NOFO_Alliance.docx

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Ecological Services – Division of Restoration and Recovery

Natural Resource Damage Assessment, Restoration and Implementation Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 15.658

Notice of Funding Opportunity

I. Description of Funding Opportunity

This is a notice of intent to award to a single source. There is no full announcement associated with this notice and this is not a request for competitive proposals.

Mercury releases from the former E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company (DuPont) plant in Waynesboro, VA impacted natural resources for miles downstream, in and adjacent to the South River, South Fork Shenandoah River, and Shenandoah River. The DuPont natural resource trustees (“Trustees”) are the United States Department of the Interior (DOI), represented by the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the Commonwealth of Virginia. Through the Natural Resource Damage Assessment and Restoration (NRDAR) process, the Trustees developed a Restoration Plan/Environmental Assessment (RP/EA), with public input, to describe the restoration projects that will compensate for injuries to various natural resources from the mercury releases. The RP/EA was included as Appendix B of the Consent Decree lodged on December 15, 2016 and approved July 28, 2017 by the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Virginia, Harrisonburg Division. The Trustees allocated funding to different restoration project categories to fulfill the objectives of the RP/EA, which can be found at:

https://www.fws.gov/northeast/virginiafield/pdf/contaminants/dupont_waynesboro/20170414_DuPont_Waynesboro_RPEA_FINAL_signatures.pdf

This is an announcement for issuing a single source financial assistance award to Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, LLC (Alliance) to complete a pilot project working with state and non-governmental partners to implement an incentive program to encourage establishment of riparian buffers along the South River, Middle River, and Christians Creek, improving habitat for wildlife and recreation.

This project was evaluated and selected jointly by the state and federal Trustees, is consistent with the goals of the RP/EA and restoration criteria (see link), and will benefit multiple of the same resources/wildlife that were impacted from mercury. The project includes partnerships with local, state, and federal organizations as well as non-profit organizations. The recipient is uniquely qualified to conduct this project due to their technical expertise and longstanding partnerships in the region.

This project will achieve goals that are consistent with multiple DOI Secretarial Priorities and core priorities of the Service. Through this project, best practices will be identified to manage land and water resources (such as, habitat restoration and agricultural best management practices) throughout the South Fork Shenandoah watershed, adapting to changes in the environment, primarily due to agricultural practices [DOI Secretarial Priority 1(a)]. This project will improve recreational fishing opportunities by improving water quality and reducing agricultural runoff to popular fishing streams [DOI Secretarial Priority 1(f) and Service Priority 5: Improving Public Access to Hunting, Fishing and Outdoor Recreation]. The Alliance is working to develop this project collaboratively with the Service, the Commonwealth of Virginia’s Office of the Governor and natural resource agencies, and local or regional community groups [DOI Secretarial Priority 3(b)]. Contractors will be hired to complete this work, generating new job opportunities and additional revenues that support national interests [DOI Secretarial Priority 5]. This project is part of a suite of restoration projects selected to cost-effectively achieve the goals of NRDAR and the RP/EA [DOI Secretarial Priority 10].

The Service, Region 5, intends to make a sole source award of a Cooperative Agreement to the Alliance. Natural Resource Damage Assessment, Restoration and Implementation (CFDA 15.658) authorizing statutes related to this agreement include: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C 9601, et seq. For a complete list of this program’s authorizing legislation, go to https://www.cfda.gov/ and search by the CFDA Program number

II. Award Information The Service Region 5 intends to make a sole source award of a cooperative agreement to the Alliance in the amount of $250,000. The estimated project period is spring 2018 through spring 2023 (5 years) and project activities include implementing an incentive program to establish riparian buffers along the South River, Middle River, and Christians Creek, in Augusta County, VA.

The Service will be substantially involved in the project under this funding opportunity. In particular, the Service will be responsible for: l) providing up to a total of $250,000 to the recipient to complete the activities, 2) working with the recipient in development of project actions to meet goals and objectives of the RP/EA and NRDAR settlement, 3) providing guidance and technical assistance in the development of the designs and plans, if needed or requested, to develop specific plans and identify potential concerns, 4) providing technical assistance to the recipient to complete regulatory permitting/environmental compliance, 4) reviewing and approving proposed modification to scope of work and budget, and 5) halting an activity if detailed performance specifications are not met.

III. Basic Eligibility Requirements Eligible Applicants:

This is a notice of intent to award to single source. All potential applicants were eligible.

Federal law mandates that all entities applying for Federal financial assistance must have a valid Dun & Bradstreet Data Universal Number System (DUNS) number and have a current registration in the System for Award Management (SAM). See Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 25 for more information. Exemptions: The SAM registration requirement does not apply to individuals submitting an application on their own behalf and not on behalf of a company or other for-profit entity, state, local or Tribal government, academia or other type of organization.

