[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 28 (Tuesday, February 11, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6892-6906]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-3290]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[Docket No. 011102267-3025-03; I.D. 100102F]


Financial Assistance for Marine Mammal Stranding Networks Through 
the John H. Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance Grant Program

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

[[Page 6893]]


ACTION: Notice of solicitation for applications.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) (hereinafter 
``we'' or ``us'') issues this document to solicit applications for 
Federal assistance under the John H. Prescott Marine Mammal Rescue 
Assistance Grant Program (Prescott Grant Program). This document 
describes how to submit applications and proposals for funding under 
the 2003/2004 Prescott Grant Program and how we will determine which 
proposals will be funded. We will provide financial assistance (up to 
$100,000 in Federal funds, with a 25 percent non-federal match) to 
eligible stranding network participants working within waters under 
United States jurisdiction for proposals pertaining to cetaceans and 
pinnipeds, except walrus. Proposals must fall primarily within one of 
the following categories: (A) recovery or treatment (i.e., rescue and/
or rehabilitation) of live stranded marine mammals, (B) data collection 
from living or dead stranded marine mammals for scientific research 
regarding marine mammal health, and (C) facility operations directly 
related to the recovery or treatment of marine mammals or collection of 
data from living or dead stranded marine mammals. Proposals will be 
reviewed for eligibility, technical merit, and consistency with the 
Prescott Grant Program's national and regional funding priorities. 
Final selection will be based on results of the on-line reviews, peer 
reviews, merit review, equitable distribution of funds among regions, 
as well as other policy considerations.

DATES: Proposal packages for the annual award cycle must be postmarked 
by April 14, 2003. For proposal packages submitted under the emergency 
assistance component of the Prescott Grant Program no submission 
deadline applies (see Section I. A.).

ADDRESSES: Proposal packages for the annual award cycle should be sent 
to NOAA/NMFS/Office of Protected Resources, Marine Mammal Health and 
Stranding Response Program, Attn:Michelle Ordono, 1315 East-West 
Highway, Room 12604, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3283, phone 301-713-2322 
ext 177. Proposal packages for the emergency assistance component of 
the Prescott Grant Program should be sent to the NMFS Regional Office 
that oversees the area of action (see the NMFS Prescott Grant Program 
web page at:http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ prot--res/ PR2/ Health-- and-- 
Stranding-- Response-- Program/ Prescott.html for addresses).
    All proposal packages must include: (1) one signed original of the 
entire proposal and all required forms, and (2) two paper copies of the 
entire proposal and all required forms (including supporting 
documentation). One electronic copy on CD or diskette (in Microsoft 
Word v. 97 or earlier or WordPerfect v. 6.1 or lower) of the entire 
proposal, including supporting documentation but minus all required 
forms, is also requested (although not required). Federal forms and 
required elements of the proposal packages can be obtained from the 
NMFS Protected Resources Home Page (see section I. L. Electronic Access 
Addresses). We cannot accept completed applications via the Internet or 
facsimile at this time.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Simona Perry, Marine Mammal Health and 
Stranding Response Program, phone 301-713-2322 ext 106 or via 
email:Prescott Grant FR.comments @ noaa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    The Marine Mammal Rescue Assistance Act of 2000 amended the Marine 
Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) to establish the John H. Prescott Marine 
Mammal Rescue Assistance Grant Program (16 U.S.C. 1421f-1)(hereafter 
referred to as the Prescott Grant Program). This notice describes how 
to submit proposals to the Prescott Grant Program for funding using 
fiscal year (FY) 2003 and 2004 funds and how we will determine which 
proposals will be funded.

