FY24 Clean Ports CAQP Sample Proj Narrative.docx

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)

2024 Clean Ports Program: Climate and Air Quality Planning Competition Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)

EPA-R-OAR-CPP-24-05

Project Narrative Sample Format

Instructions: The project narrative should substantially comply with the instructions, format, and content described below. It should also address the evaluation criteria in Section V.A. of the NOFO. The project narrative, including the cover page, workplan, and budget table, and budget detail, must not exceed a maximum of 15 single-spaced typewritten pages. Pages in excess of the 15-page limit will not be reviewed. The EPA recommends applicants use the Calibri font, a font size of 11, and 1-inch margins.

Supporting materials, such as project team biographies, Statutory Partnership agreements, and negotiated indirect cost rate agreements can be submitted as attachments and are not included in the 15-page limit. Supporting materials should also be submitted using the Optional Attachments form, as described in Section IV.B. of the NOFO.

Applicants should ensure that their project narratives are written clearly using understandable terms. Doing so will help ensure that the evaluation team members understand the purpose, outputs, and outcomes of the proposed project. Applicants are not required, but are highly encouraged, to use the project narrative format below, including the cover page.

PLEASE DELETE THIS INSTRUCTION PAGE AND INSTRUCTIONS UNDER EACH SECTION FROM YOUR FINAL PROJECT NARRATIVE.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)

2024 Clean Ports Program: Climate and Air Quality Planning Competition Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO)

EPA-R-OAR-CPP-24-05

(1) Cover Page:

The cover page should include the following information. Applicants are required to use the Supplemental Application Cover Sheet, located in the Supplemental Application Template (“2. CAQP Supplemental App.” tab) on the Clean Ports Program website.

Address (Street, City, State, Zip):

Contact Name, Title, Phone Number, and Email Address:

__ Port authority __ State, regional, or local agency with jurisdiction over a port authority or a port __ Tribal agency with jurisdiction over a port authority or a port __ Air pollution control agency __ Private entity meeting the requirements in Section III.A. [Please indicate your Statutory Partner]: _________

EPA Funding Requested: $

[As noted in Section II.B. of the NOFO, each application can request between $200,000 and $3,000,000.]

Name of Port(s) (or other project location and port(s) served):

Name of Port Authority, if applicable:

County, City, State:

Percent of time/activity in each county:

[Please indicate whether the application meet the requirements for a small water port project as described in Section II.B. of the NOFO] __ Small water port

[Project periods can be up to 3 years.]

Please indicate which of the following planning activities are included in the project:

__ Emissions inventory and/or accounting practice __ Emissions reduction strategy analysis __ Development of emissions reduction target __ Plan for reducing future port emissions __ Port resiliency assessment __ Plan to increase resilience of port __ Formal stakeholder engagement __ Workforce planning analysis __ Other activity (please specify)

__ Yes __ No

(2) Workplan:

Applicants should ensure that the workplan addresses the evaluation criteria in Section V.A. of the NOFO. Applicants should use the section and subsection numbers and headings below which correspond with the evaluation criteria in Section V.A. of the NOFO. The workplan should be written clearly using understandable terms.

Section 1- Project Summary and Approach (29 possible points, from Section V.A. of the NOFO) This section should contain a detailed project description of the following information:

a. Overall Project (15 possible points) Provide a detailed project summary and description of the proposed activities to be undertaken, consistent with Section I.B. “Program Goals and Objectives” of the NOFO. Include details of every activity for which the applicant is seeking funding. This section should include details about how the planning activities will meet the program goals to (1) build a foundation for the port(s) to transition to fully ZE operations, positioning the port(s) to serve as a catalyst for transformational change across local freight operations; and (2) reduce mobile source pollution in near-port communities, especially disadvantaged communities.

Applicants should include information about emissions inventory or accounting practice activities (one or more activities required), community engagement activities, and any other planning activities.

As discussed in Section I.B., this NOFO is focused on pollution reduction. Applications focused primarily on resiliency planning, in lieu of emissions reductions, will not score as favorably as those that include a strong focus on planning activities directly tied to emissions reductions and ZE technology deployment such as emissions inventory development and ZE technology feasibility assessments.