A. DUNS Registration Request a DUNS number at http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform. For technical difficulties, contact Dun & Bradstreet by email at: govt@dnb.com, or by calling the Government Customer Resource Center at voice phone: 866-705-5711 or TTY line: 877-807-1679 (hearing impaired customers only). Once assigned a DUNS number, entities are responsible for maintaining up-to-date information with Dun & Bradstreet.

B. Entity Registration in SAM Register in SAM at www.sam.gov. Once registered in SAM, entities must renew and revalidate their SAM registration at least every 12 months from the date previously registered. Entities are strongly urged to revalidate their registration as often as needed to ensure that their information is up to date and in synch with changes that may have been made to DUNS and IRS information. Foreign entities who wish to be paid directly to a United States bank account must enter and maintain valid and current banking information in SAM.

Note: The official U.S. government website address for SAM is www.sam.gov. There is NO COST to register in or access SAM.gov. There are third-party vendors who charge a fee in exchange for registering entities in SAM; please be aware that you can register to do business with the U.S. government FOR FREE directly in SAM at www.sam.gov.

C. Excluded Entities Applicant entities or their key project personnel identified in the SAM.gov Exclusions database as ineligible, prohibited/restricted or excluded from receiving Federal contracts, certain subcontracts, and certain Federal assistance and benefits will not be considered for Federal funding, as applicable to the funding being requested under this Federal program. The Service conducts a review of the SAM.gov Exclusions database for all applicant entities and their key project personnel prior to award.

D. Cost Sharing or Matching Cost-sharing is not a requirement.

IV. Application Requirements To be considered for funding under this funding opportunity, an application must contain:

A. A completed, signed and dated Standard Form (SF) 424, Application for Federal Assistance (http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/forms/sf-424-family.html#sortby=1). Do not include other Federal sources of funding, requested or approved, in the total entered in the “Federal” funding box on the Application for Federal Assistance form. Enter only the amount being requested under this program in the “Federal” funding box. Include any other Federal sources of funding in the total funding entered in the “Other” box.

B. Project Summary The Alliance will complete a pilot project working with state and non-governmental partners to implement an incentive program to encourage establishment of riparian buffers along the South River, Middle River, and Christians Creek in Augusta County, Virginia. The project, “Healthy Streams Farm Stewardship Program” (HSFSP), will be modeled after prior successful programs in Maryland, West Virginia, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. A target of 45 acres of forest riparian buffer will be restored and pollutant input to streams will be reduced. The Alliance will engage with at least 18 farmers and landowners to complete restoration projects to benefit water quality and habitat by providing financial incentives and technical assistance.

C. Project Narrative

1. Statement of Need: Funds under this award are to be used to compensate for natural resources injured as a result of mercury released from the former DuPont facility in Waynesboro, VA. Restoration is undertaken in accordance with the natural resource damage settlement under which DuPont paid $42,069,916.78 to compensate for natural resource injuries in the South Fork Shenandoah River watershed. As part of the settlement, the Trustees identified the preferred project categories, including“land protection, property acquisition and wildlife enhancements” and “projects to improve water quality and fish habitat”. Restoration should benefit the same types of wildlife and habitat that were impacted, and may include habitat improvement projects, such as riparian buffer establishment and agricultural best management practices (BMPs) that will improve water quality through reducing erosion and runoff. This project will increase the amount of acres and stream miles protected and improved for fish and wildlife habitat and recreation, that otherwise would not occur under current programs in Augusta County, VA. Traditional conservation programs are not always sufficient or flexible to incentivize practice adoption and overcome the barriers to participation such as, high upfront costs of implementation, limitation over which practices may be covered, little financial assistance for project maintenance, or distrust in government programs. Augusta County is the second highest agriculture producing county in the state with the highest number of cattle. It also contains headwater streams for both the South Fork Shenandoah River and James River. Buffer adoption in the area has the potential for outsized improvements to water quality and habitat, and a targeted buffer incentives program will provide a much-needed boost to the adoption of the forest buffer practice in the area.

2. Project Goals and Objectives: The long-term goal of projects funded by the DuPont natural resource settlement is to improve water quality of the South River and South Fork Shenandoah River; improve, restore, and protect habitat for the same types of fish and wildlife that were impacted from mercury; and/or improve recreational fishing. The objective of this agreement is work with state and non-governmental partners to implement an incentive program to encourage establishment of riparian buffers along the South River, Middle River, and Christians Creek in Augusta County, Virginia. The project will be modeled after prior successful programs in Maryland, West Virginia, and Virginia. The project will restore approximately 50 acres of forest riparian buffer and reduce pollutants to streams at locations within Augusta County, Virginia. This will be accomplished by engaging with farmers and landowners (target of 50) and offering financial incentives and technical assistance to complete projects that otherwise would not occur through existing programs. This program will also provide maintenance funds to ensure that riparian forest plantings are successful and are managed during the critical period of the first few years after planting. This will ensure that future maintenance costs are minimal, and will provide a resource to the landowner that is otherwise not offered.

