[Federal Register: March 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 54)]
[Notices]
[Page 14774-14776]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr19mr08-38]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[Docket No. 080307400-8401-01]
RIN 0648-ZB88
Comparative Analysis of Marine Ecosystem Organization (CAMEO)
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of funding availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This announcement is a solicitation for proposals for the
Comparative Analysis of Marine Ecosystem Organization (CAMEO) Program.
The purpose of CAMEO is to strengthen the scientific basis for an
ecosystem approach to stewardship of ocean and coastal resources and
ecosystems. To fulfill this purpose, CAMEO will assist policy makers
and resource managers to make ecosystem-science based decisions that
fulfill policy goals and management objectives of society. The program
will support research to understand complex dynamics controlling
productivity, behavior, population connectivity, climate variability
and anthropogenic pressures. It envisages the use of a diverse array of
ecosystem models, comparative analyses of managed and unmanaged areas,
and ecosystem-scale mapping in support of research, forecasting and
decision support. Proposals are requested for 1-2 year projects for
initial modeling, retrospective, and pilot studies.
DATES: Proposals must be received no later than June 17, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Electronic application packages are strongly encouraged and
are available at: http://www.grants.gov/. Paper application packages
are available on the NOAA Grants Management website at: http://
www.ago.noaa.gov/grants/appkit.shtml. If the applicant has difficulty
accessing Grants.gov or downloading the required forms from the NOAA
website, they should contact: Roy Williams, CAMEO, 1315 East-West
Highway, Room 12436, Silver Spring, MD, 20910 or by phone at (301) 713-
2367, ext. 141, or via internet at Roy.Williams@noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Technical Information: Michael Ford,
CAMEO Program Manager, NOAA/NMFS, 301-713-2239, Michael.Ford@noaa.gov;
Phil Taylor, Program Director, Biological Oceanography, OCE/GEO/NSF,
703-292-8582, prtaylor@nsf.gov; or Cynthia Suchman, Associate Program
Director, Biological Oceanography, OCE/GEO/NSF, 703/292-8582,
csuchman@nsf.gov. Business Management Information: Roy Williams, NMFS/
S&T Grants Administrator, 301-713-2367 x 141, Roy.Williams@noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Objective of Comparative Analysis of
Marine Ecosystem Organization (CAMEO) is to strengthen the scientific
basis for an ecosystem approach to stewardship of ocean and coastal
resources and ecosystems. To fulfill its objective, the product of the
CAMEO program must assist policy makers and resource managers to make
science based decisions that fulfill policy goals and management
objectives of society. This means that for CAMEO to be successful, it
must include an explicit and realistic path for translating research
results into usable decision-making support tools.
Comparative studies of ecosystems have a long history in marine
ecology. Many of these studies have been theoretical, using
mathematical models with limited or no data, and narrow in scope in
terms of the properties of ecosystems and the drivers of change. Others
have compared and contrasted large amounts of observational data to
draw general inferences. CAMEO's goal, and challenge, is to carefully
design approaches by which similarities and divergences among observed
ecosystems (comparative ecosystem analyses) are effectively interpreted
in a manner that can yield management insights. The spatial scale of
comparative analyses can range from ocean basins to local oceanic
(e.g., seamounts, shelves) and coastal (e.g., bays and estuaries)
features. The scale should be appropriate to the ecosystem properties
considered in the proposal. In some cases, a hierarchy of nested scales
may be appropriate. Obvious components of this comparative approach
involve the use of experiments, models, and observational data,
ultimately leading to sophisticated integrations of all three. Spatial
contrasts offered by comparing ecosystem function and structure within
and outside marine protected areas are one form of comparative analysis
that may offer insights into how ecosystems respond to human
activities. An important and ancillary challenge will be to identify
recent and emerging technologies (e.g. molecular techniques and
instrumentation) that may be applied toward the significant challenges
of CAMEO. In framing issues to be addressed by CAMEO, some important
ecosystem concepts, such as resilience, regime shifts and connectivity
are used without rigorously defining or thoroughly discussing them.
These are evolving concepts, and it is expected that they will be
defined in the context of the research that is proposed and refined
through CAMEO research.
ELECTRONIC ACCESS: The full text of the full funding opportunity
announcement for this program can be accessed via the Grants.gov web
site at http://www.grants.gov. The announcement will also be available
by contacting the program officials identified under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT. Applicants must comply with all requirements
contained in the full funding opportunity announcement.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY: Authority for CAMEO is provided by the
following: 33 U.S.C. 1442 for the National Marine Fisheries Service and
42 U.S.C. 1861-75 for the National Science Foundation.
CFDA: 11.472, Unallied Science Program
FUNDING AVAILABILITY: It is anticipated that about $2,000,000 in FY
2008 will be available to support approximately 5-10 projects in
response to this announcement.
