EPA-G2022-STAR-J1 FY 2022.pdf

COVID-19 Update: EPA is providing flexibilities to applicants experiencing challenges related to COVID-19. Please see the Flexibilities Available to Organizations Impacted by COVID-19 clause in Section IV of EPA’s Solicitation Clauses.

OVERVIEW INFORMATION

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Science Advisor, Policy and Engagement Office of Research and Development Science to Achieve Results (STAR) Program

ENHANCED AQUIFER RECHARGE PERFORMANCE

AND POTENTIAL RISK IN DIFFERENT REGIONAL

AND HYDROGEOLOGIC SETTINGS

This is the initial announcement of this funding opportunity.

Funding Opportunity Number: EPA-G2022-STAR-J1

Assistance Listing Number: 66.509

Solicitation Opening Date: September 16, 2022 Solicitation Closing Date: November 9, 2022: 11:59:59 pm Eastern Time

Table of Contents

I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

A. Introduction

B. Background C. Authority and Regulations D. Specific Research Areas of Interest/Expected Outputs and Outcomes E. References F. Special Requirements G. Additional Provisions for Applicants Incorporated into the Solicitation

II. AWARD INFORMATION

III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

A. Eligible Applicants B. Cost Sharing C. Other

IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

A. Grants.gov Submittal Requirements and Limited Exception Procedures https://www.epa.gov/grants/epa-solicitation-clauses

B. Application Package Information C. Content and Form of Application Submission D. Submission Dates and Times E. Funding Restrictions F. Submission Instructions and Other Submission Requirements

V. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION

A. Peer Review B. Relevancy Review C. Past Performance History Review D. Human Subjects Research Statement (HSRS) Review E. Evaluation of the Scientific Data Management Plan F. Funding Decisions

VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

A. Award Notices B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

VII. AGENCY CONTACTS

I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

For Updates and Additional Information see https://www.epa.gov/research-grants/research-funding-opportunities.

View research awarded under previous solicitations at https://www.epa.gov/research-grants/research-grant-areas.

A. Introduction

One of the high-priority research areas identified by the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Research and Development (ORD) and the National Water Reuse Action Plan (WRAP) is to establish best practices for enhanced aquifer recharge including the use of impaired sources of water. Under the 1996 Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act, the responsibility for ensuring public water systems provide safe drinking water is divided among EPA, states, tribal nations, water systems and the public (U.S. EPA 2022). The WRAP was developed in collaboration with federal, state, tribal, local, and water sector partners to build technical, financial, and institutional capacity for communities to drive progress on water reuse practices. This research is relevant to WRAP action 7.4 on increasing the understanding of current aquifer storage and recovery practices.

Groundwater overdraft can lead to many issues that impact water quality and water security, including lowering of the water table, saltwater intrusion, and aquifer compaction. Enhanced aquifer recharge (EAR) can be an important strategy to augment water supplies and improve water security by restoring overdrawn aquifers (enhancing water quantity/storage) or saline aquifers (enhancing water quality) (Ross and Hasnain 2018). For the purpose of this Request for Applications (RFA), EAR is defined as the intentional recharge of aquifers where more recharge occurs than would otherwise be expected through natural processes alone. EAR can be used synonymously with managed aquifer recharge (MAR) and can involve the use of recycled https://www.epa.gov/research-grants/research-funding-opportunities https://www.epa.gov/research-grants/research-funding-opportunities https://www.epa.gov/research-grants/research-grant-areas https://www.epa.gov/research-grants/research-grant-areas municipal wastewater through indirect potable reuse. While an active topic of research for many years, significant knowledge gaps remain concerning “best practices” in the design, siting, performance (hydrologic and water quality), longevity, maintenance, and monitoring of EAR in different land use and hydrogeologic settings. A better understanding of these areas will assist communities throughout the United States in evaluating whether and how to invest in safe and sustainable EAR strategies for enhancing water supplies, protecting water quality, maintaining aquatic ecosystems, reducing land subsidence, avoiding sea water intrusion, and other end goals.

EPA is issuing this RFA to advance the scientific and technical foundation of EAR. More specifically, research is requested to better understand fit for purpose and locally appropriate uses and risks of EAR using different source waters, with different end goals in diverse land use and hydrogeologic settings.

The Science to Achieve Results (STAR) Program’s goal is to stimulate and support scientific and engineering research that advances EPA’s mission to protect human health and the environment.

It is a competitive, peer-reviewed, extramural research program that provides access to the nation’s best scientists and engineers in academic and other nonprofit research institutions.

