NOAA-NOS-NCCOS-2018-2005323 FFO Report.pdf

Identification and application of acidification thresholds in coastal ecosystems

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Funding Opportunity Description 4

A. Program Objective 4 B. Program Priorities 5 C. Program Authority 11

II. Award Information 11 A. Funding Availability 11 B. Project/Award Period 12 C. Type of Funding Instrument 12

III. Eligibility Information 15 A. Eligible Applicants 15 B. Cost Sharing or Matching Requirement 15 C. Other Criteria that Affect Eligibility 16

IV. Application and Submission Information 16 A. Address to Request Application Package 16 B. Content and Form of Application 16 C. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM) 24 D. Submission Dates and Times 24 E. Intergovernmental Review 26 F. Funding Restrictions 26 G. Other Submission Requirements 26

V. Application Review Information 27 A. Evaluation Criteria 27 B. Review and Selection Process 28 C. Selection Factors 31 D. Anticipated Announcement and Award Dates 32

VI. Award Administration Information 32 A. Award Notices 32 B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements 32 C. Reporting 35

VII. Agency Contacts 39 VIII. Other Information 39

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 1 of 43

ANNOUNCEMENT OF FEDERAL FUNDING OPPORTUNITY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Federal Agency Name(s): National Ocean Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of Commerce

Funding Opportunity Title: Identification and application of acidification thresholds in coastal ecosystems

Announcement Type: Initial

Funding Opportunity Number: NOAA-NOS-NCCOS-2018-2005323

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 11.478, Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research - Coastal Ocean Program

Dates: The required letters of intent (LOI) for the Thresholds FFO should be sent by e-mail to Laurie.Golden@noaa.gov and must be received by 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 8, 2017. Full applications must be received and validated by Grant.gov by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on February 13, 2018. Electronic or paper copies received after the deadline will not be considered, and paper copy applications will be returned to the sender. NOAA will accept paper applications subject to further details described in this Announcement that are postmarked or provided to a commercial carrier with tracking number and receipt on or before 11:59 pm Eastern Time on February 13, 2018. Private metered postmarks will not be accepted. Applicants submitting by paper are responsible for tracking their applications and should notify the Program Manager in Section VII of this Announcement that they are submitting by paper.

When developing your submission timeline, keep in mind the following information necessary to submit an application on Grants.gov: (1) a free annual registration process in the electronic System for Award Management (SAM) may take between three and five business days or as long as several weeks, as described in Section IV.G. of this Announcement, and (2) if you submit an application via Grants.gov, you will receive a series of email notifications for up to two business days before learning via validation or rejection whether NOAA has received your application.

Funding Opportunity Description: The purpose of this document is to advise the public that NOAA/NOS/National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS and the NOAA Ocean Acidification Program (OAP) are soliciting proposals for the Identification and Application of Acidification Thresholds in Coastal Ecosystems. Funding is contingent upon the availability of Fiscal Year 2018 Federal appropriations. It is anticipated that projects funded under this announcement will have a September 1, 2018 start date.

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 2 of 43

Total funding for this research: Applicants should submit proposals not to exceed $350,000 per year for projects generally 2-3 years in duration, with a total multi-year budget not to exceed $1,050,000. If funds become available for this program, up to approximately $1,000,000 may be available in Fiscal Year 2018 for the first year of about 1-3 projects with expected start dates of September 1, 2018. Funding for this program is contingent upon availability of funds, which may not have been appropriated at the time of this announcement.. While projects are expected to be 2-3 years in scope, funding may be spread over 4 federal fiscal years depending on how project timelines align with federal budgets.

Electronic Access: Background information about NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science can be found at https://coastalscience.noaa.gov/. Information about NOAA’s Ocean Acidification Program can be found at http://oceanacidification.noaa.gov/. Proposals should be submitted through Grants.gov, http://www.grants.gov. Sign up to receive any potential amendments to this Announcement via www.grants.gov.

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 3 of 43

FULL ANNOUNCEMENT TEXT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

A. Program Objective

1. Desired Research Outcomes and Outputs

Thresholds are often present in coastal systems. Instead of gradual changes in response to change in a driver, the system reaches a point where the ecosystem changes rapidly, perhaps to a state that cannot revert to the previous system. Ocean Acidification (OA) could combine with a variety of other coastal stressors and create tipping points that can disrupt ecosystems important to coastal communities and economies. Nutrient enrichment, hypoxia, temperature and precipitation changes, coral bleaching, altered distribution of species and habitats and phenological changes to populations can interact with acidification in coastal systems to affect individual species, communities, habitats, and food webs. Economic and social thresholds affect how management actions are viewed and implemented. Thresholds may be manifested at different levels (Mumby et al., 2011). A degradation threshold exists where change in a driver can have impacts to individual species or processes, but not cause ecosystem-wide disruption. Thresholds of ecosystem state may drive a system to a different alternate stable state, perhaps irreversibly. These are sometimes called “tipping points.” And a physiological threshold exists beyond which the components of the ecosystem are no longer able to survive, the ecosystem ceases to be viable and ecosystem services are irrevocably altered. For the purposes of this announcement, “thresholds” and “tipping points” refer to thresholds of ecosystem state (sensu Mumby et al., 2011), although individual species physiological and behavioral thresholds are important to understand because it is the cumulative environmental change exceeding these thresholds which will lead to ecosystem tipping points.