3. Project Activities, Methods and Timetable: The Alliance will start work upon signature of the award and continue the project for five years. Year 1 will include planning efforts to outline work for the following four years, and will initiate activities (forest buffers and planning for agricultural BMPs).

Activities include:

· Develop HSFSP program in Augusta County working with partners such as, Whitescarver Natural Resources Management LLC, Chesapeake Bay Foundation (CBF), Headwaters Soil and Water Conservation District (HWSWCD), US Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and Farm Service Agency (FSA), and Department of Forestry (DOF). Identify other significant partners not already listed here (Year 1-5).

· Conduct outreach to producers, natural resource professionals, community leaders on need and existing opportunities. Incorporate input into each year’s planned work (Year 1-5).

· Update riparian forest buffer plans if needed (Year 1-5).

· Work with producers to engage in conservation cost-share program (Year 1-5).

· Complete any environmental compliance activities (Year 1-5).

· Install forest buffers (Year 1-3).

· Plan, design, and implement agricultural BMPs using conservation vouchers (Year 2-4).

· Inspect forest buffer project and develop site-specific maintenance recommendations (Year 2 and 4).

· Implement recommendations for riparian forest buffer project (Year 2-5).

· Progress reports at the end of each season

4. Stakeholder Coordination/Involvement: The Alliance will work with many of their established partners on this project, including: Whitescarver Natural Resources Management LLC, CBF, HWSWCD, NRCS, FSA, and DOF. Their proposal was also supported by Friends of the Middle River. The Alliance, through the HSFSP project, will work closely with other conservation programs like USDA’s Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program (CREP) and Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) or Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation’s Stream Exclusion with Grazing Land Management Practice (SL-6) and Woodland Buffer Filter Area (FR-3). The HSFSP project will improve participation in these programs by offering additional assistance to the landowner/producer, such as conservation support for the riparian area. One or more contractors will be involved in implementation of buffers. They will be chosen after the award is made when detailed plans are being prepared to do the actual work.

The Trustees (the Service and Commonwealth of Virginia) reviewed and approved this proposal, and will continue to provide input as plans are developed.

5. Project Monitoring and Evaluation: The Alliance will provide annual and financial interim reports to the project officer who will convey these reports to the Trustees. The Alliance will develop a monitoring plan with measurable goals in cooperation with the Trustees. The monitoring from each year will inform the next year’s activities.

To support the successful tree establishment in the riparian areas, the Alliance will develop and manage an innovative maintenance fund that allocates resources for each project during the first three growing seasons after the planting that is based on maintenance needs rather than using a set rate per site. The first three to five years after the planting is the most critical period for tree establishment, and proper maintenance early on can drastically reduce maintenance costs down the road. Site conditions for each buffer can vary dramatically depending on soil types, soil moisture, aspect, topography, existing vegetation, etc. This directly influences how quickly the trees establish. The Virginia Department of Forestry staff or other qualified partners and will make biannual inspections of each site and develop specific maintenance recommendations. These prescriptions will then be implemented regularly by our experienced natural resource contractor. The project’s outcomes lend themselves to straightforward measurement. Most are directly quantifiable (e.g. number of farms receiving technical assistance, number of BMPs, acres of forested buffers restored, number of farms assessed for ecosystem service markets. All nutrient and sediment load reduction estimates will be made using a reputable tool (e.g., FieldDoc or CAST).

6. Description of Entities Undertaking the Project: The Alliance is a non-profit organization founded in 1971 focused on leading, supporting, and inspiring local action to restore and protect the lands, rivers, and streams of the Chesapeake Bay watershed (six states and the District of Columbia). The Alliance mobilizes thousands of community volunteers to work on programs throughout the watershed. The Alliance has experience running large scale, multi-partner projects. Several of the partners listed above have worked previously with the Alliance on a similar project.

Key people involved from the Alliance include Jenny McGarvey, the Chesapeake Forest Program Manager and Craig Highfield, Chesapeake Forests Program Director.

Contact Information for the Alliance:

Jenny McGarvey, Chesapeake Forests Program Manager Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay, LLC 612 Hull Street, Suite 101c Richmond, VA 23225 804-977-1657 jmcgarvey@allianceforthebay.org

The Trustees, through the Service, will provide funding, project management, support, and oversight. The Service point of contact is:

804-824-2407 anne_condon@fws.gov

7. Sustainability: The Alliance will work with landowners/producers to identify any maintenance or monitoring after the initial maintenance period that will be covered by the Alliance. The benefits of this projects are expected to continue for many years. Each participant will be required to sign a letter of agreement with the Alliance in addition to any contracts they are required to sign for participating in a state or federal cost-share program. This contract will hold the landowner responsible for maintaining the buffer on a set schedule and recommended plan for a minimum of three years.