A. Background

    The Prescott Grant Program is conducted by the Secretary of 
Commerce to provide federal assistance to eligible stranding network 
participants (see section I. E. of this document) for (A) recovery or 
treatment (i.e., rescue and/or rehabilitation) of live stranded marine 
mammals\1\, (B) data collection from living or dead stranded marine 
mammals for scientific research regarding marine mammal health, and (C) 
facility operations directly related to the recovery or treatment of 
stranded marine mammals and collection of data from living or dead 
stranded marine mammals. The Prescott Grant Program is administered 
through the NMFS Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Response Program 
(MMHSRP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\For purposes of this document, a stranded marine mammal is a 
marine mammal in the wild that is (1) dead and on a beach, shore, or 
in waters under the jurisdiction of the United States or (2) is live 
and on a beach or shore of the United States and unable to return to 
the water, is in apparent need of medical attention, or is in waters 
under the jurisdiction of the United States but is unable to return 
to its natural habitat under its own power or without assistance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The MMHSRP was formalized in 1992 to fulfill the mandates of the 
Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Response Act, which amended the MMPA 
in 1992 (16 U.S.C. 1421). The MMHSRP was established to achieve 3 broad 
goals: (1) to facilitate the collection and dissemination of reference 
data on marine mammals and health trends of marine mammal populations 
in the wild; (2) to correlate the health of marine mammals and marine 
mammal populations in the wild with available data on physical, 
chemical, and biological environmental parameters; and (3) to 
coordinate effective responses to unusual mortality events. To achieve 
these goals, the MMHSRP (through close coordination with regional 
stranding networks) has the following objectives: improve the rescue, 
care and treatment of stranded marine mammals; collect life history 
data and other biomedical data from live and dead stranded marine 
mammals; develop baselines of ``normal'' stranding causes; improve the 
rapid detection of unusual mortality events; collect archival samples 
for future retrospective studies on causes of mortality or illness and 
for placement in the National Marine Mammal Tissue (and Serum) Bank; 
and develop comprehensive and consistent guidance for the rescue and 
rehabilitation of stranded marine mammals, collection of specimens, 
quality assurance, and analysis of tissue samples. It is anticipated 
that awards funded through the Prescott Grant Program will facilitate 
achievement of the MMHSRP goals and objectives by providing financial 
assistance to eligible stranding network participants.
    It is NMFS's intent to also reserve a portion of the funds to make 
emergency assistance available for unexpected, significant stranding 
events throughout the year on an as-needed basis. This emergency 
assistance is available to eligible network participants regardless of 
whether they are already receiving funds from the Prescott Grant 
Program's annual award cycle for another project. Responders to such 
stranding events should contact the NMFS Regional Office that oversees 
the area of action for further information and submit the proposal 
package to the NMFS regional stranding coordinator for review and 
approval of the need for such an award. For addresses of appropriate 
NMFS Regional Offices and stranding coordinators, see the MMHSRP web 
site:http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ prot--res/ PR2/ Health--and-- 
Stranding-- Response--Program/

[[Page 6894]]

mmhsrp.html. The NMFS regional coordinator will then forward all 
application materials to the Office of Protected Resources with a 
letter of concurrence of need. Until further guidance is published, 
those seeking emergency assistance funding should prepare their 
proposal packages according to the guidelines outlined in Section III 
of this document and forward all forms and documentation to the 
appropriate NMFS Regional Office.

B. Changes from the 2002 Solicitation

    As a result of comments received from those who submitted proposals 
in 2002 and those who took part in the 2002 technical and merit 
reviews, changes to the solicitation and review processes are being 
instituted in this competition. Therefore, we encourage applicants who 
submitted a proposal in 2002, to read this entire document before 
preparing a proposal for the 2003/2004 cycle.
    Four significant changes to the 2003/2004 funding competition 
include: 3 separate proposal categories that encompass Program goals 
and funding priorities (see Section I. C. and Section II); all proposal 
packages for the 2003/2004 award cycle will be sent to NMFS' Office of 
Protected Resources (see ADDRESSES); a new three stage review process, 
including on-line reviews of each proposal, panel peer reviews of each 
proposal, and Federal government merit review of each proposal scoring 
greater than 60 points in either the on-line or peer review (see 
Section IV); and new review criteria for use by both on-line and peer 
reviewers (see Section IV).