Applications should primarily only include information in Section 1.a. of their workplan that will not be covered by another section of their workplan.

b. Partnerships and Collaboration (7 possible points) Applicants should discuss their approach for promoting and/or obtaining collaboration and support from Statutory Partners and/or Collaborating Entities in performing the project. List the organizations that will be involved in the project and what each of the groups’ roles will be in the project’s staffing, funding, design, and implementation.

· Eligible private entities applying with a Statutory Partnership (as defined in Section III.A.) should describe each Statutory Partner’s roles and responsibilities in the project. Eligible private entities must attach a signed copy of the Statutory Partnership Agreement described in Appendix B.

· Applicants applying in coordination with Collaborating Entities (as defined in Section III.A.) should describe for each entity: the type of collaboration/support proposed, how the applicant will ensure that it will materialize during project performance, and what role it will play in the overall project. Any letters demonstrating evidence of collaboration and support from Collaborating Entities may be attached as letters of commitment under optional attachment documents listed in Section IV.B.

Under this section, the applicant should explain their plans for making subawards, as necessary and appropriate (see Appendix A) to enhance project effectiveness and/or efficiency. An example of a collaboration or partnership that would be considered under this criterion would be a proposal by an applicant (a single entity) to use Clean Ports funding to make subawards to one or more identified governmental or nonprofit subrecipients that would work collaboratively with the applicant to implement an overarching plan. Applicants, not the EPA, will select their subrecipients and the applicant must demonstrate in its proposal and/or agreements and letters of commitment that the project partners are willing to accept the subaward and have the capacity to effectively administer and perform the agreement. Selected applicants who propose to make subawards must follow proper procedures in making subawards and will be expected to make the subawards consistent with their proposal. The EPA’s award will include a term and condition requiring the applicant to make the subawards consistent with their proposal.

IF THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO PROVIDE EPA FUNDS TO ANY COLLABORATING ORGANIZATION, PLEASE CAREFULLY REVIEW PROVISIONS ON “CONTRACTS AND SUBAWARDS.”

If the applicant does not plan on partnering or collaborating with other groups in project performance, the applicant should demonstrate its ability to effectively perform and complete the project without such collaboration.

Examples of partnerships and collaboration could include, but are not limited to:

· Partnerships between a fleet operator and an air pollution control agency to collect data for emissions inventory and accounting activities

· Collaboration with utilities and/or other state and local agencies on ZE technology feasibility assessments

· Collaboration with academic organizations on identifying vulnerabilities and resiliency measures

Applicants will be evaluated on the extent to which the application demonstrates that they will work in partnership with appropriate partners to effectively and efficiently implement the proposed project. Applicants that do not plan on partnering with other groups will be evaluated based on the extent to which they demonstrate how they will be able to effectively perform and complete the project without such collaboration.

c. Coordination with Complementary Initiatives (7 possible points) Applicants should describe the extent of any coordination between their project and other programs or larger initiatives to support the proposed project activities or to help achieve the broader program goal of ensuring that meaningful community engagement and emissions reduction planning are port industry standard practices. Applicants will be evaluated based on the role that the described complementary initiatives will play in supporting the proposed project activities or broader program goal, as well as the likelihood the initiatives will materialize during grant performance. Applicants demonstrating confirmed initiatives (e.g., efforts already underway) will score higher than those with only prospective initiatives (e.g., efforts under consideration but not confirmed).

Examples could include, but are not limited to:

· Connection between the proposed project and planning efforts under the EPA’s Climate Pollution Reduction Grant program (e.g., planning joint stakeholder engagement or analytical efforts)

· Connection between the proposed project and complementary investments from businesses, state, tribal, and local governments, or other organizations

· Connection between the proposed project and state/local planning efforts

Section 2 – Environmental Results—Outcomes, Outputs and Performance Measures (20 possible points, from Section V.A. of the NOFO)

a. Expected Project Outputs and Outcomes (10 possible points) Identify the expected quantitative and qualitative outcomes and outputs of the project as defined in Section I.C.2. and 3. Of the NOFO. Specific outputs and outcomes should be provided and may include short- and longer-term activities. In addition to a narrative discussion of the outputs and outcomes, applicants are encouraged to include a table such as the following. However, the EPA will not penalize or withhold a benefit from an applicant who provides information in another format.