8. Literature Cited: None

9. Map of Project Area: Map below shows Augusta County and the three target rivers (South River, Middle River, and Christians Creek). The map shows the mercury-impacted rivers and watershed. Specific locations are to be determined.

D. Budget Form The Alliance will follow the instructions outlined below for budget forms.

Complete the Budget Information for Non-Construction Programs (SF 424A) or Budget Information for Construction Programs (SF 424C) form. Use the SF 424A if your project does not include construction and the SF 424C if the project includes construction or land acquisition. The budget forms are available on the Internet at http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/forms/sf-424-family.html#sortby=1. When developing your budget, keep in mind that financial assistance awards and subawards are subject to the Federal cost principles in Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, as applicable to the recipient organization type. Links to the full text of the Federal cost principles are available on the Internet at http://www.ecfr.gov/.

Note on Multiple Federal Funding Sources: If the project budget includes multiple Federal funding sources, you must show the funds being requested from this Federal program on the budget form separately from any other requested/secured Federal sources of funding. Enter the funds being requested from this Federal program in the first row of the Budget Summary section of the form, and then enter funding related to other Federal programs in the subsequent row(s). Be sure to enter each Federal program’s CFDA number in the corresponding fields on the form. The CFDA number for this Federal program appears on the first page of this funding opportunity.

E. Budget Justification The Alliance will follow the instructions outlined below for budget justification and indirect cost statement.

In a separate narrative titled “Budget Justification”, explain and justify all requested budget items/costs. Detail how the SF 424 Budget Object Class Category totals were determined and demonstrate a clear connection between costs and the proposed project activities. For personnel salary costs, include the base-line salary figures and the estimates of time (as percentages) to be directly charged to the project. Describe any item that under the applicable Federal cost principles requires the Service’s approval and estimate its cost.

If Federally-funded equipment will be used for the project, provide a list of that equipment, including the Federal funding source.

Required Indirect Cost Statement: Recipients that do not have an approved indirect cost rate cannot charge indirect costs to their Federal award. All applicants except individuals applying for funds separate from a business or non-profit organization he/she may operate must include in the budget justification narrative one of the following statements and attach to their application any required documentation identified in the applicable statement:

“We are:

1. A U.S. state or local government entity receiving more than $35 million in direct Federal funding each year with an indirect cost rate of [insert rate]. We submit our indirect cost rate proposals to our cognizant agency. A copy of our most recently approved rate agreement/certification is attached.

2. A U.S. state or local government entity receiving less than $35 million in direct Federal funding with an indirect cost rate of [insert rate]. We are required to prepare and retain for audit an indirect cost rate proposal and related documentation to support those costs.

3. A [insert your organization type; U.S. states and local governments, please use one of the statements above or below] that has previously negotiated or currently has an approved indirect cost rate with our cognizant agency. Our indirect cost rate is [insert rate]. [Insert either: “A copy of our most recently approved but expired rate agreement is attached. In the event an award is made, we will submit an indirect cost rate proposal to our cognizant agency within 90 calendar days after the award is made.” or “A copy of our current, approved rate agreement(s) is attached.”]

4. A [insert your organization type] that has never submitted an indirect cost rate proposal to our cognizant agency. Our indirect cost rate is [insert rate]. In the event an award is made, we will submit an indirect cost rate proposal to our cognizant agency within 90 calendar days after the award is made.

5. A [insert your organization type] that has never submitted an indirect cost rate proposal to our cognizant agency and has an indirect cost rate that is lower than 10%. Our indirect cost rate is [insert rate; must be lower than 10%]. However, in the event an award is made, we will not be able to meet the requirement to submit an indirect cost rate proposal to our cognizant agency within 90 calendar days after award. We request as a condition of award to charge a flat indirect cost rate of [insert rate; must be lower than 10%] of [insert a clear description of the direct cost base against which your rate is charged (e.g., salaries; salaries and fringe benefits; or modified total direct costs). However, please note that your organization cannot charge indirect costs in excess of the indirect costs that would be recovered if applied against modified total direct costs as defined in 2 CFR 220.68]. We understand that we must notify the Service in writing immediately if we establish an approved rate with our cognizant agency at any point during the award period.

6. A [insert your organization type] that has never submitted an indirect cost rate proposal to our cognizant agency and has an indirect cost rate that is 10% or higher. Our indirect cost rate is [insert your organization’s indirect rate; must be 10% or higher]. However, in the event an award is made, we will not be able to meet the requirement to submit an indirect cost rate proposal to our cognizant agency within 90 calendar days after award. We request as a condition of award to charge a flat de minimis indirect cost rate of 10% of modified total direct costs as defined in 2 CFR 200.68. We understand that we must notify the Service in writing immediately if we do establish an approved rate with our cognizant agency at any point during the award period. We understand that additional Federal funds may not be available to support an unexpected increase in indirect costs during the project period and such changes are subject to review, negotiation, and prior approval by the Service.