ELIGIBILITY: Eligible applicants are institutions of higher
education, other non-profits, state, local, Indian Tribal Governments,
and Federal agencies that possess the statutory authority to receive
financial assistance.
COST SHARING REQUIREMENTS: None is required.
[[Page 14775]]
EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES: The general evaluation
criteria and selection factors that apply to full applications to this
funding opportunity are summarized below. The evaluation criteria for
full applications will have different weights and details. Further
information about the evaluation criteria and selection factors can be
found in the full funding opportunity announcement.
EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR PROJECTS: The following evaluation criteria
and weighting of the criteria are as follows: 1. Importance and/or
relevance and applicability of proposed project to the program goals:
(20 percent). This ascertains whether there is intrinsic value in the
proposed work and/or relevance to NOAA, federal, regional, state, or
local goals and priorities. For this competition, this criterion
assesses whether proposals address research that will make substantial
contributions or develop products leading to improved management of
coastal resources (this criterion fulfills the Broader Impacts
requirement for NSF proposals);
2. Technical/Scientific Merit (50 percent): This assesses whether
the approach is technically sound and/or innovative, if the methods are
appropriate, and whether there are clear project goals and objectives
for this management activity. For this competition, this criterion
assesses whether proposals address the intrinsic scientific value of
the proposed work and the likelihood that it will lead to fundamental
advancements, new discoveries or will have substantial impact on
progress in that field. The proposed work should have focused science
objectives and a complete and efficient strategy for making
measurements and observations in support of the objectives. The
approach should be sound and logically planned throughout the cycle of
the proposed work;
3. Overall qualifications of applicants (20 percent): This
ascertains whether the applicant possesses the necessary education,
experience, training, facilities, and administrative resources to
accomplish the project. For this competition, this criterion assesses
whether the proposals address the capability of the investigator and
collaborators to complete the proposed work as evidenced by past
research accomplishments, previous cooperative work, timely
communication, and the sharing of findings, data, and other research
products;
4. Project costs (10 percent): The Budget is evaluated to determine
if it is realistic and commensurate with the project needs and time-
frame. For this competition, this criterion assesses whether proposals
address the adequacy of the proposed resources to accomplish the
proposed work, and the appropriateness of the requested funding with
respect to the total available funds.
5. Outreach and Education (0 percent): Outreach and education NOAA
assesses whether this project provides a focused and effective
education and outreach strategy regarding NOAA's mission to protect the
Nations natural resources.
REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS: Proposals will be evaluated
individually in accordance with the assigned weights of the above
evaluation criteria by independent peer mail review and/or by
independent peer panel review. Both Federal and non-Federal experts in
the field may be used in this process. The peer mail reviewers have
expertise in the subjects addressed by the proposals. Each mail
reviewer will see only certain individual proposals within his or her
area of expertise, and will score them individually on the following
scale: Excellent (1), Very Good (2), Good (3), Fair (4), Poor (5). The
peer panel will comprise 6 to 10 individuals, with each individual
having expertise in a separate area, so that the panel, as a whole,
covers a range of scientific expertise. The panel will have access to
all mail reviews of proposals, and will use the mail reviews in
discussion and evaluation of the entire slate of proposals. All
proposals will be evaluated and scored individually. The peer panel
shall rate the proposals using the evaluation criteria and scores
provided above. Scores from each peer panelist shall be averaged for
each application and presented to the program officers. No consensus
advice will be given by the independent peer mail review or the review
panel. The program officers will neither vote or score proposals as
part of the independent peer panel nor participate in discussion of the
merits of the proposal. Those proposals receiving an average panel
score of ``Fair'' or ``Poor'' will not be given further consideration,
and proposers will be notified of non selection. For the proposals
rated by the panel as either ``Excellent,'' ``Very Good,'' or ``Good'',
the program officers will (a) select the proposals to be recommended
for funding according to the averaged ratings, and/or by applying the
project funding priorities listed below; (b) determine the total
duration of funding for each proposal; and (c) determine the amount of
funds available for each proposal subject to the availability of fiscal
year funds. Awardsmay not necessarily be made in rank order. In
addition, proposals rated by the panel as either ``Excellent,'' ``Very
Good,'' or ``Good'' that are not funded in the current fiscal period,
may be considered for funding in another fiscal period without having
to repeat the competitive, review process. Recommendations for funding
are then forwarded to the selecting official, the Director of
Scientific Programs and Chief Science Advisor for NOAA/NMFS, or the
Program Director for NSF Biological Oceanography, for the final funding
decision. The Director shall make the final funding decisions based
upon reviewer/program officer recommendations, project funding
priorities and availability of funds. At the conclusion of the review
process, NOAA Ecosystem Goal Team Lead and the NSF Biological
Oceanography Program Director or staff will notify lead proposers for
those projects recommended for support, and negotiate revisions in the
proposed work and budget. Final awards will be issued by the agency
responsible for a specific project after receipt and processing of any
specific materials required by the agency. Investigators may be asked
to modify objectives, work plans or budgets, and provide supplemental
information required by the agency prior to the award. When a decision
has been made (whether an award or declination), verbatim anonymous
copies of reviews and summaries of review panel deliberations, if any,
will be made available to the proposer. Declined applications will be
held in the NMFS/S&T office for the required 3 years in accordance with
the current retention requirements, and then destroyed.
