding opportunity.

Funding Opportunity Number: EPA-G2011-STAR-A1

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 66.509

Solicitation Opening Date: September 30, 2010
Solicitation Closing Date: January 31, 2011: 11:59:59 pm Eastern Time

Eligibility Contact: James Gentry (gentry.james@epa.gov); phone: 703-347-8093
Electronic Submissions: Ron Josephson (josephson.ron@epa.gov); phone: 703-308-0442
Technical Contact: Anne Sergeant (sergeant.anne@epa.gov); phone: 703-347-8105

Table of Contents:
SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
	Synopsis of Program
	Award Information
	Eligibility Information
	Application Materials
	Agency Contacts
I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION
	A. Introduction
	B. Background
	C. Authority and Regulations
	D. Specific Areas of Interest/Expected Outputs and Outcomes
	E. References
	F. Special Requirements
II. AWARD INFORMATION
III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION
	A. Eligible Applicants
	B. Cost Sharing
	C. Other
IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION
	A. Internet Address to Request Application Package
	B. Content and Form of Application Submission
	C. Submission Dates and Times
	D. Funding Restrictions
	E. Submission Instructions and Other Submission Requirements
V. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION
	A. Peer Review
	B. Programmatic Review
	C. Funding Decisions
VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION
	A. Award Notices
	B. Disputes
	C. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
VII. AGENCY CONTACTS

Access Standard STAR Forms (https://www.epa.gov/research-grants/funding-opportunities-how-apply-and-required-forms)
View research awarded under previous solicitations (https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncer_abstracts/index.cfm/fuseaction/recipients.archive)

SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

Synopsis of Program:
EPA is seeking proposals for integrated, transdisciplinary research centers that will advance scientific understanding of how to influence human and institutional behavior to prevent pollution from entering Chesapeake Bay.  Presidential Executive Order 13508 (Executive Order, 2010) directs the Federal government to lead efforts to restore and protect the Chesapeake Bay.  To that end, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as part of its Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program, is seeking applications for “Sustainable Chesapeake” Research Centers to explore sustainable urban stormwater management.  EPA is specifically interested in supporting research to identify new, collaborative approaches to reduce urban stormwater inputs into Chesapeake Bay.  Each Center research project should include three components: physical/biological science, social science, and measures of success or progress.  Research areas of interest include: applying existing stormwater-reduction techniques in new ways; developing new techniques and technologies; identifying the reasons existing strategies to restore or protect the Chesapeake Bay have succeeded or failed; developing methods and metrics to document water-quality improvements in Chesapeake Bay tributaries; and developing sector-specific strategies such as for residential areas, industrial settings, commercial developments, or transportation infrastructure.

Award Information:
Anticipated Type of Award:  Grant
Estimated Number of Awards:  Approximately two awards
Anticipated Funding Amount:  Approximately $4.4 million total for all awards
Potential Funding per Award:  Up to a total of $2.2 million, including direct and indirect costs, with a maximum duration of 4 years.  Cost-sharing is not required.  Proposals with budgets exceeding the total award limits will not be considered.

Eligibility Information:
Public nonprofit institutions/organizations (includes public institutions of higher education and hospitals) and private nonprofit institutions/organizations (includes private institutions of higher education and hospitals) located in the U.S., state and local governments, Federally Recognized Indian Tribal Governments, and U.S. territories or possessions are eligible to apply.  See full announcement for more details.

Application Materials:
To apply under this solicitation, use the application package available at Grants.gov (for further submission information see Section IV.E. “Submission Instructions and other Submission Requirements”).  The necessary forms for submitting a STAR application will be found on the National Center for Environmental Research (NCER) web site, http://epa.govhttps://www.epa.gov/research-grants/funding-opportunities-how-apply-and-required-forms. If your organization is not currently registered with Grants.gov, you need to allow approximately one week to complete the registration process.  This registration, and electronic submission of your application, must be performed by an authorized representative of your organization.

If you do not have the technical capability to utilize the Grants.gov application submission process for this solicitation, call 1-800-490-9194 or send a webmail message to https://www.epa.gov/research-grants/forms/contact-us-about-research-grants at least 15 calendar days before the submission deadline to assure timely receipt of alternate submission instructions.  In your message  provide the funding opportunity number and title of the program, specify that you are requesting alternate submission instructions, and provide a telephone number, fax number, and an email address, if available.  Alternate instructions will be e-mailed whenever possible.  Any applications submitted through alternate submission methods must comply with all the provisions of this Request for Applications (RFA), including Section IV, and be received by the solicitation closing date identified above.