Example of Outputs and Outcomes Table Anticipated Outputs and Outcomes

Increased stakeholder participation in port planning and decision-making impacting environmental justice

New workforce development initiatives to train current and incoming workers Workers have better understanding of how their roles may evolve, worker voice is incorporated into decision-making, and worker safety and job-quality is prioritized

b. Performance Measures and Plan (5 possible points) Applicants should describe the proposed performance measures, which will be the mechanism to track, measure, and report progress towards achieving the expected outputs and outcomes. Applicants should describe their plan for tracking and measuring progress toward achieving the expected project outputs and outcomes and how the results of the project will be evaluated, as described in Section I.C. of the NOFO and Section 2.a. of the workplan.

These performance measures will help gather insights and will be the mechanism to track progress concerning successful processes and output and outcome strategies and will provide the basis for developing lessons to inform future recipients. It is expected that the description of performance measures will directly relate to the project outcomes and outputs (see Section I.C.), including, but not limited to:

· Overseeing subrecipients, and/or contractors and vendors;

· Tracking and reporting project progress on expenditures and purchases; and

· Tracking, measuring, and reporting accomplishments and proposed timelines/milestones.

The following are questions to consider when developing output and outcome measures of quantitative and qualitative results:

· What are the measurable short term and longer term results the project will achieve?

· How does the plan measure progress in achieving the expected results (including outputs and outcomes) and how will the approach use resources effectively and efficiently?

· What are the expected locations (county) of the outputs and outcomes?

c. Timeline and Milestones (5 possible points) The applicant should include a detailed timeline for the project including milestones for specific tasks such as bidding, procurement, installation, and reports, along with estimated start and completion dates. Applicants should include scheduled time for semi-annual and final report preparation in the project timeline.

Section 3 – Programmatic Capability and Past Performance (8 possible points, from Section V.A. of the NOFO)

a. Past Performance and Reporting Requirements (5 possible points) Submit a list of up to five federally funded and/or non-federally funded assistance agreements that the applicant is performing or has performed within the last three years. Assistance agreements include grants and cooperative agreements but not contracts. These assistance agreements should be awarded directly to the applicant. For each of the agreements, include:

· Project title

· Assistance agreement number

· Federal funding agency and assistance listing number (formally known as the CFDA number)

· Brief description of the agreement – no more than two sentences

For each listed agreement, explain whether, and if so how, the applicant was able to successfully manage and complete the work.

For each listed agreement, the applicant should also describe their history of meeting the reporting requirements under the agreement(s). This should include:

· Whether the applicant submitted acceptable final reports under those agreements;

· The extent to which the applicant adequately and timely reported on its progress towards achieving the expected outputs and outcomes under those agreements; and

· If progress was not being made, whether the applicant adequately reported why not.

Note: In evaluating applicants under the past performance factors in Section V.A. of the NOFO, the EPA will consider the information provided by the applicant and may also consider relevant information from other sources, including information from EPA files and from current/prior grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information provided by the applicant). If the applicant does not have any relevant or available past performance or past reporting information, the applicant should indicate this in the application and will receive a neutral score for these factors, which is half of the total points available for this sub-criterion in Section V.A. of the NOFO. If the applicant does not provide any response for these items, or if submitted information is found to be inaccurate, a score of 0 for these factors may be received.

b. Staff Expertise (3 possible points) Include information on the applicant’s organization, including a description of staff knowledge, expertise, qualifications, and resources and/or the ability to obtain them, to successfully achieve project goals. Biographical sketches, including resumes or curriculum vitae for key staff, managers and any other key personnel can be included as an optional project team biography attachment, as listed in Section IV.B. of the NOFO. The optional attachment does not count towards the 15-page limit of the project narrative.

Section 4 - Environmental Justice and Disadvantaged Communities (23 possible points from Section V.A. of the NOFO)

To advance environmental justice through this program, applicants will be evaluated on the extent to which project benefits will take place in disadvantaged communities and the extent to which applicants or their project partners have participated in or will participate in meaningful community engagement.

For purposes of this competition and the evaluation of applications, “disadvantaged communities” are defined as meeting both of the following criteria:

1. Any county that includes at least one of the following:

A. Any census tract that is identified as disadvantaged in the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) version 1.0;

B. Any census block group that is at or above the 90th percentile for any of EJScreen’s Supplemental Indexes when compared to the nation or state; and/or C. Any geographic area within Tribal lands as included in EJScreen.