STAR funds research on the environmental and public health effects of air quality, environmental changes, water quality and quantity, hazardous waste, toxic substances, and pesticides.

EPA recognizes that it is important to engage all available minds to address the environmental challenges the Nation faces. At the same time, EPA seeks to expand the environmental conversation by including members of communities which may have not previously participated in such dialogues to participate in EPA programs. For this reason, EPA strongly encourages all eligible applicants identified in Section III, including minority serving institutions (MSIs), to apply under this opportunity.

For purposes of this solicitation, the following are considered MSIs:

1. Historically Black Colleges and Universities, as defined by the Higher Education Act (20 U.S.C. § 1061(2)). A list of these schools can be found at Historically Black Colleges and Universities;

2. Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs), as defined by the Higher Education Act (20 U.S.C. § 1059c(b)(3) and (d)(1)). A list of these schools can be found at American Indian Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities;

3. Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), as defined by the Higher Education Act (20 U.S.C. § 1101a(a)(5)). A list of these schools can be found at Hispanic-Serving Institutions;

4. Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions; (AANAPISIs), as defined by the Higher Education Act (20 U.S.C. § 1059g(b)(2)). A list of these schools can be found at Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander-Serving Institutions; and https://sites.ed.gov/whhbcu/one-hundred-and-five-historically-black-colleges-and-universities/ https://sites.ed.gov/whhbcu/one-hundred-and-five-historically-black-colleges-and-universities/ https://sites.ed.gov/whiaiane/tribes-tcus/tribal-colleges-and-universities/ https://sites.ed.gov/whiaiane/tribes-tcus/tribal-colleges-and-universities/ https://sites.ed.gov/hispanic-initiative/hispanic-serving-institutions-hsis/ https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1XVkOWKMDORm53pvU0L8EPsrJC94&msa=0&ie=UTF8&t=m&z=3&source=embed&ll=40.58644586187277%2C-148.28228249999984

5. Predominately Black Institutions (PBIs), as defined by the Higher Education Act of 2008, 20 U.S.C. 1059e(b)(6). A list of these schools can be found at Predominately Black Institutions.

B. Background

In many locations, EAR can be a cost-effective way to augment water supplies and increase water security. Since the 1960s, the implementation of EAR has increased at an accelerated rate across the United States (Dillion et al. 2019). However, the rate of adoption is not keeping pace with increasing groundwater extraction (Dillon et al. 2019). According to recent data, an estimated 20 percent of the world’s aquifers are being over-exploited, as many people depend on aquifers for their water supply (Ross and Hasnain 2018). The overuse of groundwater can lead to many issues that impact water quality and water security. Other impacts include land subsidence and infrastructure damage, risks to groundwater-dependent ecosystems, and economic losses, including increased groundwater pumping costs and well replacement or deepening (Moran 2014). Additionally, climate change may exacerbate the need for aquifer recharge in areas experiencing increased intensity, frequency, and duration of drought and extreme heat (Taylor et

al. 2013). Wildland fires are also expected to increase in severity with drier and warmer climate patterns resulting in decreased water infiltration through post-burn hydrophobic soil (Parise and Cannon 2012).

EAR can be employed to augment water resources directly or indirectly for a variety of end uses.

Aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) and other related practices can be considered a subset of EAR practices (NRC 2008). Examples include riverbank spreading, infiltration basins, dry wells, injection wells, and other engineered structures and practices such as the use of sinkholes or other natural landscape features. As described here, EAR does not include small-scale projects designed primarily for stormwater management such as green infrastructure (this was addressed in a previous RFA). However, green infrastructure demonstrated at a larger, community or regional scale can be considered as a component of larger EAR systems. EAR can increase water resource resiliency to mitigate the impacts of drought and flooding, provide ways to combat saltwater intrusion near coastal communities, provide potable water where native groundwater has high mineral or metals content, help minimize land subsidence and aquifer compaction due to over consumption of existing groundwater supplies, aid in addressing surface water quality issues and baseflow, and yield other benefits. In some cases, EAR can also be implemented to reduce demand on drinking water utilities by supplying water for irrigation and industrial uses (Jakeman et al. 2016).

Water managers also need to integrate seasonal and long-term increases and decreases in precipitation into their water supply planning. In addition to accounting for increasing climatic spatiotemporal variability, EAR can be used as a risk management tool to provide inflows to surface water during droughts, or to store excess water when surface water levels are unusually high. Although it is currently used less in northeastern and midwestern states, EAR is a popular https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=1wlIi3j7gtlNq_w-0NKAb2bF2VmY&ie=UTF&msa=0&ll=37.35160769312532%2C-96.17229800000001&z=4 and reliable water supply option in southeast, southwest, and western states, and could become an essential tool to meet future water requirements in other regions (U.S. EPA 2021a).