Agency Contacts:
Eligibility Contact: James Gentry (gentry.james@epa.gov); phone: 703-347-8093
Electronic Submissions: Ron Josephson (josephson.ron@epa.gov); phone: 703-308-0442
Technical Contact: Anne Sergeant (sergeant.anne@epa.gov); phone: 703-347-8105

I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

A. Introduction
Despite years of research, data collection, and planning, the Chesapeake Bay remains in poor condition.  Local efforts to improve the Bay have made some headway but have been limited by various interest groups’ conflicting goals.  The 2009 Chesapeake EcoCheck Report Card (Chesapeake EcoCheck, 2009) scored its Bay Health Index, based on six indicators, at 46 percent—a C (http://www.eco-check.org/reportcard/chesapeake/2009/ ).  (For reference, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation [CBF] believes that a “Saved Bay” would score 70 percent [CBF, 2010].)  The single largest culprit is excess nutrients. These may come from wastewater treatment plants, stormwater runoff from urban/suburban areas, runoff from farmland, or air pollution.   Other stressors include development, overharvest, agriculture, and climate change.  Presidential Executive Order 13508 directs the Federal government to lead efforts to restore and protect the Chesapeake Bay, and offers an opportunity to develop new, holistic approaches that incorporate the best of successful programs and apply them to better manage the Bay.  The National Research Council (NRC, 2009a) notes that urban stormwater, although well-characterized, is a growing problem, and that new control approaches are needed.  Some of its many recommendations include a holistic approach to improve aquatic life protection, nonstructural controls, more research on their effectiveness, and management by watershed rather than political boundaries.  The NRC also identifies retrofits to existing stormwater controls as a unique opportunity for progress.

EPA plans to support research to identify collaborative approaches to reduce urban stormwater inputs into Chesapeake Bay.  Research areas of interest include:  [1] applying existing stormwater-reduction techniques in new ways; [2] developing new techniques and technologies; [3] identifying the reasons existing strategies have succeeded or failed; [4] and developing methods and metrics to document water-quality improvements in Chesapeake Bay tributaries.  Investigators may either develop an integrated strategy or a series of sector-specific strategies such as for residential areas, industrial settings, commercial developments, or transportation infrastructure.  EPA is particularly interested in proposals for integrated, transdisciplinary research centers that address the interest areas above, and advance scientific understanding of how to influence human and institutional behavior to prevent pollution from entering Chesapeake Bay.

B. Background
This funding opportunity—the “Sustainable Chesapeake” program—is modeled after the EPA’s Collaborative Science & Technology Network for Sustainability (CNS) grant program.  CNS is a cornerstone of the EPA Office of Research and Development’s transition to sustainability (http://epa.govhttps://www.epa.gov/research-grants/cns/).  Funded projects have tracked success against short- and long-term environmental, economic, and social measures; connected diverse sets of partners including universities, federal agencies, cities, states, regional planning organizations, nonprofit organizations, and industry; and transferred tools, approaches, and lessons to other states, localities, or regions.  In its CNS project “Using Market Forces to Implement Sustainable Stormwater Management,” the City of Portland, OR has reduced stormwater (and its associated nutrients, pesticides, hydrocarbons, and sediments) inputs into waterbodies through its Clean River program, and expects to avoid considerable stormwater treatment costs.  (See Collaborative Science & Technology Network for Sustainability (2004) and Collaborative Science And Technology Network For Sustainability (2006) for project descriptions for the full CNS portfolio)  The “Sustainable Chesapeake” program will employ a similar approach, in which multiple entities will collaborate to explore new environmental-protection approaches for the Chesapeake Bay that are systems-oriented, forward-looking, preventive, and collaborative.  The program will also address long-term sustainability of stormwater-management approaches.

There are many other stormwater-management strategies that consider sustainability. Examples include certain Best Management Practices (BMPs), Green Infrastructure (GI), or Low-Impact Development (LID) such as Washington, DC’s RiverSmart Rooftops, Philadelphia’s Green Infrastructure Plan, and Chicago’s Green Alleys program . Another approach is to recognize stormwater as a lost resource (Delaware Riverkeeper, 2001); this creates incentives to reduce peak flows downstream by encouraging water-resource managers to look for opportunities to enhance groundwater recharge and water re-use at a community scale (see, for instance, Charles River Watershed Association’s “Conservation Tips”).

Bay Setting:
The Chesapeake Bay is one of the world’s largest estuaries, with a 64,000 mi² watershed that includes parts of Delaware, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia, as well as Washington D.C.  About 17 million people live in the watershed, with over half of them near or along its 11,600-mile tidal shoreline.

Since colonial times, the Bay has lost half of its forested shoreline, over half of its wetlands, nearly 90 percent of its underwater grasses, and more than 98 percent of its oysters.  During the 350 years between 1600 and 1950, about 1.7 million watershed acres were lost to development.  During the 30 years between 1950 and 1980, the Bay watershed lost an additional 2.7 million acres to development (CBP, 2010).

The current leading threat to the Chesapeake Bay is excess nitrogen and phosphorus pollution that destroys habitat and causes fish kills.  Major sources include agriculture, sewage treatment plants, runoff from urban and suburban areas, and air pollution from automobiles, factories, and power plants.  Other threats to the Bay include sprawl, toxic pollution, and poor fisheries management. 

The Tragedy of the Commons:
Human development and exploitation have made the Chesapeake Bay a victim of the “Tragedy of the Commons” phenomenon described by Garrett Hardin (1968), in which resource users make choices for their own individual benefit, even while knowing that others will make similar choices and ultimately degrade the resource for all.  Even those who act altruistically by conserving the resource may still lose their short-term benefits because others continue to take their share.  More recently, the NRC’s Committee on the Human Dimensions of Global Change, in “The Drama of the Commons,” explored several explanations for this phenomenon and advocated several potential remedies, including improved governance, exploration and clarification of resource users’ roles, exploration of the linkages across institutions, and developing multiple evaluative criteria, while recognizing that no single strategy will be sufficient (NRC, 2002).  These documents highlight the importance of social factors in developing strategies to improve the Bay.