C. Proposal Categories

    For this solicitation, all proposals must fall within one of the 3 
following categories: Category A - Recovery or treatment of live 
stranded marine mammals (i.e., rescue of live stranded marine mammals 
including treatment, assessment, and/or rehabilitation); Category B - 
Data collection from living or dead stranded marine mammals (i.e., 
recovery of stranded marine mammals for collection of Level A, B, or C 
data, specimen collection, and/or analyses); Category C - Facility 
operations directly related to the recovery or treatment of stranded 
marine mammals or collection of data from living or dead stranded 
marine mammals (i.e., physical plant renovations, maintenance, facility 
modifications/upgrades, and/or construction).
    Successful proposals under Category A will be those that propose to 
improve live marine mammal stranding recovery or treatment, including, 
but not limited to:enhancing the rescue and treatment of animals, 
training of responders and rehabilitators via development of outreach 
and educational material or workshops, developing and testing of new or 
novel techniques for transport, treatment, or reporting, and non-
construction operational needs (e.g., equipment, supplies, staffing, 
printing) related to these activities. Successful proposals under 
Category B will be those that propose to collect data that will allow 
researchers to correlate physical, chemical, biological, and marine 
mammal health parameters towards a better understanding of marine 
mammal population biology, and non-construction operational needs 
(e.g., equipment, supplies, staffing, printing) related to these 
activities. Successful proposals under Category C will be those that 
propose to meet facility operation needs (e.g., physical alterations to 
facility, maintenance) for stranding response and recovery or conduct 
facility upgrades (e.g., renovations, build-outs) in order to enhance 
existing recovery or treatment areas or increase the ability to collect 
marine mammal health and environmental data before, during, or after 
stranding events. According to the statute, preference will be given to 
facility operation needs and upgrades for those facilities that have 
established records for rescuing or rehabilitating sick and stranded 
marine mammals.
    The applicant must select only one of the 3 categories that best 
fits their proposal. We recognize that most projects will have overlap 
with more than one category; however, applicants must determine which 
one category best fits the overall goals of the proposed project. For 
additional guidance on the type of expertise that will be used in 
evaluating proposals, applicants should refer to Section IV. B. and IV. 
C. In the 2003/2004 award cycle, no Prescott Grant Program funds will 
go towards basic scientific research on non-stranded marine mammals 
(i.e., wild population studies).

D. Program Funding Priorities

    Each proposal category has a set of national and regional funding 
priorities that relate to specific national or regional stranding 
network needs. All proposals must identify at least one national or 
regional funding priority that is directly related to the projects 
goals and objectives. These specific funding priorities are outlined in 
section II of this document and are not in any rank order.

E. Available Program Funds

    This solicitation announces that a minimum of $1.3M is available 
for distribution and that a maximum of $8.8M may be available for 
distribution under the 2003/2004 Prescott Grant Program. For the 2003/
2004 annual cycle there is $1.3M from carryover of FY 2002 funds, and 
possibly up to $3.76M from FY 2003 appropriations, and up to $3.76M 
from FY 2004 appropriations. Applicants are hereby given notice that 
neither funds for FY 2003 nor FY 2004 have been appropriated, and 
therefore exact dollar amounts cannot be given. The maximum Federal 
award for each annual award or emergency assistance award cannot exceed 
$100,000 (with a minimum of 25 percent non-Federal cost share), as 
stated in the legislative language (16 U. S. C. 1421f-1).
    In addition to the annual competitive process, $400K is available 
from FY 2002 carryover to provide for emergency assistance awards. If 
appropriations are received for FY 2003 and FY 2004, then additional 
funds will be set aside for these emergency assistance awards. Of the 
FY 2003 appropriations, $200K will be set aside. Additionally, FY 2004 
appropriations will be set aside as needed or as indicated by previous 
usage of the emergency assistance fund. All emergency funds set aside 
and unused will be carried over for awards in subsequent years.
    There is no limit on the number of proposals that can be submitted 
by the same eligible stranding network participant or authorized 
researcher during the 2003/2004 annual cycle. However, there are 
insufficient funds to award financial assistance to every applicant. 
Multiple proposals submitted must clearly identify different projects 
and must be successful in the competitive review process. In an attempt 
to ensure that the greatest number of applicants receive assistance 
during the 2003/2004 funding cycle, eligible stranding network 
participants can receive no more than two awards in this cycle. The two 
awards must be for projects that are clearly separate in their 
objectives, goals, and budget requests. In addition, if eligible 
researchers are applying as Principal Investigators, and are not 
independently authorized under the MMPA Section 112(c), the MMPA 
Section 104 (see implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.33-44), the 
MMPA Section 109(h) (see implementing regulations at 50 CFR 216.22), or 
the National Contingency Plan for Response to Marine Mammal Unusual 
Mortality Events, then they can receive no more than one award in the 
2003/2004 cycle.
    Eligible stranding network participants and researchers can be 
identified as Co-Investigators or Cooperators on an unlimited number of