AND

2. Any county that meets at least one of the following:

A. Contains at least one designated nonattainment area or maintenance area for any of the following National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Data is sourced from EPA’s Green Book of Nonattainment Areas for Criteria Pollutants:

a. PM2.5 1997 Standard (Annual: 15 μg/m3, 24-hour: 65 μg/m3)

b. PM2.5 2006 Standard (Annual: 15 μg/m3, 24-hour: 35 μg/m3)

c. PM2.5 2012 Standard (Annual: 12 μg/m3, 24-hour: 35 μg/m3)

d. Ozone (O3) 2008 Standard (8-hour: 0.075ppm)

e. Ozone (O3) 2015 Standard (8-hour: 0.070ppm); and/or B. Contains at least one census tract where the modeled ambient diesel PM concentration from the 2019 Air Toxics Screening Assessment is above the 80th percentile (0.38 μg/m3 for 2019) for census tracts nationwide. The 80th percentile is a programmatic cutoff designed to help evaluate those areas that are most likely to have higher concentrations of diesel PM in the year of analysis (i.e., the year for which data are available); this level was not chosen based on risk or other health-based criteria or thresholds. AirToxScreen is a screening tool and there are limitations and uncertainties associated with it; see: AirToxScreen Limitations.

Counties that qualify in whole or in part as disadvantaged communities under one or more of the criteria listed above are identified on the EPA’s Clean Ports Program Disadvantaged Community County List, found on the Clean Ports Program website. This list also identifies whether counties qualify as extreme or severe nonattainment areas. For evaluation criteria 4.a. and 4.b., applicants should demonstrate the extent to which the project takes place in a disadvantaged community by providing the following Port Location Information for each project site:

· Facility Name. If Site is not a port, please indicate port(s) served.

· City, State, Zip Code

· County

· Description of project activity

· Share of project activity

· Does county contain PM2.5 or Ozone nonattainment area? (Y/N) If so, does it contain a severe or extreme nonattainment area? (Y/N)

· Does county contain PM2.5 or Ozone maintenance area? (Y/N)

· Does county contain high ambient diesel PM concentration based on AirToxScreen? (Y/N)

Applicants are required to provide this information using the Supplemental Application Cover Sheet, located in the Supplemental Application Template (“2. CAQP Supplemental App.” tab) on the Clean Ports Program website. This template will automatically identify whether the project is located in a disadvantaged community based on the county provided and the criteria above.

a. Disadvantaged Communities: Nonattainment Areas (7 possible points) Applicants should describe the extent to which projects are located in counties that meet the disadvantaged communities definition based on meeting the criterion that they contain ozone or PM2.5 nonattainment or maintenance areas. Applicants should also describe the extent to which projects are located in severe or extreme nonattainment areas. Information for this part of the workplan must be provided using the Supplemental Application Cover Sheet, located in the Supplemental Application Template (“2. CAQP Supplemental App.” tab) on the Clean Ports Program website. Note that a list of counties that meet these criteria can be found on the Clean Ports Program website.

Projects that take place in counties that contain severe or extreme nonattainment areas will receive more points than projects that do not. If projects will take place in more than one county, applicants should describe the percentage of the project activity that will occur in counties containing nonattainment areas or maintenance areas. Partial points may be awarded under this criterion based on the percentage of time that the project takes place in one of these counties.

b. Disadvantaged Communities: Areas with Air Toxics Concerns (5 possible points) Applicants should describe the extent to which projects are located in counties that meet the disadvantaged communities definition based on meeting the criterion that they contain areas with air toxics concerns. Information for this part of the workplan must be provided using the Supplemental Application Cover Sheet, located in the Supplemental Application Template (“2. CAQP Supplemental App.” tab) on the Clean Ports Program website. Note that a list of counties that meet these criteria can be found on the Clean Ports Program website.

If projects will take place in more than one county, applicants should describe the percentage of the project activity that will occur in counties containing air toxics concerns. Partial points may be awarded under this criterion based on the percentage of time that the project takes place in one of these counties.

c. Community Engagement Prior to Application and During Project (7 possible points) This section should include details about how the activities will meet the program goal to help ensure that meaningful community engagement is a standard practice at the port(s). Applicants should describe the quality and extent of meaningful engagement with near-port communities, particularly disadvantaged communities. Meaningful engagement means seeking out and facilitating the involvement of people potentially affected by the project; informing them about the project; giving them an opportunity to participate in the project, contribute, and provide feedback; and enabling them to influence decisions about future projects that may affect their environment and/or health. Meaningful engagement is a process, not a single event.