Climate Change:
Higher temperatures, altered weather patterns, and increased storm intensity have already been observed in the Mid-Atlantic region.  Future climate change could increase evaporation from soils, evapotranspiration from vegetation, and water demand and use by people, and may cause many other changes, including timing of coastal inversion layers and seasonal nutrient upwelling, the amount of precipitation, the proportion of rain to snow, the intensity, duration, or frequency of the precipitation events, and stormwater volume and behavior in the Chesapeake Bay region (Karl et al., 2009; Pyke et al., 2008; Titus et al., 2009).  The magnitude of climate change impacts will depend on interactions with local land-uses and changes, watershed characteristics, and management practices.

Development:
About 90,000 people move into the Chesapeake Bay watershed each year, and with that influx comes increased impervious surface, pollution, and demand for natural resources.  Although various programs have reduced stressors in several categories (e.g., toxics, wastewater), nutrients and sediments associated with urban stormwater are still increasing over time (Executive Order 13508, 2010).  Strategies to reduce these stressors—the only types that are increasing—are critical to improving Bay water quality.

Impervious surfaces:
Paved areas, other waterproof surfaces, and compacted soils can adversely affect waterbodies in several ways:  The precipitation that flows over them moves faster and causes more erosion; surface heat is transferred and the water can hold less oxygen; and pollutants are swept up by the water and delivered to tributaries.  If shorelines are armored with impervious surfaces, habitat for aquatic organisms is destroyed.  Although it is commonly believed that aquatic ecosystems do not exhibit adverse effects at impervious surface area less than 10 percent, Baker and King (2010; see also King and Baker 2010) developed an analytical method that can detect adverse effects in streams at impervious surface areas of 1 to 3 percent.

The specific Strategic Goal and Objective from the EPA’s Strategic Plan that relate to this solicitation are:

• Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water, Objective 2.3: Enhance Science and Research

The EPA’s Strategic Plan can be found at: https://www.epa.gov/ocfo/plan/2006/entire_report.pdf (PDF) (184 pp, 9.87 MB)

C. Authority and Regulations
The authority for this RFA and resulting awards is contained in the Clean Water Act, Section 104, 33 U.S.C. 1254.  For research with an international aspect, the above statutes are supplemented, as appropriate, by the National Environmental Policy Act, Section 102(2)(F).

Note that a project’s focus is to consist of activities within the statutory terms of EPA’s financial assistance authorities; specifically, the statute(s) listed above.  Generally, a project must address the causes, effects, extent, prevention, reduction, and elimination of air pollution, water pollution, solid/hazardous waste pollution, toxic substances control, or pesticide control depending on which statute(s) is listed above.  These activities should relate to the gathering or transferring of information or advancing the state of knowledge.  Proposals should emphasize this “learning” concept, as opposed to “fixing” an environmental problem via a well-established method.  Proposals relating to other topics which are sometimes included within the term “environment” such as recreation, conservation, restoration, protection of wildlife habitats, etc., must describe the relationship of these topics to the statutorily required purpose of pollution prevention and/or control.

Applicable regulations include: 40 CFR Part 30 (Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit Organizations), 40 CFR Part 31 (Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments) and 40 CFR Part 40 (Research and Demonstration Grants).  Applicable OMB Circulars include: OMB Circular A-21 (Cost Principles for Educational Institutions) relocated to 2 CFR Part 220 , OMB Circular A-87 (Cost Principles for State, Local and Indian Tribal Governments) relocated to 2 CFR Part 225, OMB Circular A-102 (Grants and Cooperative Agreements With State and Local Governments), OMB Circular A-110 (Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Other Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals and Other Non-Profit Organizations) relocated to 2 CFR Part 215, and OMB Circular A-122 (Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations) relocated to 2 CFR Part 230.

D. Specific Research Areas of Interest/Expected Outputs and Outcomes
Research Centers
This RFA is a new competition for “Sustainable Chesapeake” Research Centers under which EPA is seeking proposals for integrated, transdisciplinary research centers that will advance scientific understanding of how to influence human and institutional behavior to prevent pollution from entering Chesapeake Bay.  Presidential Executive Order 13508 (Executive Order, 2010) directs the Federal government to lead efforts to restore and protect the Chesapeake Bay.  To that end, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as part of its Science to Achieve Results (STAR) program, is seeking applications for “Sustainable Chesapeake” Research Centers to explore sustainable urban stormwater management.  EPA is specifically interested in supporting research to identify new, collaborative approaches to reduce urban stormwater inputs into Chesapeake Bay.

Applicants should take an integrated approach to their study designs.  In promoting integrated, transdisciplinary research, EPA seeks applications that demonstrate that the research team has worked together to design the program, to ensure each project reflects the input and interactions of different disciplines, and that the Center as a whole reflects the collective thinking of a multidisciplinary team.  It is not sufficient to list a collection of insular projects even if they address complementary topics.  EPA recognizes that tight scientific integration can be a challenge, but this is a high priority.  Applicants are expected to: demonstrate how the various projects contained within their proposals are integrated; encourage participation of investigators with the needed expertise and qualifications; and employ cutting-edge approaches.  This funding presents the opportunity for investigators from different disciplines to work together on larger problems than can be addressed in a grant proposal for a single research project.  An example of such integration might include ecologists, water-resource managers, engineers, and social scientists working together to better understand how to simultaneously reduce stormwater discharges from several sectors in a particular Chesapeake Bay tributary. 