An ability to identify these tipping points or thresholds in advance could allow proactive management to avoid catastrophic ecosystem collapses and consequent economic and social upheaval (Groffman et al, 2006; Selkoe et al., 2015). This announcement is aimed towards outcomes that allow coastal managers to better anticipate and avoid, or successfully manage through ecosystem shifts associated with OA in combination with other stressors. This could take the form of modifying stormwater and nutrient management, ecohydraulics, decreasing other stresses to enhance resilience, changing watershed practices, enhanced restoration of coastal habitats or establishment of refugia for areas that will be impacted.

The research funded under this initiative will address the following Objectives:

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 4 of 43

• Develop a tipping point detection and warning capability for OA in concert with other stresses, including identification of indicator species (and their associated impairment thresholds) and parameters to monitor that might provide early warning of impending change from one ecosystem state to another.

• Identify how social and economic thresholds may be associated with ecological thresholds (Adger, 2000). For instance, at what market price will it be unsustainable to fish or operate an aquaculture business? How much decline in a coral reef can be sustained before tourism declines? What is the level of acidification where mitigation of aquaculture operations becomes unsustainable? These are likely to occur at different levels than the ecological thresholds (Liu et al., 2007). Explore how communities and decision makers react to and utilize scientific information on potential ecological and economic tipping points in order to maximize the utility and effectiveness of supported research products.

• Refine ecosystem models that integrate biophysical dynamics with social-economic dynamics to simulate possible management scenarios, and evaluate the socio-economic tradeoffs of different management actions.

• Provide better understanding of factors that interact with OA to cause a threshold effect and how actions taken by coastal industries, water quality and resource management, and coastal planning and restoration will affect thresholds, with guidance for managers on how to balance the risks associated with multiple, potentially competing thresholds.

It may be that one proposal does not include all of these objectives. For instance, a proposal may only address development of a detection and warning capability. However, that capability would need to take other stressors into account and not just consider biogeochemical acidification parameters. Social and economic thresholds, and evaluation of information needed to effect a societal response to impending thresholds, may be considered in addition to ecological thresholds.

B. Program Priorities

Thresholds are often present in aquatic systems (e.g., Carpenter, 2003; Hughes et al., 2007) and managers have become increasingly aware of the implications to natural resources (Dodds et al., 2010, Selkoe et al., 2015). While thresholds often occur in systems with non-linear dynamics, they are also possible in systems with linear dynamics (Petraitis and Hoffman, 2010). Human-induced changes can cause a system to pass a threshold into an alternate state, which may not provide the same ecosystem services as the previous state.

Costs to restore a system to a previous state may be greater than avoiding a threshold that

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 5 of 43 can cause a system to shift. Therefore, it would be helpful to have an early warning system that could alert managers to the potential for system change. Alternatively, if restoration is the goal, it would be desirable to cross a threshold to an alternate state that is more favorable.

In this case, it would be beneficial to know when management efforts might be able to produce such a system change. Or restoration may be taking place assuming the system is in one state, but a threshold is passed that pushes the system into an alternate state which negates or decreases the effectiveness of restoration. In all cases, it is necessary to identify ecosystem thresholds, predict them, and understand how they interact with social and economic thresholds to drive management actions (Foley et al., 2011).

An international survey of coastal managers (Lyytimaki and Hilden, 2011) showed concerns that current coastal management structures and practices are not capable of preventing the crossing of the thresholds of harmful changes, especially those related to climate change.

The paper has the following recommendations for research areas and management approaches:

• Develop interdisciplinary research approaches and management structures that can take into account various kinds of thresholds with different spatial, temporal, and functional scales.

• Identify cases where enough knowledge already exists to make well-grounded management decisions with regard to thresholds.

• Social and political dynamics should be recognized in efforts to provide coastal management with ecological and technical information on thresholds.

• Need to develop a transdisciplinary research approach and adaptive management practices sensitive to both new information and the changing views and values of all relevant stakeholders.