Community engagement can include engagement prior to application, in which input was sought and the proposed project is responsive to comments and concerns of near-port communities. Examples of community engagement prior to application include, but are not limited to:

· Results from a community engagement process with local residents to discuss port operations and community concerns and interests related to port climate and air quality planning, such as a charrette, focus group, key person interview, public hearing, and/or survey.

· Any efforts prior to the application to build community consensus around the proposed project, meet the interests of port stakeholders, and/or identify community priorities and benefits related to the project.

See additional examples below under community engagement during the project and in criterion d. Long-term Community Engagement.

Applicants may explain any hurdles that prevented the applicant from engaging with the public.

Community engagement can also include plans to meaningfully engage with near-port communities, especially and disadvantaged communities, during the execution of the proposed project.

Examples of community engagement during the project include, but are not limited to:

· A communications plan that presents a process for disseminating information to the community

· Forums to understand how the community sees potential benefits of the project and how they can engage (e.g., health benefits, new employment opportunities)

· Tabling events, briefings, workshops, forums, and other outreach to present the planned project for early input and to share results

· A hotline or text updates

· A clear point of contact for the public, communicated via regular newsletters, social media posts, and other outreach conveying project updates

· Hiring community members as staff or consultants, to contribute their expertise throughout the project period

· Site visits to share updates and to provide opportunities for community members to interact with port staff

· Honoraria to incentivize community members to participate in program activities, and mitigation stipends to cover expenses like childcare, transportation, or internet access

Applicants will score more highly if they can describe how they have engaged with the community prior to application, as well as how they will engage with the community during the project.

Applicants that provide specific details on the process as well as time and resource commitments will score higher than just providing letters of support. Applicants should consult the Environmental Justice Primer for Ports and the Ports Primer for Communities as resources for conducting meaningful community engagement.

d. Long-term Community Engagement (4 possible points) This section should include details about how the activities will meet the program goal to help ensure that meaningful community engagement is a standard practice at the port(s). Applicants should either (1) describe an established long-term policy or process for meaningful community engagement (as defined in Section 4.c. of the workplan), particularly with disadvantaged communities, to get community input on port operations and projects that impact air quality and address community concerns or, if they do not have such a policy or process in place, (2) describe their plans to establish such a policy or process before the end of the project period. Examples of long-term community engagement include, but are not limited to:

· A community engagement liaison or equity program director who is responsible for assisting port staff with their long-term community engagement

· A community advisory committee or other standing forum for two-way engagement that includes representation from local residents and/or local community groups

· A clear point of contact in a public forum (e.g., hotline, website) for community issues, feedback, and complaints

· A community benefits agreement/commitment (other than those specific to workforce development described in Section 6 of the workplan)

· A budget to support community engagement training for staff

Section 5 – Project Sustainability (5 possible points, from Section V.A. of the NOFO) This section should include details about how the activities will meet the program goal to help ensure that emissions reduction planning is a standard practice at the port(s). Applicants should describe the extent to which the applicant and project partners have the ability to continue planning activities or implement results of the planning project after EPA funding for this project has ended.

Examples could include, but are not limited to:

· A description of how the planning activities fit into a broader, publicly available strategy to reduce emissions at the port.

· A description of plans to use results of the planning activities to implement emissions reduction strategies or resiliency measures.

· A description of plans to periodically update emissions inventories.

Section 6 – Workforce Development (5 possible points from Section V.A. of the NOFO)

· Climate and Air Quality Measure Workforce Impact Analysis: The EPA encourages applicants to prepare for the workforce impacts that may result from their proposed planning activities. Under this sub-criterion, the EPA will evaluate applicants on the quality and extent to which the application will carry out a workforce impact analysis related to ZE technology deployment or other emissions reduction efforts as part of the project. Applications may request funding to support workforce planning activities tied to a proposed activity, including, but not limited to:

· Analyzing how implementing recommendations from the planning activities could impact the current workforce and developing strategies and protections for mitigating harmful impacts. For example, clarifying protections to ensure existing workers are not replaced or displaced because of new technologies