Given different end goals, diverse land use, and different hydrologic settings, more information is needed on fit for purpose and locally appropriate uses and potential risks of EAR. While EAR is being implemented at aquifers across the United States, goals, outcomes, methods and other requirements of EAR operations vary at different locations. The following examples illustrate the differences between locations:

1. The Arbuckle Simpson aquifer (ASA), a sole source, karst aquifer in Oklahoma provides drinking water to 39,000 people, including the Chickasaw and Choctaw Nations, and the Chickasaw National Recreation Area, which receives approximately 3.4 million visitors per year. Aquifer overdraft concerns resulted in extensive studies starting in 2002 to characterize the ASA. The ASA has been identified as a candidate for ASR. Under the Safe and Sustainable Water Resources (SSWR) research program, ORD is evaluating the impact of EAR on groundwater quality and quantity in the ASA. The study area focuses on the eastern portion of the ASA. Previous studies have shown that the unsaturated epikarst zone may be capable of storing a significant volume of groundwater. The primary objectives of the current proof-of-concept study are to determine the magnitude and impact of direct recharge of overland surface runoff (stormwater) on groundwater quality in a rural karst setting. Rural settings are inherently different from urban settings in terms of water quality and are not well represented in current literature. The secondary objective is to evaluate the use of relatively simple and easily transferable hydrogeologic methods and geophysical techniques to estimate the overall contribution of the enhanced recharge to groundwater.

2. The Potomac Aquifer System (PAS) lies within the Atlantic Coastal Plain Physiographic

Province, which is characterized by an eastward thickening wedge of marine and non-marine sediments. These sediments are a series of interbedded, unconsolidated, and semi-consolidated layers of sand, silt, gravel, and shell and clay deposits. The PAS is an underground source of drinking water and is also utilized for industrial and agricultural applications. The PAS is experiencing depleted water levels due to significant ground water overdraft. Efforts are underway to replenish the PAS by recharging the aquifer with highly treated wastewater utilizing aquifer recharge injection wells (Barr and Ihlo 2022).

Research needs may include groundwater modeling of preferential flow paths, reactions between reactive minerals and dissolved oxygen, and the necessity to adjust pH to preclude the mobilization of reactive, metal bearing minerals.

3. The Los Angeles Coastal Plain covers about 580 squares miles and is the largest coastal plain of semiarid southern California. In California about 20 percent of recycled municipal wastewater is used for indirect potable reuse (IPR). The State Water Resources Control Board regulates recycled water projects, and advanced treated wastewater and an environmental buffer/residence time is required prior to subsurface introduction and reuse. Monitoring in combination with computational simulation models is key to demonstrate an adequate retention time. For example, one month of subsurface residence time is considered equivalent to 1-log reduction for pathogenic microorganism control, e.g., 12-log reduction is required for protection from enteric viruses. Tracer studies are required to validate retention time predictions. The water management practices in the Los Angeles Coastal Plain introduce enhanced groundwater recharge into the Central Basin and West Coast Basin. Best management practices (BMPs) include groundwater spreading basins and infiltration galleries, vadose zone drywells, and injection wells for aquifer replenishment and seawater intrusion barriers. Groundwater modeling systems are needed that include advanced spatial refinement and representation of complex layered sedimentary geology, fault zones, and flow system complexity. Advanced monitoring methods and tracers are also needed. Tracers are sometimes purposefully introduced and sometimes inadvertently released but both provide useful information. At the Los Angeles Coastal Plain, advanced water treatment is paired with the EAR infrastructure and the receiving aquifer chemistry in a fit for purpose paradigm.

Most of the EAR operations studies have targeted augmentation of drinking/municipal water supplies. Sources of water for EAR operations can include highly treated municipal wastewater, captured stormwater, agricultural drainage and irrigation water runoff, and surface water (e.g., stream diversion). Each of these sources have trade-offs based on quantities of available water and water quality issues. Municipal wastewater has an advantage of being available in consistent volumes in areas where there are high levels of urban water demand. However, there are obvious water quality and human health risks that must be addressed. While stormwater and stream diversions may have better water quality than municipal wastewater, its availability is more intermittent and dependent on climatic conditions.