Applicants are encouraged to bring together investigators from other departments and/or institutions, provided they can demonstrate both effective research-planning integration and approaches for maintaining that integration when the research is implemented.  Centers should take a holistic approach to stormwater-related stressors, and provide for regular communication among team members.

Each proposed research project under the Sustainable Chesapeake Research Centers program should be based on a collaborative, transdisciplinary, multi-entity partnership.  Each proposed research project within the Center should address sustainable urban stormwater management and include:

1. A physical/biological science component such as
   • developing clear stormwater-management goals,
   • identifying existing and developing new techniques and technologies to reduce stormwater volume and keep associated pollutants from entering the Bay, and/or
   • examining existing water-resource management programs to identify which strategies are most and least effective, and the factors responsible for their respective performance (this could be conducted at regional and local scales)
2. A social science component such as
   • identifying the most compelling reasons that influence individuals’ or communities’ adoption of behaviors that reduce stressors or protect the environment or
   • economic analysis that includes environmental, social, and economic benefits to a watershed or community
3. Measures of success or progress, including
   • developing and promoting the use of statistically valid protocols to evaluate program effectiveness and
   • applying these metrics to evaluate the project’s success, progress, or effectiveness.

It is understood that not all activities may fit neatly into the categories shown above; however, all three components should be represented within each research project.  To the extent practicable, applicants should incorporate sustainability principles into their proposed activities.

Context for Research Questions

Urban stormwater: For purposes of this research opportunity, urban stormwater is water that flows overland from developed areas including subdivisions, large cities, highways, commercial developments, industrial areas, and transportation centers. This may include both regulated (point source) and unregulated (non-point source) discharges.

Communities: “Community” need not be limited to a municipality or neighborhood. It may be defined, for instance, as households; a professional community such as lawn care, transportation, or land-use planning; or users of a particular Bay resource. Different communities will likely value the Bay for different reasons or attributes, and may require individual metrics to evaluate success. Community-engagement efforts may employ cognitive anthropology, ethnography, or cultural models (e.g., Paolisso, 2002) to better understand a particular group’s behavior, beliefs, and expectations regarding the Bay.

Processes: Investigations should focus on both technological and behavioral (individual and community) strategies that lead to reductions in stormwater discharges to the Bay, as demonstrated by improvements in measured chemical, physical, and/or biological processes. Applicants may explore options such as (for example) physical devices (e.g., rain gardens), local regulatory approaches, incentive programs, or education campaigns.

Watersheds: Proposed projects should consider the site or activity’s role in improving water quality in its respective watershed (e.g., Choptank River) rather than political boundaries, yet recognize that many of the entities that can implement such improvements must work within jurisdictional boundaries.

Social Factors: The Chesapeake Bay Watershed is home to some of the nation’s most prosperous counties as well as areas where telephones and indoor plumbing are not common. Some areas host significant immigrant or minority populations. Proposed economic analyses should consider whether ecosystem, social, and economic benefits accrue widely or are concentrated in certain socioeconomic areas, particularly if an activity’s costs are borne elsewhere. Applicants may wish to explore how human and societal phenomena affect and can be used to accomplish environmental change. For instance, persuasive technology such as instant mileage indicators in hybrid vehicles induces many owners to maximize their mileage through “hypermiling.” Another example is a utility (e.g., Southern California Edison) offering programs that encourage customers to reduce power consumption by offering reports that compare their usage with that of their neighbors. Applicants may also wish to explore choice architecture the idea that the way in which choices are presented influences decision making (Thaler and Sunstein, 2009).

Sustainability: Proposed projects should be placed in the context of the “triple bottom line” of continued long-term environmental, social, and economic success. The U.N. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED, also known as the Brundtland Commission) said “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” (WECD, 1987) For this research opportunity, examples might include use of native species, community acceptance, and cost savings over traditional stormwater management approaches.

Data sources: Applicants are encouraged to use existing data such as that found at the USGS National Ambient Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) program (particularly the urban-focused work at http://co.water.usgs.gov/nawqa/urbanPortal/), NOAA fisheries data (see http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/gis/data/fisheries.htm), Maryland Biological Stream Survey (MBSS; see http://www.dnr.state.md.us/streams/MBSS.asp), etc., and should document why the chosen data sets are appropriate for the intended application. If combining datasets, investigators should explain why it is appropriate to combine them (e.g., provide information about collection methods, study design, etc.).

In conducting its research, the Center should demonstrate a willingness to use, as appropriate, existing or future databases as they become available. In addition, the Centers are encouraged to seek out and participate collaboratively with data sharing or monitoring efforts.

Partnerships: Individual projects should emphasize collaboration. A partnership may be described as a group in which actors from different sectors voluntarily work to develop a product that no single actor could effectively produce on its own (NRC, 2009b). Applicants may wish to take advantage of the “plan, do, check, refine” approach described in “Enhancing the Effectiveness of Sustainability Partnerships” (NRC, 2009b). Partnerships should be collaborations of organizations that materially contribute to the project, not simply entities providing endorsement.