7. A [insert your organization type] that is submitting this proposal for consideration under the [insert either “Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit Program” or “Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit Network”], which has a Department of the Interior-approved indirect cost rate cap of [insert program rate]. If we have an approved indirect cost rate with our cognizant agency, we understand that we must apply this reduced rate against the same direct cost base as identified in our approved indirect cost rate agreement. If we do not have an approved indirect cost rate with our cognizant agency, we understand that the basis for direct costs will be the modified total direct cost base defined in 2 CFR 200.68 “Modified Total Direct Cost (MTDC)”. We understand that we must request prior approval from the Service to use the MTDC base instead of the base identified in our approved indirect cost rate agreement, and that Service approval of such a request will be based on: 1) a determination that our approved base is only a subset of the MTDC (such as salaries and wages); and 2) that use of the MTDC base will still result in a reduction of the total indirect costs to be charged to the award. In accordance with 2 CFR 200.405, we understand that indirect costs not recovered due to a voluntary reduction to our federally negotiated rate are not allowable for recovery via any other means.

8. A [insert your organization type] that will charge all costs directly.

All applicants are hereby notified of the following:

· Recipients without an approved indirect cost rate are prohibited from charging indirect costs to a Federal award. Accepting a flat de minimis rate as a condition of award is an approved rate.

· Failure to establish an approved rate during the award period renders all costs otherwise allocable as indirect costs unallowable under the award.

· Recipients may not charge to their Service award any indirect costs calculated against the portion of total direct project costs paid by any other Federal funding source or non-Federal partner.

· Recipients must have prior written approval from the Service to transfer unallowable indirect costs to amounts budgeted for direct costs or to satisfy cost-sharing or matching requirements under the award.

· Recipients are prohibited from shifting unallowable indirect costs to another Federal award unless specifically authorized to do so by legislation.

Applicants who are individuals applying for funds separate from a business or non-profit organization he/she may operate are not eligible to charge indirect costs to their award. If you are an individual applying for funding, do not include any indirect costs in your proposed budget.

For more information on indirect cost rates, see the Service’s Indirect Costs and Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreements guidance document on the Internet at https://www.fws.gov/grants/atc.html.

Negotiating an Indirect Cost Rate with the Department of the Interior: Entities that do not have a NICRA must first have an open, active Federal award before they can submit an indirect cost rate proposal to their cognizant agency. The Federal awarding agency that provides the largest amount of direct funding to your organization is your cognizant agency, unless otherwise assigned by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). If the Department of the Interior is your cognizant agency, your indirect cost rate will be negotiated by the Interior Business Center (IBC). For more information, contact the IBC at:

Indirect Cost Services Acquisition Services Directorate, Interior Business Center U.S. Department of the Interior 650 Capitol Mall, Suite 7-400 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: 916-930-3803 Email: Through https://www.doi.gov/ibc/contactus/ibcfeedback web form Internet address: https://www.doi.gov/ibc/services/finance/indirect-cost-services

F. Single Audit Reporting Statements: The Alliance will follow the instructions outlined below for single audit reporting requirements.

As required in Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 200, Subpart F, all U.S. states, local governments, federally-recognized Indian tribal governments, and non-profit organizations expending $750,000 USD or more in Federal award funds in a fiscal year must submit a Single Audit report for that year through the Federal Audit Clearinghouse’s Internet Data Entry System. All U.S. state, local government, federally-recognized Indian tribal government and non-profit applicants must provide a statement regarding if your organization was/was not required to submit a Single Audit report for the organization’s most recently closed fiscal year and, if so, state if that report is available on the Federal Audit Clearinghouse Single Audit Database website (https://harvester.census.gov/facweb/) and provide the EIN under which that report was submitted. Include these statements at the end of the Project Narrative in a section titled “Single Audit Reporting Statements”.

G. Assurances: The Alliance will follow the instructions outlined below for assurances.

Include the appropriate signed and dated Assurances form available at http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/forms/sf-424-family.html#sortby=1. Use the Assurances for Construction Programs (SF 424D) for construction and land acquisition projects. Use the Assurances for Non-Construction Programs (SF 424B) for all other projects. The form includes a statement that some of the assurances may not be applicable to your organization and/or your project or program. Signing this form does not make you or your organization subject to laws that are otherwise not applicable to you or your organization. Changing, crossing out, or making notations on the form before signing has no impact on the applicability of law.

H. Certification and Disclosure of Lobbying Activities: The Alliance will follow the instructions outlined below for certification and disclosure of lobbying activities.

Under Title 31 of the United States Code, Section 1352, an applicant or recipient must not use any federally appropriated funds (both annually appropriated and continuing appropriations) or matching funds under a grant or cooperative agreement award to pay any person for lobbying in connection with the award. Lobbying is defined as influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress connection with the award. Submission of an application also represents the applicant’s certification of the statements in 43 CFR Part 18, Appendix A-Certification Regarding Lobbying. If you/your organization have/has made or agrees to make any payment using non-appropriated funds for lobbying in connection with this proposal AND the Federal share exceeds $100,000, complete and submit the SF LLL, Disclosure of Lobbying Activities form available at http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/forms/post-award-reporting-forms.html#sortby=1. See 43 CFR, Subpart 18.100 for more information on when additional submission of this form is required.