In contrast to treated sources of water, which can be tightly controlled based on the types and degree of treatment used, water quality of untreated stormwater and surface water can vary widely. The availability and use of different sources of water for EAR provides opportunities for water managers. However, gaps in the understanding remain concerning the locally appropriate and fit for purpose design of EAR systems using different source waters in different land use and hydrogeologic settings. For example, while the use of treated wastewater for EAR has been implemented in the United States for decades (Dillon et al. 2019), many states and communities still have health risk concerns. Additional research is needed to advance the knowledge of “best practices” in the design, siting, performance (hydrologic and water quality), longevity, maintenance and monitoring of EAR using different sources of water in different land use and hydrogeologic settings.

A major concern for many communities is the potential risk to groundwater quality from EAR.

Risks include at least three general types: 1) direct contamination of groundwater by dissolved and suspended contaminants in the source of water (e.g., pathogens, oil and gas, pesticides, and other chemicals); 2) indirect contamination through changing aquifer conditions that allow a potential contaminant to be mobilized from the subsurface (e.g., arsenic mobilization); and 3) interaction of infiltrated water with existing subsurface contaminants (in either soil, subsoil, or ground water) that could alter the spatial extent of existing contamination. Among the unknown factors that control these potential effects are: 1) ability of soil to degrade and/or attenuate contaminants sourced from infiltrated water; 2) potential mobilization of contaminants in the soil introduced from past land use; 3) potential mobilization of naturally occurring elements in the soil that may be transported due to changes in the subsurface with increased infiltration; and 4) increased transport of existing groundwater contaminants due to changing hydrology. Other potential risks to groundwater include rising water tables and altered hydrology leading to flooding, damage to infrastructure, induced seismicity, and other unanticipated problems.

Priorities for developing new research, tools, frameworks, and models to assist planning and demonstration of EAR should be based on a fit for purpose approach for an existing location, and also take into account current studies to include experience with existing projects and engagement with key stakeholders and water managers working on EAR. Additional information from EPA related to EAR can be found in EPA’s recently published technical literature review (EPA 2021b) and through the Water Reuse Action Plan.

C. Authority and Regulations

The authorities for this RFA and resulting awards are contained in the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300j-1, Section 1442, and the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1254, Section 104(b)(3).

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. Further note applications dealing with any aspect of or related to hydraulic fracking will not be funded by EPA through this program.

Additional applicable regulations include: 2 CFR Part 200, 2 CFR Part 1500, and 40 CFR Part 40 (Research and Demonstration Grants).

D. Specific Research Areas of Interest/Expected Outputs and Outcomes Note to applicant: The term “output” means an environmental activity, effort, and/or associated work products related to an environmental goal or objective, that will be produced or provided over a period of time or by a specified date. The term “outcome” means the result, effect, or consequence that will occur from carrying out an environmental program or activity that is related to an environmental or programmatic goal or objective.

The activities to be funded under this solicitation support EPA’s FY 2022-2026 Strategic Plan (https://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/strategicplan). Awards made under this solicitation will support Goal 5: Ensure Clean and Safe Water for All Communities, Objective 5.2: Protect and https://www.epa.gov/waterreuse/national-water-reuse-action-plan-online-platform?action=7.4 https://www.epa.gov/planandbudget/strategicplan

Restore Waterbodies and Watersheds, of the Plan. All applications must be for projects that support the goal(s) and objective(s) identified above. Awards made under this announcement will further EPA’s priorities ensuring clean and safe water for all communities by promoting high-priority water quality research. The proposed research awards support the STAR Program’s goal of stimulating and supporting scientific and engineering research that advances EPA’s mission to protect human health and the environment in the area of Safe and Sustainable Water Resources by seeking applications proposing innovative research to support Enhanced Aquifer Recharge (EAR) as a viable and safe, water management strategy by improving understanding of fit for purpose uses and risks.

EPA also requires that grant applicants adequately describe environmental outputs and outcomes to be achieved under assistance agreements (see EPA Order 5700.7A1, Environmental Results under Assistance Agreements, https://www.epa.gov/grants/epa-order-57007a1-epas-policy-environmental-results-under-epa-assistance-agreements). Applicants must include specific statements describing the environmental results of the proposed project in terms of well-defined outputs and, to the maximum extent practicable, well-defined outcomes that will demonstrate how the project will contribute to the goal(s) and objective(s) described above.

The Agency is soliciting research to provide new information supporting fit for purpose use and risk characterization for potential EAR sites. Applicants are not expected to develop new EAR infrastructure and/or operations. Rather, applicants should seek opportunities to partner with states, municipalities, or other interested parties to leverage, to the extent possible, existing infrastructure, models, data, and other available resources at existing EAR operations. Proposed research can include bench scale (e.g., column studies), mechanistic modeling and field-based sampling and data analysis, but must ultimately advance the practical application, knowledge transfer and safe use of EAR.