SELECTION FACTORS FOR PROJECTS: The Selecting Official shall award
in the rank order unless the proposal is justified to be selected out
of rank order based on one or more of the following factors: 1.
Availability of funding 2. Balance and distribution of funds a. By
research area b. By project type c. By type of institutions d. By type
of partners e. Geographically 3. Duplication of other projects funded
or considered for funding by NOAA/Federal agencies. 4. Program
priorities and policy factors as set in Sections I.A and B of the FFO.
5. Applicants prior award performance. 6. Partnerships with/
Participation of targeted groups. 7. Adequacy of information necessary
for NOAA staff to make a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
determination and draft necessary documentation before recommendations
[[Page 14776]]
for funding are made to the NOAA Grants Officer.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW: Applications under this program are not
subject to Executive Order 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal
Programs.
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY: In no event will NOAA or the Department of
Commerce be responsible for proposal preparation costs if these
programs fail to receive funding or are cancelled because of other
agency priorities. Publication of this announcement does not oblige
NOAA to award any specific project or to obligate any available funds.
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (NEPA): NOAA must analyze the
potential environmental impacts, as required by the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), for applicant projects or proposals
which are seeking NOAA federal funding opportunities. Detailed
information on NOAA compliance with NEPA can be found at the following
NOAA NEPA website: http://www.nepa.noaa.gov/, including our NOAA
Administrative Order 216-6 for NEPA, http://www.nepa.noaa.gov/NAO216_
6_TOC.pdf, and the Council on Environmental Quality implementation
regulations, http://ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/regs/ceq/toc_ceq.htm.
Consequently, as part of an applicant's package, and under their
description of their program activities, applicants are required to
provide detailed information on the activities to be conducted,
locations, sites, species and habitat to be affected, possible
construction activities, and any environmental concerns that may exist
(e.g., the use and disposal of hazardous or toxic chemicals,
introduction of non-indigenous species, impacts to endangered and
threatened species, aquaculture projects,and impacts to coral reef
systems). In addition to providing specific information that will serve
as the basis for any required impact analyses, applicants may also be
requested to assist NOAA in drafting of an environmental assessment, if
NOAA determines an assessment is required. Applicants will also be
required to cooperate with NOAA in identifying feasible measures to
reduce or avoid any identified adverse environmental impacts of their
proposal. The failure to do so shall be grounds for not selecting an
application. In some cases if additional information is required after
an application is selected, funds can be withheld by the Grants Officer
under a special award condition requiring the recipient to submit
additional environmental compliance information sufficient to enable
NOAA to make an assessment on any impacts that a project may have on
the environment.
THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE PRE-AWARD NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR
GRANTS AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS: The Department of Commerce Pre-Award
Notification Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements
contained in the Federal Register notice of February 11, 2008 (73 FR
7696), are applicable to this solicitation.
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT: This document contains collection-of-
information requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA).
The use of Standard Forms 424, 424A, 424B, and SF-LLL and CD-346 has
been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
respective control numbers 0348-0043, 0348-0044, 0348-0040, 0348-0046,
and 0605-0001. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is
required to, nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to
comply with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of
the PRA unless that collection of information displays a currently
valid OMB control number.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 12866: This notice has been determined to be not
significant for purposes of Executive Order 12866.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 13132 (FEDERALISM): It has been determined that
this notice does not contain policies with Federalism implications as
that term is defined in Executive Order 13132.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT/REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ACT: Prior
notice and an opportunity for public comment are not required by the
Administrative Procedure Act or any other law for rules concerning
public property, loans, grants, benefits, and contracts (5 U.S.C.
553(a)(2)). Because notice and opportunity for comment are not required
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 or any other law, the analytical requirements
for the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) are
inapplicable. Therefore, a regulatory flexibility analysis has not been
prepared.
Dated: March 13, 2008.
Steven A. Murawski,
Director of Scientific Programs and Chief Science Advisor, NOAA/
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. E8-5567 Filed 3-18-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S