The absorption of atmospheric CO2 leads to acidification of ocean and coastal waters. This has emerged as an important issue for managing coastal systems (Strong et al., 2014). A major impact of acidification is on calcium carbonate (CaCO3) deposition. Since many commercially important shellfish and corals rely on CaCO3 for structural support and defense from predators, this can have economic consequences to aquaculture, wild shellfisheries and coral reefs. "A common threshold for CaCO3 dissolution is the saturation state of aragonite. At aragonite saturation states = 1.0, CaCO3 will dissolve. However, even at higher saturation states, growth rates and reproduction can be affected, as it takes more energy to build shell material. Moreover, different life history stages are susceptible to

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 6 of 43 impairment at different saturation state levels (Gibson et al., 2011).

Coastal acidification does not result solely from atmospheric CO2 and open ocean processes.

The coastal environment exhibits large fluctuations in carbonate chemistry on diurnal and seasonal timeframes, in addition to the long-term trends (Waldbusser and Salisbury, 2014).

Inputs associated with river, groundwater and stormwater sources can influence acidification parameters (Cai et al, 2011, Waldbusser and Salisbury, 2014). Nutrient enrichment can lead to excessive algal blooms and decomposition, which not only increases CO2 in coastal waters, but also decreases oxygen (Melzner et al, 2013). Low O2 has its own set of physiological thresholds for marine organisms, with dissolved oxygen (DO) levels < 2 mg O2/liter being classified as hypoxic. However, several species show both lethal and sublethal effects at higher DO levels (Vaquer-Sunyer and Duarte, 2008). Some evidence shows that the effects of low DO and low ¿Ar on bivalve shellfish may be synergistic (Clark and Gobler, 2016). How thresholds for different stressors may interact remains a key gap in understanding how acidification, in concert with other stressors, will affect coastal ecosystems (Ekstrom et al., 2015).

An emerging research interest associated with OA is the potential for mitigation efforts (Strong et al., 2014). Approaches can include nutrient load reduction (Wallace et al., 2014), limiting precipitation runoff and stormwater surges along with associated erosion (Kelly et al., 2011), restoration of seagrasses and mangroves (Jones, 2016), co-culture of macroalgae with shellfish (e.g., http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/aquaculture/homepage_stories/paul_allen_grant.html) and/or reduction of overfishing (Hughes et al., 2007). How these efforts will work in natural environments, and how they may react to interacting thresholds is still an open question. In addition, little work has been done on social and economic thresholds that may impact the implementation of such mitigation efforts.

Specific habitats are also influenced by thresholds beyond OA and eutrophication.

Temperature thresholds are common in determining coral bleaching (Kwiatkowski, L. et al.

2015), marsh systems can convert to mangroves due to sea level rise (Krauss et al., 2011), and major marine population shifts can occur that influence ecosystem dynamics (Perry et al., 2008). Understanding how all these different thresholds can interact to impact coastal habitats will be crucial to resource management in changing environments (Scavia et al., 2002).

These interacting thresholds are not merely a theoretical concern. As noted in a report from the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP, 2014), “Ocean acidification has already changed the way shellfish farmers on the West Coast of the United

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 7 of 43

States conduct business. …Facilities like the Taylor Shellfish Farms hatchery on Hood Canal in Washington State have changed their production techniques to respond to increasing acidification in Puget Sound.” Similar concerns exist in other regions of the country (e.g., see https://earthzine.org/2015/05/26/ocean-acidification-a-global-issue-affecting-a-maine-oyster-farm/). Because of these issues, the U.S. Strategic Plan for Federal Research and Monitoring of Ocean Acidification calls for research to understand how ocean acidification will interact with other stressors, as well as the development of new and enhanced models to project how combined stressors will affect marine ecosystems and the socioeconomic and cultural impacts to communities.

Thresholds do not occur only in natural systems, but also in human systems. Moreover, interactions between natural and human systems can create thresholds that are not present in analyses of only one or the other (Liu et al., 2007). In order to manage coastal systems to be resilient to these perturbations, an integration of natural, social and economic science is needed, as well as an understanding of governance structures (Berkes et al., 2000; Adger et al., 2005; Adger et al., 2009; Renaud et al., 2010).

To address these issues, a multi-pronged approach is envisioned:

• Retrospective studies, modeling and data synthesis to identify a threshold and/or tipping point detection and warning capability for OA in concert with other coastal stresses,

• Social and economic research to assess how communities and decision makers may react to thresholds, and evaluate the significance of potential thresholds related to OA in concert with other stresses,

• Scenario development to project potential changes of a suite of coastal stressors, and how coastal managers and businesses might balance the risks associated with multiple, potentially competing thresholds, and

• Engagement of local decision makers throughout the process to identify desired research outcomes, their pathway to utilization and benchmarks for success.

This opportunity will not support extensive new field or laboratory studies on impacts of OA on particular organisms. Instead, it is meant to synthesize existing information in the context of thresholds. Therefore, requests for new laboratory equipment, field operations or shiptime will not be considered.