· Conducting detailed job and skills-based needs assessments to identify potential workforce gaps for future port activities to reduce emissions

· Identifying additional sources of funding for workforce development programs to meet the needs of implementing recommendations from the planning activities, including high-quality models that increase accessibility for individuals from near-port communities such as pre-apprenticeship programs

· Identifying and building relationships with partners necessary for workforce development activities at the port (e.g., labor unions, public workforce system, community colleges, community-based organizations)

If an applicant does not believe that workforce impact analysis is relevant for their proposed project, they should indicate this in the application and provide a clear justification why their proposal will not impact their workforce (e.g., conducting an emissions inventory may not impact the workforce directly).

· Equitable Workforce Development Pathways as Part of Project: Applicants are also encouraged to identify opportunities for individuals from disadvantaged communities, including near-port communities, to gain exposure to careers related to environmental quality at ports, such as paid internships with the applicant or educational outreach related to the planning activities conducted as part of the project. Applicants should describe the extent to which they will work with partners to recruit participants, such as community colleges, Minority Serving Institutions, community-based organizations, and other similar groups. Stipends or other compensation is an allowable use of funds and can be included in the budget.

Applicants may attach letters of commitment from workforce development organizations they plan to partner with, such as State/local workforce boards or labor unions, as optional attachments (does not contribute to the workplan 15-page limit).

Section 7 - Budget (20 possible points from Section V.A. of the NOFO)

This section of the project narrative is a detailed description of the budget found in the SF-424A. It must include a discussion of the applicant’s approach to ensuring proper management of grant/cooperative agreement funds, a detailed budget narrative, and the itemized budget table below. Selected applicant(s) will need to submit a copy of the current approved indirect cost rate that has been negotiated with a federal cognizant agency prior to award. The cognizant agency is the federal agency responsible for reviewing, negotiating, and approving indirect cost proposals on behalf of all federal agencies (see 2 CFR 200.1). Additional guidance for developing the project budget is available in RAIN-2019-G02, “Interim General Budget Development Guidance for Applicants and Recipients of EPA Financial Assistance.”

a. Budget Detail (5 possible points) This section of the project narrative provides a detailed breakout by funding type included in the proper budget category for each activity requesting funds. Applicants should consult EPA’s Interim General Budget Development Guidance for Applicants and Recipients of EPA Financial Assistance.

Applicants should provide a detailed breakout by funding type and budget category for each activity. Applicants should use the instructions, budget object class descriptions, and example table below to complete the detailed budget section of the project narrative. The budget detail and the budget table should be included in the project narrative and will count towards the 15-page limit. Additional budget documents, excluding the SF-424 and SF-424A forms, and any budget information in the project narrative beyond the page limit will not be reviewed, as explained in Section III.C. of the NOFO. Applicants should include rows for each applicable budget category in their budget table to accurately reflect the proposed project budget. Applicants must itemize costs related to personnel, fringe benefits, travel, equipment, installation or labor supplies, contractual costs, other direct costs (i.e., subawards, participant support costs), indirect costs, and total costs.

For applicants proposing to implement a participant support cost or rebate program, the rebates are appropriately listed under the “Other” budget category as “Participant Support Costs.” See Appendix A for more information on participant support costs and RAIN-2018-G05, “EPA Guidance on Participant Support Costs.”

· Personnel – List all staff positions by title. Provide annual salary (and percentage of time) or hourly rate (and number of hours) assigned to the project, and total cost for the budget period. This category includes only direct costs for the salaries of those individuals who will perform work directly for the project (paid employees of the applicant organization as reflected in payroll tax records). If the applicant is providing staff time (in-kind services) as a cost share, this should be included as Personnel costs. Personnel costs do not include: (1) costs for services of contractors (including individual consultants), which are included in the “Contractual” category; (2) costs for employees of subrecipients under subawards or non-employee program participants (e.g., interns or volunteers), which are included in the “Other” category; or (3) effort that is not directly in support of the proposed project, which may be covered by the organization’s negotiated indirect cost rate. The budget detail must identify in the personnel category, the personnel type by Full Time Equivalent (FTE), including percentage of FTE for part-time employees, number of personnel proposed for each category, and the estimated funding amounts.