Examples of partnerships include but are not limited to:

• a non-governmental organization (NGO) and a highway department; 
  a university, a municipality, and an NGO; 
  a transit authority and a university;
  two NGOs, a university, a parks agency, and a local government department of environmental protection;
  multiple universities;
  an NGO, a municipal stormwater authority, and a military installation.*

*Note that in this instance, only the NGO and the local government could receive funding under such a partnership; Federal agencies are not eligible for EPA grant assistance. However, a Federal entity may allow other organizations to conduct research on their premises if the principal purpose of the study is to further scientific and public (i.e., non-Federal) understanding of the research subject. Therefore, the nature of such a study would be directed towards a general scientific audience; this may include recommendations for further study or critiques of prior research, but may not include advice to a Federal agency for improved environmental management of Federal land or property.

(See Collaborative Science & Technology Network for Sustainability (2004) and Collaborative Science And Technology Network For Sustainability (2006) for more partnership examples.)

Complementary and consistency with other activities:

To the extent practicable, proposed activities should strive for consistency with the livability principles described in the interagency Partnership for Sustainable Communities, which are: [1] provide more transportation choices [2] promote equitable, affordable housing [3] enhance economic competitiveness [4] support existing communities [5] coordinate policies and leverage investment [6] value communities and neighborhoods (see http://www.smartgrowth.org/misc/default.asp?art=83). For instance, proposed work might include development of stormwater control features that are safe, human-scaled, aesthetically appealing, and serve as community focal points or amenities, and use local expertise to design, construct, and maintain them. Or projects could be integrated into community-revitalization efforts or green-jobs programs.

Proposed projects should also strive for consistency with the Urban Waters Initiative, particularly its goals of helping communities restore and reconnect with their waterways and surrounding land in order to restore and protect urban waters. (Urban Waters will also build upon ongoing efforts across the nation and will utilize strategies that have proven to be successful. It will also act to convene stakeholders, broker the exchange of knowledge, and leverage existing federal programs to promote urban water revitalization. See http://epa.gov/urbanwaters/.)

Example Research Questions

(Note: In developing proposals, applicants need not feel confined to these examples; they are intended only to illustrate the breadth of potential research questions.) In order to address each component, applicants may draw from these examples or develop one or more new questions, and may choose to address a single question or explore several related questions.

Physical/Biological Science

How can stormwater be harvested, stored or otherwise used as a resource by different sectors (e.g., transportation, residential, industrial, municipal)?

What are the watershed-level impacts of a particular stormwater trading program?

What are the cumulative terrestrial and aquatic ecosystem effects of stormwater management activities on a particular stream or watershed?

How effective are various operation and maintenance strategies (or none at all) in preserving the benefits of green infrastructure?

To what extent can natural hydrology be restored on an urban infill site?

Social Science

What are the best strategies for engaging a community or neighborhood with a neglected/impaired stream or wetland and transforming it into a cultural amenity?

How can stormwater be used as a community amenity, i.e., reduce energy consumption, enhance community livability, and enhance or restore ecosystem services?

How can innovative stormwater systems both improve water quality and help reduce municipal infrastructure costs (construction, materials and operation and management costs)?

What motivates people or organizations to take action to protect the environment?

Which GI/LID approaches are best suited for application on different types of properties (e.g., homes, businesses, public resources)?

Measures

How can the success of stormwater-reduction programs best be monitored and evaluated for both effectiveness and sustainability?

What are the associated ecosystem, societal, and economic benefits of improved stormwater management? Do they accrue in the community, or elsewhere?

What are the performance characteristics of various nonstructural stormwater controls?

How can we evaluate the success of human-oriented strategies such as choice architecture and persuasive technology? (See “Social Factors” above.)

Expected Outputs and Outcomes

Note to applicant: The term “output” means an environmental activity or effort, and associated work products, related to a specific environmental goal(s), (e.g., testing a new methodology), that will be produced or developed over a period of time under the agreement. The term “outcome” means the result, effect, or consequence that will occur from the above activity(ies) that is related to an environmental, behavioral, or health-related objective.

The expected outputs from this research will be scientific data and information on how best to influence human and institutional behavior to reduce stormwater inputs into Chesapeake Bay. These outputs are expected to include articles in peer-reviewed journals, websites, periodic reports, and presentations at scientific conferences. Additionally, proposed activities should generate products that states, tribes, and municipalities can use to develop stormwater management practices, inform their decisionmaking, and achieve their water-quality goals.

Expected outcomes include reduced stormwater volume, reduced impervious surface, improved water quality, and increased community engagement with local watersheds or waterbodies. Expected outcomes should be articulated in a way that expresses the spatial and temporal scale over which water-quality improvements are expected. Measures should be designed to detect those improvements at the appropriate spatial and temporal scales. (Because they are more easily measured than other parameters, the National Research Council (2009a) recommends that flow and impervious surface be considered as proxies for stormwater pollutant loading.) It is also expected that this information will both inform watershed and waterbody assessments and increase the efficiency and effectiveness of state, tribal, and local water-quality management strategies.