Coordination within NOAA and across other federal and state agencies is encouraged. In

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 8 of 43 particular, partnerships with the following entities are strongly encouraged, where appropriate. This list should not be interpreted as exclusive; other appropriate groups may be involved, depending on the habitat and issues under consideration.

• NOAA NOS National Marine Sanctuaries (http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/)

• NOAA NOS National Estuarine Research Reserves (https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/ecosystems/nerrs/)

• Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) Regional Associations (http://www.ioosassociation.org/)

• NOAA Climate Program Office (CPO) (http://cpo.noaa.gov/)

• State Sea Grant Programs (http://seagrant.noaa.gov/About)

• NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service Office of Habitat Conservation (http://www.habitat.noaa.gov/)

• NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service Regional Fisheries Science Centers (http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/sciencecenters/)

• NOAA Habitat Focus Areas (https://www.habitatblueprint.noaa.gov/habitat-focus-areas/)

• NOAA Sentinel Sites (http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/sentinelsites/)

• State departments of natural resources and/or environmental protection

• Commercial interests reliant on coastal resources.

The Office of National Marine Sanctuaries (ONMS) has examples of vulnerability assessments for specific sanctuaries (e.g., Hutto et al., 2015) and some suggested indicators (e.g., Duncan et al., 2013) that are designed to provide a clear and concise way to communicate the status and trends of important physical factors of the climate system and their impacts on NMS resources. However, these indicators are not evaluated in the context of how close the system may be to crossing a threshold that might trigger fundamental changes. Similarly, the National Estuarine Research Reserve system recently conducted a climate sensitivity assessment (Robinson et al., 2013) that categorized reserves based on their potential sensitivities to climate hazards/variables, ecological resiliency, projected

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 9 of 43 changes in temperature, and projected sea level rise. The regional science centers of the NOAA National Marine Fisheries Service have undertaken regional climate assessments (e.g., https://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/ecosystems/climate/northeast-fish-and-shellfish-climate-vulnerability/NEVA_Overview). However, there have not been thresholds identified for any of these variables for specific coastal habitats. Knowing when a system is approaching a threshold could help in prioritizing reserve management options.

Proposals should identify the importance of the region or habitat under study, key species and/or parameters and why they are chosen for analysis with respect to thresholds, and overlaying social and economic factors. All projects must demonstrate a clear link to management issues and specify outputs and outcomes that will provide managers, businesses and the public with sound scientific information for making decisions. Proposals must describe specific plans for sharing information and research products with end-users and the community in a timely manner, for example by proposing workshops and public outreach activities throughout the life of the project. Articulation of outcome-based management goals is required in proposals. Activities in the final year of the project must include communication of research results to interested audiences and intended users.

Management Application:

These science products to support outcome-based actions by coastal managers will be the goal of this FFO:

• A threshold detection and warning capability for OA in concert with other stresses, including identification of indicator species and parameters (ecological, economic, and/or social) to monitor that might provide early warning of impending change from one ecosystem state to another.

• Ecosystem models that integrate biophysical dynamics with social-economic dynamics to simulate possible management action scenarios, identify thresholds (potentially including social and economic thresholds) and evaluate the socio-economic tradeoffs of different management actions.

• Guidance for managers on how to balance the risks associated with multiple, potentially competing thresholds based on better understanding of factors that interact with OA to cause a threshold effect, how actions taken in different spheres will affect thresholds, and how communities and decision makers react to and utilize scientific information on potential ecological and economic tipping points.

Projects must have an advisory committee whose purpose is to provide advice to the

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 10 of 43 investigator team to assist with project design to ensure stakeholder use of research products developed under this FFO. The structure, size, and activities of the committee must be described in the proposal, including a plan for how it will provide advice to the investigators.

Members of the committee must be named and letters included in the proposal indicating that they have agreed to serve; these letters do not count against the page limits. The committee must include members independent of the project (not funded investigators), who will typically be potential end users. A primary responsibility of the advisory committee will be to develop a management transition plan that will outline how the scientific results will be used in a management context, and expected timelines for that use. NCCOS and OAP employees cannot be members, although the NCCOS and OAP Program Managers may attend committee meetings. Funding may be requested for activities such as participation in project investigator meetings, workshops and/or informational community events. Travel funds for the committee should be included within the budget. Although federal employees may be members, they cannot receive travel funds. The NCCOS Program Manager may consult with the project’s lead PI to add committee members during the project period.