Research is needed to support decisions on siting EAR infrastructure including improved understanding of the risks and tradeoffs of different geophysical capabilities of an area and available sources of water so that municipalities can evaluate the site-specific characteristics and suitability of EAR for a given site. Research based on existing EAR systems can help determine the effects of the geology and hydrology along with source water quality on the effectiveness of the EAR infrastructure, leading to an improved understanding of fit for purpose uses and risks of EAR in different land use and hydrogeologic settings.

Applicants should propose research that addresses at minimum, three of the four research areas below. Applications which do not address at least three of the research areas described below may not be rated as highly under the evaluation process described in Section V as those that do.

Bulleted topics are listed under each research area for applicants to consider in shaping their research project. Applicants are not required to respond to all of the bulleted topics or limit the research scope to these topics.

Research Areas:

https://www.epa.gov/grants/epa-order-57007a1-epas-policy-environmental-results-under-epa-assistance-agreements https://www.epa.gov/grants/epa-order-57007a1-epas-policy-environmental-results-under-epa-assistance-agreements

1. Research on the effect of local subsurface geology and hydrology on EAR effectiveness for enhancing water quality and ensuring a safe supply of drinking water. To enhance understanding of how subsurface geology affects successful aquifer recharge, applicants should propose research on subsurface characteristics to enable site characterization. This can include but is not limited to:

• Aquifer type (unconsolidated, consolidated, unconfined, confined, mixed, anisotropy in properties)

• Potential for contaminant mobilization

• Potential for induced seismicity from groundwater recharge

• Impact of discrete subsurface heterogeneity

• Lithology (geochemical properties)

2. Research on the effect of source water (excluding oil and gas produced water) and the ability of sub-surface geology to degrade or attenuate conventional and emerging contaminants (including pathogens) that might be found in different sources of water.

This can include but is not limited to:

• Vadose zone physical, mineralogical, and chemical properties

• Aquifer types (sedimentary, carbonate-karst, igneous and metamorphic)

• Various sources of waters (stormwater, agricultural drainage and return flows, recycled municipal wastewater)

• Characterization of background water quality prior to EAR implementation

• Treatment of water both before recharge and after extraction, especially where groundwater is used as a source of drinking water

• Mobilization of natural contaminants

3. Research on methods and technologies for monitoring and maintenance of EAR systems to improve and maintain performance and operational efficiency (both source water quality and quantity) and reduce potential environmental and public health risk. This can include but is not limited to:

• Monitoring needs, new methods and technologies

• Target parameters for monitoring and monitoring frequency and risk

• Maintenance needs, new methods and technologies (e.g., to reduce clogging)

4. Research on computational modeling and scientific visualization. This can include but is not limited to:

• Better predictive modeling and characterization of uncertainty to represent performance and risk

• Linked geohydrological and geochemical modeling

• Improved models in karst and fractured rock aquifers

• Integrated measurements and modeling of surface and ground water when applicable

• Demonstration of useful modeling in practice

Expected Outputs and Outcomes

Outputs:

Outputs expected from the awards under this solicitation may include publications of research results in peer-reviewed journals, guidance documents, decision support tools, models, demonstrations and case studies, reports, and presentations related to EAR analysis and strategies.

These tools, models, and frameworks should be transferable to different regions of the United States, account for regional variations in costs, and be applicable in different physical/site and hydroclimatic settings, including consideration of extreme weather events and climate change.

They should allow individual communities to insert place-specific data on capital costs; labor costs; hydrogeochemical conditions; historical, current and projected weather conditions; and other local factors that contribute to variations in EAR implementation and success.

Outcomes:

• Increased adoption of fit for purpose EAR including better ability for state, tribal, and local water-quality managers to plan, construct, maintain, and monitor EAR practices

• Increased understanding of the risks, benefits, and consequences of EAR practices, given particular source waters, subsurface geology, and groundwater end use

• Improved groundwater sustainability

Innovation and Sustainability

To the maximum extent practicable, research applications must embody innovation and sustainability. Innovation occurs at the intersection of invention and insight (Lemelson/MIT 2004) and is the complex process of introducing novel ideas into use or practice (Nunes 2004).