· Fringe Benefits – Identify the percentage(s) of wage or salary represented as Fringe, any other basis for its computation, and the types of benefits included. Fringe benefits are allowances and services provided by employers to their employees as compensation in addition to regular salaries and wages. Fringe benefits may include, but are not limited to, the cost of leave, employee insurance, pensions, and unemployment benefit plans. If the applicant’s fringe rate does not include the cost of leave, and the applicant intends to charge leave to the agreement, it must provide supplemental information describing its proposed method(s) for determining and equitably distributing these costs.

· Travel – Specify the mileage or fares, per diem, estimated number of trips in-state and out-of-state, number of travelers, and other costs for each type of travel. Travel may be integral to the proposed project (e.g., site visits), related to the proposed project (e.g., attendance at meetings), or for technical training or attendance at workshops that supports effective implementation of the project activities. Only include travel costs for employees in the Travel category. Travel costs do not include: (1) costs for contractor travel (including consultants), which are included in the “Contractual” category; (2) travel costs for employees of subrecipients under subawards and non-employee program participants (e.g., trainees), which are included in the “Other” category. Further, travel does not include bus rentals for group trips, which would be covered under the Contractual category. Finally, if the applicant intends to use any funds for travel outside the United States, it must be specifically identified. All proposed foreign travel must be approved by the EPA’s Office of International and Tribal Affairs prior to being taken.

· Equipment – Identify each item to be purchased which has an estimated acquisition cost of $5,000 or more per unit and a useful life of more than one year. Equipment also includes accessories necessary to make the equipment operational. Equipment does not include: (1) equipment planned to be leased/rented, including under a lease/purchase agreement; or (2) equipment service or maintenance contracts that are not included in the purchase price for the equipment. These types of proposed costs should be included in the “Other” category. Items with a unit cost of less than $5,000 should be categorized as supplies, pursuant to the 2 CFR § 200.1 definition of “Equipment.” The budget detail must include an itemized listing of all equipment proposed under the project. If installation costs are included in the equipment costs, labor expenses shall be itemized with the detailed number of hours charged and the hourly wage. If the applicant has written procurement procedures that define a threshold for equipment costs that is lower than $5,000, then that threshold takes precedence.

· Supplies – “Supplies” means all tangible personal property other than “equipment.” The budget detail should identify categories of supplies to be procured (e.g., tools or office supplies). Non-tangible goods and services associated with supplies, such as printing service, photocopy services, and rental costs should be included in the “Other” category.

· Contractual – Identify each proposed contract and specify its purpose and estimated cost. Contractual services (including consultant services) are those services to be carried out by an individual or organization, other than the applicant, in the form of a procurement relationship. EPA’s Subaward Policy and supplemental Frequent Questions provide detailed guidance for differentiating between contractors and subrecipients. The EPA does not require applicants to identify specific contractors. The applicant should list the proposed contract activities along with a brief description of the anticipated scope of work or services to be provided, proposed duration, and proposed procurement method (competitive or non-competitive), if known. Any proposed non-competed/sole-source contracts in excess of $3,500 must include a justification. Note that it is unlikely that the EPA will approve use of sole source contracts for goods and services (e.g., consulting) that are widely available in the commercial market. Refer to EPA’s Best Practice Guide for Procuring Services, Supplies, and Equipment Under EPA Assistance Agreements for the EPA’s policies on competitive procurements and encouraging the use of small and disadvantaged business enterprises. Leased or rented goods (equipment or supplies) should be included in the “Other” category.

· Construction - Anticipated costs for hiring general contractors and other contractors performing activities described in the DBE Rule’s definition of Construction will be categorized as “Construction”. Note, EPA’s Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) rule at 40 CFR 33.103 provides definitions for construction, services, and equipment costs for the purpose of categorizing costs on the SF-424A budget form. Anticipated costs for hiring general contractors and other contractors performing activities described in the DBE Rule’s definition of Construction will be categorized as “Construction.” Other construction-related anticipated costs may be categorized under “Construction,” “Contractual,” or “Equipment,” depending on whether the cost falls under the DBE Rule’s definition of Construction, Services, or Equipment. For example, anticipated costs for pre-construction architectural and engineering Services as defined in the DBE Rule will be categorized as “Contractual.”