C. Program Authority

Coastal Zone Management Act, Section 1456c “The Secretary shall conduct a program of technical assistance and management-oriented research necessary to support the development and implementation of State coastal management program[s]…and technical assistance in coastal zone management”

Federal Ocean Acidification Research and Monitoring Act 33 U.S.C. Chapter 50, Sec. 3701- Directs the Secretary of Commerce to conduct research and monitoring and authorizes the Secretary to establish an ocean acidification program in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) consistent with the strategic research plan, including:

(1) providing grants for critical research projects exploring the effects of ocean acidification on ecosystems and the socioeconomic impacts of increased ocean acidification; and (2) incorporating a competitive merit-based process for awarding grants.

II. Award Information

A. Funding Availability

Applicants should submit proposals not to exceed $350,000 per year for projects generally 2-3 years in duration, with a total multi-year budget not to exceed $1,050,000. If funds become available for this program, up to approximately $1,000,000 may be available

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 11 of 43 in Fiscal Year 2018 for the first year of about 1-3 projects with expected start dates of September 1, 2018. Funding for this program is contingent upon availability of funds, which may not have been appropriated at the time of this announcement. Funding may be spread over 4 federal fiscal years depending on how project timelines align with federal budgets.

B. Project/Award Period

Full applications may cover a project/award period up to 3 years, but shorter-term project proposals are also encouraged.

Awards may be funded incrementally, generally on an annual basis, but, once awarded, those awards will not compete for funding in subsequent years. This multi-year funding is often appropriate for projects to be funded for two to five years. Once approved, full applications are not required for the continuation out years. While applicants are not required to divide Federal assistance project activities into annual increments based on appropriations law, this approach may be constructive given the possibility that funding may not be available in subsequent years.

Funding for each year's activity is contingent upon the availability of funds from Congress, satisfactory performance, and is at the sole discretion of the agency.

During the implementation phase of research projects funded under this announcement, regardless of the funding mechanism used, NCCOS and OAP Program Managers will analyze financial statements and progress reports for each continuing award, and will have dialogue with the Principal Investigators (PI) and Authorized Representatives of the recipient institutions to discuss research progress and expected time lines for the remaining award period. If NOAA experiences budget reductions in future fiscal years, the amount of funding provided in any given fiscal year will be determined on a project-specific basis by the remaining tasks to be completed, the overall pace of the research and the length of time remaining on the award and/or across the board reductions based on the overall funds available.

Regardless of the budget for any given fiscal year, Program Managers will consider the length of time remaining for each project, the amount of funds available, the tasks to be completed in the upcoming fiscal year, the pace of research, and any delayed progress relative to that originally proposed, before determining the funding amount in any given fiscal year.

C. Type of Funding Instrument

In an effort to maximize the use of limited resources, applications from non-Federal, Federal Funding Opportunity Page 12 of 43 non-NOAA Federal and NOAA Federal applicants will be evaluated in the same competition, with different funding instruments applied depending on the type of applicant.

The funding instrument for a research application selected for funding from a non-Federal researcher is expected to be a cooperative agreement. A cooperative agreement is appropriate when substantial Federal government involvement is anticipated. This means that the recipient can expect substantial agency collaboration, participation, or intervention in project performance. Substantial involvement exists when: responsibility for the management, control, direction, or performance of the project is shared by the assisting agency and the recipient; or the assisting agency has the right to intervene (including interruption or modification) in the conduct or performance of project activities. "Substantial involvement” will be coordinated and communicated by NCCOS Program Managers, and can include collaboration and participation by NOAA researchers, as well as NCCOS Program Manager involvement in PI meetings, setting up management advisory groups, development of management transition plans, and communication of project results.

If the non-Federal applicant is at an institution that has a NOAA Cooperative Institute (CI), it is allowed to submit applications that reference the CI by attaching a cover letter to the application stating its desire to have the application associated with the CI. This letter should specify the name of the cooperative institute, the CI cooperative agreement number, and the NOAA-approved research theme and task that applies to the proposal. The application will use the Facilities & Administrative (F&A, or indirect cost) rate associated with the main CI agreement. If the application is selected for funding, NOAA will notify the university that a separate award will be issued with its own award number. However, the award will include two Special Award Conditions (SACs): (1) the existing University/NOAA Memorandum Of Agreement (MOA) would be incorporated by reference into the terms of the competitive award, and (2) any performance report(s) for the competitive project must follow the timetable of the funding program and be submitted directly to the funding program.

Report(s) will be copied to the CI's administrator when due, to be attached to the main cooperative agreement progress report as an appendix. This will allow the CI to coordinate all the projects submitted through the CI, since the terms of these awards will specify that this is a CI project via the MOA.

If the non-Federal applicant is at an institution that has a NOAA approved Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Units (CESU), it is allowed to submit applications that reference the CESU. If the applicant is a member of one of these CESUs and is interested in using its CESU status, it may state its wishes in a cover letter to the application stating its desire to have the application associated with the CESU. This letter should specify the name of the CESU. Of the seventeen CESUs across the nation, NOAA is a member of ten: North and

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 13 of 43

West Alaska, California, Hawaii-Pacific Islands, South Florida-Caribbean, Gulf Coast, Piedmont-South Atlantic Coast, Chesapeake Watershed, North Atlantic Coast, Pacific Northwest, and Great Plains. If an applicant is associated with a CESU NOAA is not a member of, the application must be submitted through their institution without reference to CESU status.