Innovation for the purposes of this RFA is defined as the process of developing new or novel technology-based projects (methods, devices, creative solutions or concepts) that contribute to improved social, environmental, and economic well-being. Innovative research can take the form of wholly new applications or applications that build on existing knowledge and approaches for new uses. Research applications must include a discussion on how the proposed research is innovative (see Section IV.C.5.iii.a). The goal of sustainability, derived from the U.S. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), is to “create and maintain conditions, under which humans and nature can exist in productive harmony, that permit fulfilling the social, economic, and other requirements of present and future generations.” Research applications must include a discussion on how the proposed research will seek sustainable solutions that protect the environment and strengthen our communities (see Section IV.C.5.iii.a). Reviewers will draw from all of the above-mentioned innovation and sustainability definitions in the review/evaluation process of research applications (see Section V.A).

Collaboration/Engagement Plan A collaboration/engagement plan is required. See Section IV.C.5.iii.e. Collaboration and cooperative partnerships are strongly encouraged in the design and execution of the proposed research. Therefore, applications must include a Collaboration/Engagement Plan. Applications should, at minimum, describe how: a) applicants will work in partnership with appropriate partners (e.g., states, tribes, municipalities, academia, industry groups, utilities, non-profit organizations, associations, and local communities/community-based organizations) to effectively design and implement the proposed project; b) to the extent possible, coordinate with and/or complement other projects or activities being performed by others that will result in a greater positive impact; and c) demonstrate how the proposed project will engage appropriate partners (which may include community-based organizations, as defined below) to enhance the project’s effectiveness and/or efficiency and address the concerns of impacted communities.

For the purpose of this announcement, a “community-based organization” generally means a nongovernmental organization that has demonstrated effectiveness as a representative of a community or a significant segment of a community and that helps members of that community obtain environmental, educational, or other social services. A community-based organization must be a nonprofit or not-for-profit corporation in good standing under state or Tribal law with authority to enter into binding legal agreements. The community-based organization need not be tax exempt under the Internal Revenue Code but may use documentation of tax-exempt status to demonstrate that it is a nonprofit.

The collaboration/engagement plan should:

• Describe the type of collaboration/engagement proposed and what role it will play in the overall project including the degree of partner and/or community input or engagement in the conceptualization, hypothesis/question development, design, methods, analyses and implementation of the research.

• Describe how the collaboration/engagement will enhance the overall impact of the project such that the project results are useable by state/local agencies, utilities, and impacted communities. This includes the capacity of the project to more effectively communicate risk and translate scientific results into easily understandable outreach and education materials.

• Describe how activities of the project will be coordinated with related or complementary projects and studies.

• Describe how the collaboration/engagement will materialize during project performance.

Describe the partner(s)’ intent to participate in the proposed research including evidence of support of an active partnership with states, tribes, municipalities, academia, industry groups, utilities, non-profit organizations, associations, and/or local communities/community-based organizations (e.g., letter(s) of intent or support from community-based organizations, community leaders, state or local government agencies, non-government organizations, industry-based organizations, water utility managers, site managers or operators). Any letters demonstrating evidence of collaboration and support should be included as part of section IV.C.5.vii.a Letters of Intent/Letters of Support.

Applicants that do not plan on collaborating/engaging with other groups in project performance must still include a collaboration/engagement plan in their application describing how they will be able to effectively perform and complete the project without such collaboration/engagement.

E. References

Barr, Omid, and Christy Ihlo. Edited by Evan Kirk and Garrett Basnight, UNC Environmental Finance Center, June 2022, Leveraging the Integrated Planning Framework for Advancing Climate Resilience and Environmental Justice, https://efc.sog.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1172/2022/07/2022_Integrated_Planning_Final.pdf.

Dillon, P. et al. 2019. “Sixty years of global progress in managed aquifer recharge.”

Hydrogeology Journal (2019) 27 1–30, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-018-1841-z

Jakeman, Anthony, et al. "Integrated Groundwater Management: An Overview of Issues and Options." Integrated Groundwater Management, edited by Anthony Jakeman, Anthony, Olivier Barreteau, Randall Hunt, Jean-Daniel Rinaudo, and Andrew Ross, Springer Nature, 2016, pp 3-

20. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23576-9_1

Lemelson-MIT Program and the National Science Foundation. Invention: Enhancing Inventiveness of Quality of Life, Competitiveness and Sustainability. (Report of the Committee for the Study of Invention [PDF]), 2004. https://lemelson.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2020- 04/Invention%20Assembly%20Full%20Report.pdf

Moran, Tara, et al. “Understanding California's Groundwater.” Water in the West, Stanford University, 9 Sept. 2014, Available at:

https://waterinthewest.stanford.edu/groundwater/overdraft/#:~:text=Direct%20impacts%20of%2 0groundwater%20overdraft,dry%20up%2C%20leading%20to%20conflicts.

National Research Council (NRC). Prospects for Managed Underground Storage of Recoverable Water. National Academies In Press, 2008, https://doi.org/10.17226/12057.