I. Conflict of Interest Disclosures: The Alliance will follow the instructions outlined below for conflict of interest disclosures.

Applicants must notify the Service in writing of any actual or potential conflicts of interest that are known at the time of application or that may arise during the life of this award, in the event an award is made. Conflicts of interest include any relationship or matter which might place the recipient, the recipient’s employees, or the recipient’s subrecipients in a position of conflict, real or apparent, between their responsibilities under the award and any other outside interests. Conflicts of interest may also include, but are not limited to, direct or indirect financial interests, close personal relationships, positions of trust in outside organizations, consideration of future employment arrangements with a different organization, or decision-making affecting the award that would cause a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts to question the impartiality of the applicant, the applicant’s employees, or the applicant’s future subrecipients in the matter. Applicants must notify the Service in writing in their application if any key project personnel, including subrecipient and contractor personnel, are known to be related to, married to, or have a close personal relationship with any Federal employee in or associated with the program to which you are applying for funding or who otherwise may be involved in the review and selection of the application. Upon receipt of such a notice, the Service Project Officer in consultation with their Ethics Counselor will determine if a conflict of interest exists and, if so, if there are any possible actions to be taken by the applicant to reduce or resolve the conflict. Failure to resolve conflicts of interest in a manner that satisfies the Service may result in the project not being select for funding.

J. Required Overlap/Duplication Statement: The Alliance will follow the instructions outlined below for overlap/duplication statement.

Applicants must provide a statement that addresses if there is any overlap between the proposed project and any other active or anticipated projects in terms of activities, costs, or time commitment of key personnel. If any overlap exists, applicants must provide a description of the overlap in their application. Applicants must also state if the proposal submitted for consideration under this program is/is not in any way duplicative of any proposal that was/will be submitted for funding consideration to any other potential funding source (Federal or non-Federal). If such a circumstance exists, applicants must detail when the other duplicative proposal(s) were submitted, to whom (entity name and program), and when funding decisions are expected to be announced. If at any time a proposal is awarded funds that would be duplicative of the funding requested from the Service, applicants must notify the Service point of contact for this funding opportunity immediately.

Application Checklist

· Evidence of non-profit status: If a non-profit organization, a copy of their Section 501(c)(3) or (4) status determination letter received from the Internal Revenue Service.

· SF 424, Application for Federal Assistance: A complete, signed and dated SF 424, SF 424-Mandatory, or SF 424-Individual form.

· Project summary

· Project narrative

· Timetable

· Single Audit Reporting statement: If a U.S. state, local government, federally-recognized Indian tribal government, or non-profit organization, statements regarding applicability of and compliance with Single Audit reporting requirements.

· SF 424 budget form: A complete SF 424A or SF 424C Budget Information form.

· Budget justification

· Federally-funded equipment list: If Federally-funded equipment will be used for the project, a list of that equipment.

· Indirect cost statement

· NICRA: When applicable, a copy of the organization’s current Negotiated Indirect Cost Rate Agreement.

· SF 424 Assurances form: Signed and dated SF 424B or SF 424D Assurances form.

· SF LLL form: If applicable, completed SF-LLL Disclosure of Lobbying Activities form.

· Conflict of Interest disclosure, when applicable.

· Overlap/Duplication statement

Failure to provide complete information may cause delays, postponement, or rejection of the application.

V. Submission Instructions SUBMISSION DEADLINE: N/A. This is a notice of a single source financial assistance award. This announcement is for notification purposes only.

Intergovernmental Review: Before submitting an application, U.S. state and local government applicants should visit the following website (http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants_spoc/) to determine whether their application is subject to the state intergovernmental review process under Executive Order (E.O.) 12372 “Intergovernmental review of Federal Programs.” E.O. 12372 was issued to foster the intergovernmental partnership and strengthen federalism by relying on state and local processes for the coordination and review of proposed Federal financial assistance and direct Federal development. The E.O. allows each state to designate an entity to perform this function. The official list of designated entities is posted on the website. Contact your state’s designated entity for more information on the process the state requires to be followed when applying for assistance. States that do not have a designated entity listed on the website have chosen not to participate in the review process.

VI. Application Review Information Criteria: This is a notice of a single source financial assistance award. This announcement is for notification purposes only. This project was selected by the Trustees using the criteria outlined in the RP/EA (see Section 5.1 and link).