The following criteria must be met for NOAA to use the established partnerships with CESUs:

The proposed funding opportunity must fit within the objectives of the National CESU Network Program outlined below:

• To provide research, technical assistance, and education to federal land management, environmental, and research agencies and their partners in biological, physical, social, cultural, and engineering disciplines needed to address natural and cultural resource management issues at multiple scales and in an ecosystem context.

• The proposed funding opportunity must fit the intent of the Cooperative and Joint Agreements, which means:

• The research partnership will carry out or stimulate an activity (data, products or services) for a public purpose; and

• NOAA will be significantly involved in the work.

Previous research completed by a local CI will be considered in decisions made to issue an award to a CESU.

The funding instrument for a selected application from an eligible NOAA Federal applicant will be an intra-agency transfer of funds.

The funding instrument for a selected application from a non-NOAA Federal applicant will be through an inter-agency transfer of funds, provided legal authority exists for the Federal applicant to receive funds from another agency. Non-NOAA Federal applicants that intend to be the lead institution must call Laurie Golden/240-533-0285 to discuss technical details.

PLEASE NOTE: Before non-NOAA Federal applicants may be funded, they must demonstrate that they have applicable legal authority for an interagency transfer of funds.

Support may be solely through NCCOS or partnered with other Federal offices and agencies.

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 14 of 43

The intra- and inter-agency transfers of funds are not Federal assistance (grants or cooperative agreements), and the policies described in this Announcement applicable to Federal assistance awards do not apply to Federal entities receiving intra- and inter-agency transfers of funds. Refer to the Agency Contact officials in Section VII. for more information.

III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants

Eligible applicants for Federal financial assistance in this competition are institutions of higher education, other non-profits, state, local, Indian Tribal Governments, for-profit organizations, U.S. Territories and Federal agencies that possess the statutory authority to receive transfers of funds. DOC/NOAA supports cultural and gender diversity and encourages applications involving women and minority individuals and groups. In addition, DOC/NOAA is strongly committed to broadening the participation of historically black colleges and universities, Hispanic serving institutions, tribal colleges and universities, and institutions that work in underserved areas. DOC/NOAA encourages applications involving any of the above institutions to apply.

Please note that:

(1) PIs should be employees of an eligible entity listed above; and applications should be submitted through that entity. Non-Federal researchers should comply with their institutional requirements for application submission.

(2) Non-NOAA Federal applicants will be required to submit certifications or documentation showing that they have specific legal authority to accept funds for this type of research.

(3) Foreign researchers must apply as subawards or contracts through an eligible US entity.

(4) Non-Federal researchers affiliated with NOAA-University Cooperative/Joint Institutes will be funded through cooperative agreements.

(5) NCCOS researchers may apply as subawards through an eligible US entity but cannot be the lead PI on the application.

B. Cost Sharing or Matching Requirement

None

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 15 of 43

C. Other Criteria that Affect Eligibility

Letters of intent are required. A full proposal that did not submit a LOI will not be considered and will be returned to the proposer without review.

Each application must substantially comply with the sixteen elements listed under Content and Form of Application, Required Elements, (1) - (16), or it will be returned to sender without further consideration. A checklist with the required and requested application elements can be found in Section VIII

IV. Application and Submission Information

A. Address to Request Application Package

Laura Golden 1305 East West Hwy SSMC 4 Station 8219 Silver Spring, MD 20910

B. Content and Form of Application

1. Letter of Intent (LOI)

LOIs are required. Any full proposals submitted without a prior timely LOI submission will not be considered. The purpose of the LOI process is to provide information to potential applicants on the relevance of their proposed project and the likelihood of it being competitive in advance of preparing a full application. Full applications will be encouraged only for LOIs deemed relevant; however, the final decision to submit a full proposal is made by the investigator. The LOI should provide a concise description of the proposed work and its relevance to program priorities. The LOI should be no more than two pages (front only) in length, single spaced in 12-point font with 1-inch margins and should include in order the components listed below. If all these components are not included, the LOI will not be considered.

(1) Tentative project title.

(2) Name(s) phone number(s), email address(s) and institution(s) of all Principal Investigator(s), and specification of which individual is the Lead Principal Investigator.

(3) Approximate cost of the project.

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 16 of 43

(4) Statement of the problem and its management relevance.

(5) Brief summary of work to be completed, methodology to be used, and the plan for engaging the user community.