Nunes, S. "Extending the innovation ecosystem," Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on e-Commerce Technology, 2004. CEC 2004., 2004, pp. 3-3, doi:

10.1109/ICECT.2004.1319709. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/1319709

Parise, M., and Susan H. Cannon. "Wildfire impacts on the processes that generate debris flows in burned watersheds." Natural hazards 61.1 (2012): 217-227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069- 011-9769-9 https://efc.sog.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1172/2022/07/2022_Integrated_Planning_Final.pdf https://efc.sog.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1172/2022/07/2022_Integrated_Planning_Final.pdf https://doi.org/10.1007/s10040-018-1841-z https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23576-9_1 https://lemelson.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2020-04/Invention%20Assembly%20Full%20Report.pdf https://lemelson.mit.edu/sites/default/files/2020-04/Invention%20Assembly%20Full%20Report.pdf https://waterinthewest.stanford.edu/groundwater/overdraft/#:%7E:text=Direct%20impacts%20of%20groundwater%20overdraft,dry%20up%2C%20leading%20to%20conflicts.

https://waterinthewest.stanford.edu/groundwater/overdraft/#:%7E:text=Direct%20impacts%20of%20groundwater%20overdraft,dry%20up%2C%20leading%20to%20conflicts.

https://doi.org/10.17226/12057 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/1319709 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9769-9 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9769-9

Ross, Andrew, and Sunail Hasnain. “Factors affecting the cost of managed aquifer recharge (MAR) schemes.” Sustain Water Resource Management, 4.2, (2018) 179- 190.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-017-0210-8

Taylor, Richard G., et al. "Ground water and climate change." Nature climate change 3.4 (2013):

322-329. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1744

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. “Aquifer Recharge and Aquifer Storage and Recovery.”

4 4 August 2021a. Available at https://www.epa.gov/uic/aquifer-recharge-and-aquifer-storage-and-recovery

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Enhanced Aquifer Recharge of Stormwater in the United States: State of the Science Review (Final Report). Washington, D.C., EPA/600/R-21/037, 2021b. Available at https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/risk/recordisplay.cfm?deid=352238

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. “Understanding the Safe Drinking Water Act.” February 15, 2022. https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/overview-safe-drinking-water-act

F. Special Requirements

It is EPA Policy to ensure that the results of EPA-funded extramural scientific research are accessible to the public to the greatest extent feasible consistent with applicable law; policies and Orders; the Agency’s mission; resource constraints; and U.S. national, homeland and economic security. This entails maximizing, at no charge, access by the public to peer-reviewed, scientific research journal publications or associated author manuscripts, and their underlying digital research data, created in whole or in part with EPA funds, while protecting personal privacy;

recognizing proprietary interests, confidential business information, and intellectual property rights; and avoiding significant negative impact on intellectual property rights, innovation, and U.S. competitiveness.

Applications submitted under this announcement shall include a Scientific Data Management Plan (SDMP) that addresses public access to EPA-funded scientific research data. See the SDMP clause in Section IV for details on the content of an SDMP. Applicants will also be asked to provide past performance information on whether journal publications or associated author manuscripts, and the associated underlying scientific research data and metadata, under prior assistance agreements were made publicly accessible. These items will be evaluated prior to award.

Reasonable, necessary and allocable costs for data management and public access may be included in extramural research applications and detailed in the budget justification described in Section IV.

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 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40899-017-0210-8 https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1744 https://www.epa.gov/uic/aquifer-recharge-and-aquifer-storage-and-recovery https://www.epa.gov/uic/aquifer-recharge-and-aquifer-storage-and-recovery https://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/risk/recordisplay.cfm?deid=352238 https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/overview-safe-drinking-water-act 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 (https://www.epa.gov/research-grants/research-grants-guidance-and-policies).

This solicitation provides the opportunity for the submission of applications for projects that may involve human subjects research. All applications must include a Human Subjects Research Statement (HSRS; described in Section IV.C.5.iii.c of this solicitation). If the project involves human subjects research, it will be subject to an additional level of review prior to funding decisions being made as described in Sections V.D and V.F of this solicitation.

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.

G. Additional Provisions for Applicants Incorporated into the Solicitation

Additional provisions that apply to sections III, IV, V, and VI of this solicitation and/or awards made under this solicitation, can be found at EPA Solicitation Clauses. These provisions are important for applying to this solicitation and applicants must review them when preparing applications for this solicitation. If you are unable to access these provisions electronically at the website above, please contact the EPA point of contact listed in this solicitation (usually in Section VII) to obtain the provisions.