To be considered for funding, the Alliance applied to an open proposal process specifically related to the DuPont NRDAR settlement funds allocated for projects to improve water quality and fish habitat. Projects to improve water quality and fish habitat include agricultural BMPs and riparian buffer improvements. The Commonwealth of Virginia, through the Virginia Land Conservation Foundation (VLCF), initiated a proposal process in order to make project recommendations to the Secretary of Natural Resources, one of the Trustees in this matter. VLCF and Virginia agency staff scored the proposals using the eligibility standards and criteria outlined in the application (see page 10-11 for the scoring matrix/process for water quality projects). The VLCF scoring matrix incorporated some Virginia-specific criteria and was consistent with the criteria outlined in the RP/EA.

The Service evaluated the projects against criteria outlined in Section 5.1 of the RP/EA. The site-specific requirements incorporated the restoration criteria, or “factors to consider when selecting the alternative to pursue”, listed in the DOI damage assessment regulations (43 C.F.R. § 11.82(d)(1-10)). There were no matching requirements for this funding.

Criteria from the RP/EA are listed below. If any of the grounds for elimination were met, the project was not considered further. Otherwise projects were ranked using the general criteria and, if applicable, acquisition-specific criteria. Ranking was completed using a qualitative system of ranking – designating the achievement of criteria as low, medium, or high. Final selection of projects was based on follow-up discussions and ranking comparison with Trustees, and, if necessary, the applicants.

GROUNDS FOR PROJECT ELIMINATION

1. BENEFITS OF PROJECT ARE UNLIKELY TO RESULT IN RESTORATION BENEFITS IN ADVANCE OF THE NATURAL RECOVERY PERIOD

2. PROJECT HAS SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3. POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECTS TO HUMAN HEALTH AND SAFETY

4. POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE SOCIOECONOMIC EFFECTS

General Criteria - All Projects

RELATIONSHIP TO THE INJURIES (giving rise to the claim for natural resource damages)

1. SIMILARITY IN ATTRIBUTES TO THE INJURED NATURAL RESOURCE, same type and quality

2. LOCATION - proximity to South River/South Fork Shenandoah River watershed

3. SCALE OF BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT - quality/quantity benefits provided by project (increase in acres, species, etc.) such as, geographical extent of expected benefits (i.e., how many stream miles will benefit, will it connect/increase acreages of protected lands)

LIKELIHOOD OF SUCCESS AND TECHNICAL FEASIBILITY

4. PROVEN TECHNOLOGY - can project be accomplished with available technology?

5. DOCUMENTED SUCCESS - has a similar project succeeded in the past?

6. COST EFFECTIVENESS - are costs reasonable related to expected benefits? Any cost-share?

REGULATORY AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS

7. FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL LAW COMPLIANCE

8. SITE OWNERSHIP AND ACCESS - do we have permission for the project?

9. PROPOSED PROJECT IS NOT “OTHERWISE REQUIRED” - by federal, state, local laws, regulations, permits, licenses

10. CONSISTENCY WITH TRUSTEE POLICY, MANAGEMENT GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES

OTHER CRITERIA

1. CONSISTENCY WITH LOCAL, REGIONAL, AND NATIONAL RESTORATION GOALS AND INITIATIVES

2. TIME FRAME OF POTENTIAL BENEFITS

3. SELF-SUSTAINABILITY OF THE RESTORATION PROJECT

4. INTEGRATION WITH EXISTING MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS / LEVERAGE POTENTIAL

5. HABITAT CONNECTIVITY (e.g., creating contiguous habitat)

6. PROXIMITY TO LANDS WITH PROTECTED STATUS.

7. BENEFITS TO PROTECTED SPECIES / SENSITIVE OR UNIQUE HABITATS

8. EDUCATION AND OUTREACH OPPORTUNITIES

9. PUBLIC USE OPPORTUNITIES

MONITORING

1. MONITORING - will there be measurable results?

Acquisition-specific

SURROUNDING LAND USE AND LAND PROTECTION STATUS

Does the parcel provide opportunity to avoid habitat fragmentation or protect a corridor?

Does surrounding land use threaten the resource value of a parcel?

Nature and likelihood of development threats

PRIORITY

Has the parcel been identified as high priority for protection in existing local/regional land-use planning docs?

TYPES AND CONDITION OF NATURAL RESOURCES BENEFITED

Is there evidence of rare species or habitat?

Are there exemplary natural communities?

Does it protect warm-water fisheries?

COST OF PROTECTION

Would this be acquisition, land transfer?

Can the parcel be protected at a fair price for size and location?

Is there opportunity for leveraging additional resources

LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE AND MANAGEMENT NEEDS

Will public access be allowed? If so, is the management and degree of public access consistent with resource protection?

What is potential for future management problems and costs?

Are there on-site resources that need to be preserved (cultural, archaeological)?