NCCOS and OAP Program Managers will review each LOI to determine whether it is responsive to the Program's goals, as advertised in this notice. Letters or emails to encourage or discourage a full application are scheduled to be sent out two weeks after the LOI due date.

Late LOIs will not be considered and any associated full applications will not be considered.

2. Full Applications

Example Application An example application can be found on the NCCOS website at:

https://coastalscience.noaa.gov/about/funding-opportunities/application-forms/.

Required Elements

Collaborative Proposals - If more than one institution is collaborating in a project awarded funds, the lead institution will be responsible for distributing funds to the partner institutions with the exception of Federal partners. Federal partners will be funded with either intra- or inter- agency agreements initiated by NCCOS. Collaborating institutions expected to receive funds must be budgeted as subawards or contracts. Unfunded collaborators may also participate.

Each application must substantially comply with the following sixteen elements to be forwarded for merit review. The Summary, Title page, Abstract, Project Description, References, Biographical Sketch, and Budget Justification must be single spaced in 12-point font with 1-inch margins. The Collaborators List must be an Excel spread sheet. The sixteen elements are as follows:

(1) Standard Form 424. The applicant must submit the Standard Form, SF-424, “Application for Federal Assistance,” to indicate the total amount of funding proposed for the whole project period. This form is to be the cover page for the original application and is the first required form in the grants.gov application package.

(2) Summary title page. One-page maximum. The Summary title page identifies the project's

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 17 of 43 title, starting with the brief identifier: Thresholds 2018 and the PI’s name and affiliation, complete address, phone and E-mail information. The requested funding amounts for each fiscal year should be included on the Summary title page.

(3) One-page abstract/project summary. The summary (abstract) should appear on a separate single page, headed with the proposal title, institution(s), investigator(s), total proposed cost, and budget period. It should be written in the third person. The summary is used to help compare proposals quickly and allows the respondents to summarize their key points in their own words. Project summaries of applications that receive funding may be posted on program-related websites.

The project summary should include an introduction of the problem, rationale, scientific objectives and/or hypotheses to be tested, and a brief summary of work to be completed.

(4) Project Description. The description of the proposed project must include narratives of the Proposed Research (elements a through d), the Application to Management (element e), and the Data Management Plan (element f).

The description of the proposed project must not be more than 15 pages for elements (a) through (e) and an additional 2 pages for the Data Management Plan (f).

The Proposed Research Narrative should be thorough and explicitly indicate its relevance to the program goals and scientific priorities by:

(a) Identifying the topic that is being addressed by the proposal, the region proposed for work, and the significance of the species and/or parameters analyzed for thresholds;

(b) Describing the proposed scientific objectives and research activities in relation to the present state of knowledge in the field and in relation to previous and current work by the proposing principal investigator(s);

(c) Discussing how the proposed project lends value to the program goals;

(d) Identifying the function of each PI. The Lead PI (s) will be responsible for communicating with the Federal Program Manager on all pertinent verbal or written information. He/She may also be a primary liaison to the Management Advisory Committee;

(e) The Applications to Management Narrative should establish the connection to relevant resource management needs by explicitly identifying the end user group(s) including

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 18 of 43 evidence of the linkage between the scientific questions and management needs. The description of the Advisory Committee and its activities should also be included in this section (see required information in Section I.B.2.)

This narrative should provide the management justification for the research through:

(i) Articulating the coordination with one or more management and/or commercial entities;

(ii) Discussing the expected significance of the project to stakeholder priorities and needs.

Specific management targets, with proposed outputs and outcomes, should describe how this project will improve management capabilities. Outputs are defined as products (e.g.

publications, models) or activities that lead to outcomes (changes in management knowledge or action). Definitions and examples of outputs and outcomes can be accessed at https://coastalscience.noaa.gov/about/funding-opportunities/outputs-and-outcomes/. The timeline for achieving outcomes should be included in the Milestone Chart (below).

(iii) Describing specific activities, such as workshops or development of outreach materials that will enhance information transfer from project scientists to relevant management entities, other end-users, or the public.

(f) Providing a detailed Data Management Plan that describes how metadata and data collected as part of the project will be disseminated to the broader community, and plans for longer term archiving of these data. National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) serves as the data management focal point for the NOAA Ocean Acidification Program (http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/oceanacidification/index.html). All data resulting from NOAA OAP-funded projects must be archived and accessible through NCEI. Costs associated with use of data centers, or data archiving, should be included in the application budget. See the section on the NOAA Data Reporting requirements below (Section VI. C.).

(5) References cited. Reference information is required. Each reference should include the names of all authors in the same sequence they appear in the publications, the article title, the journal or book title, volume number, page numbers, and year of publications. While there is no established page limitation, this section should include bibliographic citations only and should not be used to provide parenthetical information outside of the Project Description.