II. AWARD INFORMATION

It is anticipated that a total of approximately $8 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 4 awards under this RFA.

Requests for amounts in excess of a total of $2,000,000 per award, including direct and indirect costs, will not be considered. The total project period requested in an application submitted for this RFA may not exceed 3 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 https://www.epa.gov/research-grants/research-grants-guidance-and-policies https://www.epa.gov/research-grants/research-grants-guidance-and-policies the original selections are made. Any additional selections for awards will be made no later than six months after the original selection decisions.

In appropriate circumstances, EPA reserves the right to partially fund applications by funding discrete portions or phases of proposed projects. If EPA decides to partially fund an application, it will do so in a manner that does not prejudice any applicants or affect the basis upon which the application, or portion thereof, was evaluated and selected for award, and therefore maintains the integrity of the competition and selection process. Awards may be fully or incrementally funded, as appropriate, based on funding availability, satisfactory performance, and other applicable considerations.

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 rather than substantial to achieving the goals of the research under a grant. Interaction that is “incidental” does not involve resource commitments by EPA.

III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

Note: Additional provisions that apply to this section can be found at EPA Solicitation Clauses.

A. Eligible Applicants Public and private nonprofit institutions/organizations, public and private institutions of higher education (IHEs), and hospitals located in the U.S. and its territories or possessions; state and local governments; Federally Recognized Indian Tribal Governments; and U.S. territories or possessions are eligible to apply. Profit-making firms and individuals are not eligible to apply.

Consistent with the definition of Nonprofit organization at 2 CFR § 200.1, the term nonprofit organization means any corporation, trust, association, cooperative, or other organization that is operated mainly for scientific, educational, service, charitable, or similar purpose in the public interest and is not organized primarily for profit; and uses net proceeds to maintain, improve, or expand the operation of the organization. The term includes tax-exempt nonprofit neighborhood and labor organizations. Note that 2 CFR § 200.1 specifically excludes Institutions of Higher Education from the definition of non-profit organization because they are separately defined in the regulation. While not considered to be a nonprofit organization(s) as defined by 2 CFR § 200.1, public or nonprofit Institutions of Higher Education are, nevertheless, eligible to submit applications under this RFA. Hospitals operated by state, tribal, or local governments or that meet the definition of nonprofit at 2 CFR § 200.1 are also eligible to apply as nonprofits or as instrumentalities of the unit of government depending on the applicable law. For-profit colleges, universities, trade schools, and hospitals are ineligible.

Nonprofit organizations that are not exempt from taxation under section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code must submit other forms of documentation of nonprofit status; such as certificates of incorporation as nonprofit under state or tribal law. Nonprofit organizations exempt from taxation under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code that lobby are not eligible for EPA funding as provided in the Lobbying Disclosure Act, 2 U.S.C. 1611.

Foreign governments, international organizations, and non-governmental international organizations/institutions 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. An award recipient 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. Federal employees may not receive salaries or augment their Agency’s appropriations through awards made under this program unless authorized by law to receive such funding.

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, 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 Ron Josephson in ORD, phone: 202-564-7823, email: josephson.ron@epa.gov.

B. Cost sharing

Cost sharing is not required.

C. Other

All applications will be reviewed for eligibility and must meet the eligibility requirements described in Sections III.A., B., and C. to be considered eligible. Applicants deemed ineligible for funding consideration as a result of the threshold eligibility review will be notified within 15 calendar days of the ineligibility determination.

mailto:josephson.ron@epa.gov

a. Applications must substantially comply with the application submission instructions and requirements set forth in Section IV of this solicitation or else they will be rejected. However, where a page limit is expressed in Section IV with respect to the application, or parts thereof, pages in excess of the page limitation will not be reviewed. Applicants are advised that readability is of paramount importance and should take precedence in application format, including selecting a legible font type and size for use in the application.

b. In addition, initial applications must be submitted through Grants.gov as stated in Section IV of this solicitation (except in the limited circumstances where another mode of submission is specifically allowed for as explained in Section IV) on or before the application submission deadline published in Section IV of this solicitation. Applicants are responsible for following the submission instructions in Section IV of this solicitation to ensure that their application is timely submitted. Please note that applicants experiencing technical issues with submitting through Grants.gov should follow the instructions provided in Section IV, which include both the requirement to contact Grants.gov and email a full application to EPA prior to the deadline.

c. Applications submitted outside of Grants.gov will be deemed ineligible without further consideration unless the applicant can clearly demonstrate that it was due to EPA mishandling or technical problems associated with Grants.gov or SAM.gov.