· Other – List each item in sufficient detail for the EPA to determine the reasonableness and allowability. This category should include only those types of direct costs that do not fit in any of the other budget categories. Examples of costs that may be in this category include: insurance; rental/lease of equipment or supplies; equipment service or maintenance contracts; printing or photocopying; participant support costs such as non-employee training stipends and travel; and subaward costs. Applicants should describe each item listed in the “Other” category and list the estimated, aggregated costs of participant support costs and subawards in a separate line item within the “Other” category. Additional information about participant support costs is contained in RAIN-2018-G05, “EPA Guidance on Participant Support Costs.”

Subawards (e.g., subgrants) and participant support costs are a distinct type of cost under this category. The term “subaward” means an award of financial assistance (money or property) by any legal agreement made by the recipient to an eligible subrecipient even if the agreement is casually referred to as a contract. Please refer to Appendix A for detailed guidance on funding projects and partnerships and how to correctly categorize these costs in the workplan budget. “Other” does not include procurement purchases, technical assistance in the form of services instead of money, or other assistance in the form of revenue sharing, loans, loan guarantees, interest subsidies, insurance, or direct appropriations. Subcontracts are not subawards and belong in the contractual category. Refer to EPA’s Subaward Policy and supplemental Frequent Questions for additional guidance.

· Indirect Charges – If indirect charges are budgeted, indicate the rate and base. Indirect costs are those incurred by the recipient for a common or joint purpose that benefit more than one cost objective or project and are therefore not readily assignable to specific cost objectives or projects as a direct cost. Examples of Indirect Cost Rate calculations are shown below:

· Personnel (Indirect Rate x Personnel = Indirect Costs)

· Personnel and Fringe (Indirect Rate x Personnel & Fringe = Indirect Costs)

· Total Direct Costs (Indirect Rate x Total direct costs = Indirect Costs)

· Direct Costs, less distorting or other factors such as contracts and equipment (Indirect Rate x (total direct cost – distorting factors) = Indirect Costs)

Additional indirect cost guidance is available in RAIN-2018-G02, “Indirect Cost Guidance for Recipients of EPA Assistance Agreements.”

The budget table summarizes, by line item, all proposed costs within each applicable budget category. Additional information to explain and justify each line item should be provided in the narrative budget description.

Example Budget Table1 (part of the 15-page limit)

Personnel

Fringe Benefits

Full-time Employees @ 20% of Salary and Wages x Total Personnel

- Retirement, Health Benefits, FICA3, SUI4 $49,920

Travel

Equipment

Supplies

Contractual

Construction

Other

Indirect Charges

(Federal Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate = 20%)

Note on Management Fees: When formulating budgets for applications, applicants must not include management fees or similar charges in excess of the direct costs and indirect costs at the rate approved by the applicant’s cognizant federal audit agency, or at the rate provided for by the terms of the agreement negotiated with the EPA. The term "management fees or similar charges" refers to expenses added to the direct costs in order to accumulate and reserve funds for ongoing business expenses, unforeseen liabilities, or for other similar costs that are not allowable under EPA assistance agreements. Management fees or similar charges cannot be used to improve or expand the project funded under this agreement, except to the extent authorized as a direct cost of carrying out the workplan.

b. Expenditure of Awarded Funds (5 possible points) Applicants should provide a detailed description of the approach, procedures, and controls for ensuring that awarded grant funds will be expended in a timely and efficient manner.

c. Reasonableness of Costs (10 possible points) The EPA will evaluate the reasonableness of the project budget based on the applicant’s narrative description of the budget and detailed breakout, and justification of requested funding for each work component or task. Provide a detailed description of every itemized cost, including how every cost relates to the project narrative and specific activities. Instructions for what to include in the budget detail are described above in Section IV.C.2, Section 7.a.

Applicants must itemize the cost categories as listed below on the SF-424A form: personnel, fringe benefits, contractual costs, travel, equipment, supplies, construction costs, other direct costs (subawards, participant support costs), indirect costs, and total costs. Round up to the nearest dollar and do not use any cents.

Recipients may issue subawards, contracts, or participant support costs to implement projects. Please refer to Appendix A for detailed guidance on these funding options and how to correctly categorize these costs in the workplan budget.

The reasonableness of cost will be evaluated based on how many planning elements are included (e.g., emissions inventory and stakeholder collaboration only versus an emissions inventory, emissions reduction strategy analysis, stakeholder collaboration, and resilience planning),…