(6) Milestone chart. Provide time lines of major tasks covering the duration of the proposed project.

(7) Biographical sketch. All PI(s) co-PI(s) must provide summaries of up to 2 pages that

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 19 of 43 include the following:

(a) A listing of professional and academic credentials and mailing address;

(b) A list of up to five publications most closely related to the proposed project and five other significant publications.

(8) Current and pending support. Describe all current and pending Federal financial/funding support for all PI(s) and co-PI(s). Continuing grants must also be included. A current and pending support form is available on the NCCOS web site for your use:

https://coastalscience.noaa.gov/about/funding-opportunities/application-forms/. You should respond to this element whether or not you have any current and/or pending support, e.g., by indicating “not applicable.”

(9) A list of all known applicable permits that will be required to perform the proposed work.

You should respond to this requirement element whether or not permits are required.

(10) Accomplishments from Prior Federal Support. If any PI or co-PI identified on the project has received Federal funding in the past five years addressing OA or ecosystem thresholds, information on the award(s) is required. Each PI and co-PI who has received more than one award (excluding amendments) must report on the award most closely related to the proposal. This section should not exceed two pages per award in addition to the 15 pages for the Project Description.

The following information should be provided:

a) the Federal agency, award number, amount and period of support;

b) the title of the project;

c) a summary of the results of the completed work;

d) publications resulting from the award;

e) a brief description of outputs and outcomes; and

f) as appropriate, a description of the relation of the completed work to the proposed work.

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 20 of 43

When applicable, this information will be considered by reviewers in the evaluation of overall qualifications of applicants. You should respond to this element whether or not you have accomplishments from prior Federal support; e.g. by indicating “no prior Federal research on OA or ecosystem thresholds.”

(11) Budget narrative/justification. In order to allow reviewers to fully evaluate the appropriateness of costs, all applications must include a detailed budget narrative and a justification to support all proposed budget categories for each fiscal year. Personnel costs should be broken out by named PI and number of months and percentage of time requested per year per PI. Support for each PI should be commensurate with their stated involvement each year in the milestones chart (see Required Elements (6) Milestone chart).

Any unnamed personnel (graduate students, post-doctoral researchers, technicians) should be identified by their job title, and their personnel costs explained similar to PI personnel costs above. The contribution of any personnel to the project goals should be explained. Travel costs should be broken out by number of people traveling, destination and purpose of travel, and projected costs per person. Equipment costs should describe the equipment to be purchased, and its contribution to the achievement of the project goals. Each subaward should be listed as a separate item in the budget justification. Provide separate budget justifications for each subaward and indicate the basis for the cost estimates. Describe project activities for subawards and products/services to be obtained for acquisitions, and indicate the applicability or necessity of each to the project.

For additional information concerning each of the required categories and appropriate level of disclosure please see http://www.ago.noaa.gov/grants/docs/gmd_budget_narrative_guidance_-_05-24- 2017_final.pdf.

If more than one institution is collaborating in a project awarded funds, a separate budget justification is required for each subaward. Signed approval from each identified subaward institution is also required. The lead institution is responsible for sending funds to their subaward institutions. For acquisition contracts, the purpose and cost or price must be fully justified and the contract must fully comply with 2 C.F.R. 200.317-.326.

An applicant requesting funds for indirect costs in its proposal budget that has a current Federally approved rate should submit documentation of the indirect cost rate agreement as an attachment to its application submission. An applicant without a Federally approved rate should refer to Section IV.F.of this Announcement regarding options.

Federal Funding Opportunity Page 21 of 43

(12) CD 511. Certification Regarding Lobbying. Lead institutions can submit these forms through the grants.gov CD511 document placeholder without a hard signature because electronic signatures are allowed on documents from the submitting institution.

(13) Standard Form 424B. Assurances - Non-Construction Programs. Lead institutions can submit these forms through the grants.gov SF 424B document placeholder without a hard signature because electronic signatures are allowed on document from the submitting institutions.

(14) Standard Form 424A. All applicants are required to submit a SF-424A Budget Form that identifies the budget for each fiscal year of the proposal. Place each fiscal year in separate columns in Section B of page 1 on the SF424A by filling in the fiscal years 1 to 3 in Section A Budget Summary - Grant Program Function or Activity column. (Note that this revised 424A Section B format is a NOAA requirement that is not reflected in the Instructions for the SF 424A). The budget figures must correspond with the descriptions contained in the proposal.

Each subaward should provide a SF424A listing each year of funding being requested. List total subaward costs under line item 6.h. other on the SF-424A. Signed approval from the institution of each identified subaward should be provided.

(15) Provide one list that includes all (U.S. and Foreign) collaborators, advisors, and advisees for each investigator (PI(s) and co-PI(s), post-docs, and…