E. References
Baker, M.E. and King, R.S.  A new method for detecting and interpreting biodiversity and ecological community thresholds.  Methods in Ecology & Evolution doi: 10.1111/j.2041-210X.2009.00007.x  (2010)

Charles River Watershed Association (CWRA).  Conservation Tips. (http://www.crwa.org/watershed/tips/residents.html; accessed 23 August 2010)  (2010)

Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF).  Bay Area Facts.   (accessed 32 August 2010)

Chesapeake EcoCheck.  Chesapeake Bay Report Card.  http://www.eco-check.org/reportcard/chesapeake/2009/ (2009; accessed 23 August 2010)

Delaware Riverkeeper.  Stormwater Runoff, Lost Resource or Community Asset?  Washington Crossing, PA (2001)

Executive Order 13508, Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration http://executiveorder.chesapeakebay.net/ (2010; accessed 23 August 2010)

Hardin, G.  The Tragedy of the Commons.  Science 13 December 1968 162: 1243-1248  (1968)

Karl, T.R., Melillo, J.M, and Peterson, T.C., eds.  Global Climate Change in the United States.  Cambridge University Press.  (2009)

King, R.S. and Baker, M.E.  Considerations for analyzing ecological community thresholds in response to anthropogenic environmental gradients.  Journal of the North American Benthological Society: Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 998-1008.  (2010)

National  Research Council (NRC).  The Drama of the Commons.  National Academies Press, Washington.  ISBN-13: 978-0-309-08250-1.  (2002)

National Research Council (NRC).  Urban Stormwater Management in the United States.  National Academies Press, Washington. ISBN-13: 978-0-309-12539-0.  (2009a)

National Research Council (NRC).  Enhancing the Effectiveness of Sustainability Partnerships.  National Academies Press, Washington.  ISBN-13: 978-0-309-12993-0. (2009b)

Paolisso, M.  Blue Crabs and Controversy on the Chesapeake Bay:  A Cultural Model for Understanding Watermen’s Reasoning about Blue Crab Management.  Human Organization 61(3): 226-239.  (2002)

Paul, M.J & J.L. Meyer.  Streams in the Urban Landscape.  Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 32:333–65.  (2001)

Pyke, C.R., Najjar, R.G., Adams, M.B., Breitburg, D., Kemp, M., Hershner, C., Howarth, R., Mulholland, M., Paolisso, M., Secor, D., Sellner, K., Wardrop, D., and Wood, R. Climate Change and the Chesapeake Bay: State-of-the-Science Review and Recommendations. A Report from the Chesapeake Bay Program Science and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC), Annapolis, MD.   (2008)

Roy, A.H. et al.  Impediments and Solutions to Sustainable, Watershed-Scale Urban Stormwater Management:  Lessons from Australia and the United States.  Environmental Management (42):344-359.  (2008)

Thaler, R.H. and Sunstein, C.R.  Nudge.  Penguin Books, New York.  (2009)

Titus, J.G. et al.  Coastal Sensitivity to Sea-Level Rise: A Focus on the Mid-Atlantic Region.  Washington D.C.: A report by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research.  (2009)

Walsh, C.J. et al.  The Urban Stream Syndrome:  Current Knowledge and the Search for a Cure.  Journal of the North American Benthological Society, 2005, 24(3):706–723.  (2005)

World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED).  Our Common Future Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-282080-X.  (1987)

F. Special Requirements
Agency policy and ethical considerations prevent EPA technical staff and managers from providing applicants with information that may create an unfair competitive advantage.  Consequently, EPA employees will not review, comment, advise, and/or provide technical assistance to applicants preparing applications in response to EPA RFAs.  EPA employees cannot endorse any particular application.

Multiple Investigator applications may be submitted as: (1) a single Lead Principal Investigator (PI) application with Co-PI(s) or (2) a Multiple PI application (with a single Contact PI).  If you choose to submit a Multiple PI application, you must follow the specific instructions provided in Sections IV. and V. of this RFA.  For further information, please see the EPA Implementation Plan for Policy on Multiple Principal Investigators.

The application must include a plan (see “Data Plan” in section IV.B.6.c.) to make available to the public all data generated from observations, analyses, or model development (primary data) and any secondary (or existing) data used under an agreement awarded from this RFA.  The data must be available in a format and with documentation such that they may be used by others in the scientific community.

These awards may involve the collection of “Geospatial Information,” which includes information that identifies the geographic location and characteristics of natural or constructed features or boundaries on the Earth or applications, tools, and hardware associated with the generation, maintenance, or distribution of such information.  This information may be derived from, among other things, a Geographic Positioning System (GPS), remote sensing, mapping, charting, and surveying technologies, or statistical data. 

As described more fully in Section IV, each application must address the following items (for content and form of application submission and page limitations, see Section IV.B):

 

 

 

1. Center Description (5-page limit): Applications should describe the overall goals, objectives, and approach for the Center, including how the Center will pursue a multidisciplinary and thematic approach to the problems to be investigated.
2. Research Project Descriptions (15-page limit for each project description):  Applications should contain one or more projects that address a theme related to the research questions described above in Section D.  Each of the specific individual research projects should be completely described according to the instructions in Section IV below.  Individual project descriptions should explain how the project fits into the overall Center program and relates to other projects in the proposal.
3. Administrative Core Unit Description (15-page limit):  Each Center shall have an Administrative Core Unit which provides overall oversight, coordination and integration of the Center’s activities.  As part of the Administrative Core description, applications should include a Center Integration Plan describing how the program will be integrated internally.  Center proposals should take a multidisciplinary approach.  The Center’s Integration Plan, at minimum, should indicate how programmatic and funding decisions will be made; how project objectives will be successfully achieved in a timely manner; how investigators from different disciplines within the Center will communicate on a regular basis about the development and progress of Center projects; how progress toward achieving the expected results (outputs and outcomes) will be monitored and measured; who will set priorities, and who will be responsible for implementing the integration plan, assuring compliance with the plan, and evaluating its effectiveness in achieving integration within the Center.