Review and Selection Process:

The review and selection process followed the process outlined above in “Criteria”. To be considered for funding, the Alliance applied to an open proposal process specifically related to the DuPont NRDAR settlement funds allocated for projects to improve water quality and fish habitat. The Commonwealth of Virginia, through the VLCF, initiated the proposal process in order to make project recommendations to the Secretary of Natural Resources, one of the Trustees in this matter. Applications were scored using a multi-phased review process. VLCF and Virginia agency staff scored the proposals using the eligibility standards and criteria outlined in the application and identified the top scoring proposals. The Service evaluated the projects against site-specific restoration requirements outlined in the RP/EA (see also 43 C.F.R. § 11.82(d)(1-10)). Top ranking applications were discussed by Trustees at multiple in-person meetings and phone calls, and appropriate funding determinations were made jointly by the Trustees. Applicant past performance and likelihood of success were considered throughout this process. Multiple Virginia natural resource agencies (Department of Conservation and Recreation, Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, Department of Environmental Quality) and Service staff were involved in the review process

The Alliance has unique experience with similar efforts in the watershed and established relationships with partners. They have the technical skills to manage and implement this project successfully. Through this project, many more acres and stream miles will be improved and protected than what could be accomplished with existing programs– improving riparian habitat and stream conditions for wildlife and recreation. This project is cost-effective and has multiple benefits to the resources of concern.

Prior to participating in any review or evaluation process, all staff and peer reviewers, evaluators, panel members, and advisors must sign and return to the program office point of contact the “Department of the Interior Conflict of Interest Certification” form. For a copy of this form, contact the Service point of contact identified in the Agency Contacts section below.

Prior to award, the Service reviews the selected applicant’s statement regarding potential overlap or duplication in terms of activities, funding, or time commitment of key personnel and makes a determination regarding Service funding. Depending on the circumstances, modification of the application, other pending applications, or an active award may be necessary, or the Service might choose to not fund the proposed project.

Each fiscal year, for every entity receiving one or more awards in that fiscal year, the Service conducts a risk assessment based on eight risk categories. The result of this risk assessment is used to establish a monitoring plan for all awards to the entity in that fiscal year. For a copy of the Service’s risk assessment form, go to https://www.fws.gov/grants/atc.html.

Prior to approving an award with a Federal funding amount that exceeds or is expected to exceed the simplified acquisition threshold, as adjusted (see 2 CFR 200.88), the Service must review and consider any information about the applicant that is in the designated integrity and performance system accessible through SAM (currently FAPIIS; https://www.fapiis.gov/fapiis/index.action) to determine if, at a minimum, the information found in the system for the applicant demonstrates a satisfactory record of Federal award performance and integrity and business ethics (see 2 CFR 200.205(a)(2)). The Service must also report to FAPIIS if an applicant subject to this review is found not qualified for a particular award due to its prior record of integrity or performance under Federal awards (see 2 CFR 200.212).

VII. Award Administration Award Notices: Following review, applicants may be requested to revise the project scope and/or budget before an award is made. Successful applicants will receive written notice in the form of a notice of award document. Notices of award are typically sent to recipients by e-mail. If e-mail notification is unsuccessful, the documents will be sent by courier mail (e.g., FedEx, DHL or UPS). Award recipients are not required to sign/return the Notice of Award document. Acceptance of an award is defined as starting work, drawing down funds, or accepting the award via electronic means. Awards are based on the application submitted to, and as approved by, the Service. The notice of award document will include instructions specific to each recipient on how to request payment. If applicable, the instructions will detail any additional information/forms required and where to submit payment requests. Applicants whose projects are not selected for funding will receive written notice, most often by e-mail, within 60 days of the final review decision.

Domestic Recipient Payments: Prior to award, the Service program office will contact you/your organization to either enroll in the U.S. Treasury’s Automated Standard Application for Payments (ASAP) system or, if eligible, obtain approval from the Department of the Interior to be waived from using ASAP.

Transmittal of Sensitive Data: Recipients are responsible for ensuring any sensitive data being sent to the Service is protected during its transmission/delivery. The Service strongly recommends that recipients use the most secure transmission/delivery method available. The Service recommends the following digital transmission methods: secure digital faxing; encrypted emails; emailing a password protected zipped/compressed file attachment in one email followed by the password in a second email; or emailing a zipped/compressed file attachment. The Service strongly encourages recipients sending sensitive data in paper copy to use a courier mail service. Recipients may also contact their Service Project Officer and provide any sensitive data over the telephone.

Award Terms and Conditions: Acceptance of a financial assistance award (i.e., grant or cooperative agreement) from the Service carries with it the responsibility to be aware of and comply with the terms and conditions applicable to the award. Acceptance is defined as the start of work, drawing down funds, or accepting the award via electronic means. Awards are based on the application submitted to and approved by the Service and are subject to the terms and conditions incorporated into the notice of award either by direct citation or by reference to the following: Federal regulations; program legislation or regulation; and special award terms and conditions. The Service’s Standard Award Terms and Conditions are available on the Internet at https://www.fws.gov/grants/atc.html.