   The Center proposal should also address how the Center will disseminate research findings and other information.  Publishing research results in scientific journals is essential; however, it is not sufficient.  Plans for Center websites and other means of communicating results should be described.

   The Administrative Core should also provide for coordination and integration with the other Center, as described in Section VI (see “Coordination After Grant Award”).

4. If appropriate, a Center can elect to have one or more Facility Support Cores that provide a technique, service, or instrumentation that will enhance ongoing research efforts across the Center’s specific projects. Examples of such facilities are analytical chemistry laboratories, statistics centers, etc. The application should provide a compelling rationale for why such a core is needed and how it will be used by multiple projects within the proposed center (15-page limit per Facility Support Core).

II. AWARD INFORMATION

It is anticipated that a total of approximately $4.4 million will be awarded under this announcement, depending on the availability of funds, quality of applications received, and other applicable considerations.  The EPA anticipates funding approximately two awards under this RFA.  Requests for amounts in excess of a total of $2.2 million, including direct and indirect costs, will not be considered.  The total project period requested in an application submitted for this RFA may not exceed four years.  The EPA reserves the right to reject all applications and make no awards, or make fewer awards than anticipated, under this RFA.  The EPA reserves the right to make additional awards under this announcement, consistent with Agency policy, if additional funding becomes available after the original selections are made.  Any additional selections for awards will be made no later than six months after the original selection decisions.

EPA intends to award only grants under this announcement.

Under a grant, EPA scientists and engineers are not permitted to be substantially involved in the execution of the research.  However, EPA encourages interaction between its own laboratory scientists and grant Principal Investigators after the award of an EPA grant for the sole purpose of exchanging information in research areas of common interest that may add value to their respective research activities.  This interaction must be incidental to achieving the goals of the research under a grant.  Interaction that is “incidental” does not involve resource commitments.

III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

A. Eligible Applicants
Public nonprofit institutions/organizations (includes public institutions of higher education and hospitals) and private nonprofit institutions/organizations (includes private institutions of higher education and hospitals) located in the U.S., state and local governments, Federally Recognized Indian Tribal Governments, and U.S. territories or possessions are eligible to apply.  Profit-making firms are not eligible to receive assistance agreements from the EPA under this program.

Eligible nonprofit organizations include any organizations that meet the definition of nonprofit in OMB Circular A-122, located at 2 CFR Part 230.  However, nonprofit organizations described in Section 501(c) (4) of the Internal Revenue Code that lobby are not eligible to apply.

National laboratories funded by Federal Agencies (Federally-Funded Research and Development Centers, “FFRDCs”) may not apply.  FFRDC employees may cooperate or collaborate with eligible applicants within the limits imposed by applicable legislation and regulations.  They may participate in planning, conducting, and analyzing the research directed by the applicant, but may not direct projects on behalf of the applicant organization.  The institution, organization, or governance receiving the award may provide funds through its assistance agreement from the EPA to an FFRDC for research personnel, supplies, equipment, and other expenses directly related to the research.  However, salaries for permanent FFRDC employees may not be provided through this mechanism.

Federal Agencies may not apply.  Federal employees are not eligible to serve in a principal leadership role on an assistance agreement, and may not receive salaries or augment their Agency’s appropriations in other ways through awards made under this program.

The applicant institution may enter into an agreement with a Federal Agency to purchase or utilize unique supplies or services unavailable in the private sector to the extent authorized by law.  Examples are purchase of satellite data, census data tapes, chemical reference standards, analyses, or use of instrumentation or other facilities not available elsewhere.  A written justification for federal involvement must be included in the application.  In addition, an appropriate form of assurance that documents the commitment, such as a letter of intent from the Federal Agency involved, should be included.

Potential applicants who are uncertain of their eligibility should contact James Gentry (gentry.james@epa.gov) in NCER, phone 703-347-8093.

B. Cost-Sharing
Institutional cost-sharing is not required.

C. Other
Applications must substantially comply with the application submission instructions and requirements set forth in Section IV of this announcement or they will be rejected.  In addition, where a page limitation is expressed in Section IV with respect to parts of the application, pages in excess of the page limit will not be reviewed.  Applications must be submitted to grants.gov (see Section IV.E. “Submission Instructions and Other Submission Requirements” for further information) on or before the solicitation closing date and time in Section IV of this announcement or they will be returned to the sender without further consideration.  Also, applications exceeding the funding limits or project period term described herein will be returned without review.  Further, applications that fail to demonstrate a public purpose of support or stimulation (e.g., by proposing research which primarily benefits a Federal program or provides a service for a Federal agency) will not be funded.

Each Center shall include an Administrative Core responsible for overall oversight, coordination and integration of the Center’s activities. Applications that do not include an Administrative Core in the proposed Center will be rejected.

Applications deemed ineligible for funding consideration will be notified within fifteen calendar days of the ineligibility determination.

IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

Formal instructions for submission through Grants.gov follow in Section E.

A. Internet Address to Request Application Package
Use the application package available at Grants.gov (see Section E. “Submission Instructions and Other Submission Requirements”).  Note: With the exception of the current and pending support form (available at http://epa.govhttps://www.epa.gov/research-grants/funding-opportunities-how-apply-and-required-forms), all necessary forms are included in the electronic application package.

An email will be sent by NCER to the Lead/Contact PI and the Administrative Contact (see below) to acknowledge receipt of the application and transmit other important information.  The email will be sent from receipt.application@epa.gov; emails to this address will not be accepted.  If you do not receive an email acknowledgment within 30 days of the submission closing date, immediately inform the Eligibility Contact shown in this solicitation.  Failure to do so may result in your application not being reviewed.  See Section E. “Submission Instructions and Other Submission Requirements” for additional information regarding the application receipt acknowledgment.

B. Content and Form of Application Submission
The application is made by submitting the materials described below. Applications must contain all information requested and be submitted in the formats described.

Summary of Page Limitations for Application Content:

The documents listed below must be single-spaced, with standard 12-point type and 1-inch margins on 8.5x11-inch paper. While these guidelines establish the minimum type size requirements, applicants are advised that readability is of paramount importance and should take precedence in selection of an appropriate font for use in the proposal.

The following page limitations may not be exceeded (excess pages will not be reviewed):

• Abstracts: 1-page abstract for the Center as a whole; 1-page abstracts for each proposed research project
• Research Plan: 5 pages for overall Center objectives, approach, and expected benefits; 15 pages for each research project description
• Research Cores: 15 pages for the Administrative Core; 15 pages for each Facility Support Core(s)
• Budget: Budget summary pages and project pages should include both annual budgets for each year, one through four, and cumulative totals for the entire four-year period:
  • 2-page summary for the total Center budget
    2 pages per research project
    2 pages for the Administrative Core and each Facility Support Core(s)
• Budget Justification: 2 pages per research project; 2 pages for the Administrative Core and each Facility Support Core(s)
• Quality Assurance Management Plan: 5 pages
• Data Plan: 2 pages

1. Standard Form 424

   The applicant must complete Standard Form 424. Instructions for completion of the SF424 are included with the form. (However, note that EPA requires that the entire requested dollar amount appear on the 424, not simply the proposed first year expenses.) The form must contain the signature of an authorized representative of the applying organization.

   Applicants are required to provide a "Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System" (DUNS) number when applying for federal grants or cooperative agreements. Organizations may receive a DUNS number by calling 1-866-705-5711 or by visiting the web site at http://www.dnb.com

   Executive Order 12372, "Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs," does not apply to the Office of Research and Development's research and training programs unless EPA has determined that the activities that will be carried out under the applicants' proposal (a) require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), or (b) do not require an EIS but will be newly initiated at a particular site and require unusual measures to limit the possibility of adverse exposure or hazard to the general public, or (c) have a unique geographic focus and are directly relevant to the governmental responsibilities of a State or local government within that geographic area.

   If EPA determines that Executive Order 12372 applies to an applicant's proposal, the applicant must follow the procedures in 40 CFR Part 29. The applicant must notify their state's single point of contact (SPOC). To determine whether their state participates in this process, and how to comply, applicants should consult http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants_spoc. If an applicant is in a State that does not have a SPOC, or the State has not selected research and development grants for intergovernmental review, the applicant must notify directly affected State, area wide, regional and local entities of its proposal.

   EPA will notify the successful applicant(s) if Executive Order 12372 applies to its proposal prior to award.

2. Key Contacts

   The applicant must complete the "Key Contacts" form found in the Grants.gov application package. An "Additional Key Contacts" form is also available at http://epa.govhttps://www.epa.gov/research-grants/funding-opportunities-how-apply-and-required-forms. The Key Contacts form should also be completed for major sub-agreements (i.e., primary investigators). Do not include information for consultants or other contractors. Please make certain that all contact information is accurate.

   For Multiple PI applications: The Additional Key Contacts form must be completed (see Section I.F. for further information). Note: The Contact PI must be affiliated with the institution submitting the application. EPA will direct all communications related to scientific, technical, and budgetary aspects of the project to the Contact PI; however, any information regarding an application will be shared with any PI upon request. The Contact PI is to be listed on the Key Contact Form as the Project Manager/Principal Investigator (the term Project Manager is used on the Grants.gov form, the term Principal Investigator is used on the form located on NCER's web site). For additional PIs, complete the Major Co-Investigator fields and identify PI status next to the name (e.g., "Name: John Smith, Principal Investigator").

3. Table of Contents

   Provide a list of the major subdivisions of the application indicating the page number on which each section begins.

4. Abstract (1 page abstract for the Center as a whole; 1 page abstracts for each proposed research project)

   The abstract is a very important document in the review process. Therefore, it is critical that the abstract accurately describes the research being proposed and conveys all the essential elements of the research. Also, the abstracts of applications that receive funding will be posted on the NCER web site.

   The abstract should include the information described below (a-h). Examples of abstracts for current grants may be found on the NCER web site.

   1. Funding Opportunity Title and Number for this proposal.
   2. Project Title: Use the exact title of your project as it appe