[[Page 6895]]

proposals. In addition, Department of Commerce (DOC) and Department of 
Interior (DOI) employees may act as Cooperators if they are responsible 
for performing analyses or interpreting data collected under a Prescott 
award. However, no Prescott Grant Program funds can be used for 
salaries or travel of DOC or DOI employees. See section I. F. for 
Eligibility requirements.
    There is no guarantee that sufficient funds will be available to 
make awards for all qualified projects. Publication of this notice does 
not oblige NOAA to award any specific project or to obligate any 
available funds. If an application for a financial assistance award is 
selected for funding, NOAA/NMFS has no obligation to provide any 
additional funding in connection with that award in subsequent years. 
In no event will NOAA or DOC be responsible for proposal preparation 
costs if this program fails to receive funding or is cancelled because 
of other agency priorities.
    If a recipient of an award incurs any costs prior to receiving an 
award agreement signed by an authorized NOAA official, they would do so 
solely at their own risk of these costs not being included under the 
award. Notwithstanding any verbal or written assurance that applicants 
have received, pre-award costs are not allowed under the award unless 
the Grants Officer approves them in accordance with 15 CFR 14.28.

F. Eligibility

    There are 5 categories of eligible stranding network participants 
that can apply for funds under this Program: (1) Letter of Agreement 
(LOA) holders; (2) LOA designees; (3) researchers; (4) NMFS-recognized 
Northwest Region participants; and, (5) state, local, or eligible 
Federal government entities.
    In order for these organizations and individuals to apply for award 
funds under the Prescott Grant Program, they must meet the following 
eligibility criteria specific to their category of participation:
1. LOA Holder Participant
    a. Active as an authorized participant for the past 3 years in 
network activities.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\Applications from new network members, such as individuals or 
groups that have been granted authorization recently, will likely 
not qualify for eligibility during the first few funding cycles 
unless those applicants have experience as active Network 
participants (e.g., as designee or under 109(h)) for the past 3 
years. The Act makes clear its intent to provide financial 
assistance to the active stranding network: ``Provide grants to 
eligible stranding network participants* * *'', and preference 
should be given to: ``* * * those facilities that have established 
records for rescuing or rehabilitating sick and stranded marine 
mammals.'' The 3 year period is important to establishing whether or 
not participants are in good standing by their completion of 
reporting requirements and level of cooperation.
    \3\To be ``in good standing'', you must meet all of the 
following criteria:
    a. If a Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) or Endangered 
Species Act (ESA) scientific research or enhancement permit holder 
and the applicant is a designated Principal Investigator, have 
fulfilled all permit requirements, including but not limited to 
submission of all reports, and must have no pending or outstanding 
enforcement actions under the MMPA or ESA.
    b. Have complied with the terms and responsibilities of the 
appropriate LOA, MMPA section 109(h) authorization, or National 
Contingency Plan (whichever applies). This includes the following 
reporting requirements: (1) timely reporting of strandings to NMFS, 
(2) timely submission of complete reports on basic or Level A data 
to the Regional Coordinator (includes investigator's name, species, 
stranding location, number of animals, date and time of stranding 
and recovery, length and condition, and sex; marine mammal parts 
retention or transfer; annual reports), and (3) collecting 
information or samples as necessary and as requested. This also 
includes the following coordination/cooperation requirements: (1) 
cooperation with state, local, and Federal officials, and (2) 
cooperation with other stranding network participants.
    c. Have cooperated in a timely manner with NMFS in collecting 
and submitting Level B (supplementary information regarding sample 
collection related to life history and to the stranding event) and 
Level C (necropsy results) data and samples, when requested.
    d. Have no current enforcement investigation for the take of 
marine mammals contrary to MMPA or ESA regulations.
    e. Have no record of pending NMFS notice of violation(s) 
regarding the policies governing the goals and operations of the 
Stranding Network.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    b. Participating in good standing.\3\
    c. Holding a current LOA for stranding response (either live or 
dead animal response) or rehabilitation from NMFS.
    d. Not a current full-time or part-time employee of the DOC or the 
DOI.
2. LOA Designee Participant
    a. Active as an authorized participant for the past 3 years in 
network activities\2\.
    b. Participating in good standing\3\.
    c. Holding a current letter of designation from a NMFS LOA holder.
    d. Not a current full-time or part-time employee of DOC or DOI.
3. Researcher Participant
    a. Active as an authorized participant for the past 3 years in 
network activitiess.\2\
    b. Holds an authorizing letter from an appropriate NMFS Regional 
Administrator to salvage or receive salvaged dead stranded marine 
mammal specimens and parts for the purpose of utilization in scientific 
research (50 CFR 216.22), unless an exception to notification or prior 
authorization is cited under 50 CFR 216.22(c)(8). Persons authorized to 
salvage dead marine mammal specimens under this section must have 
registered the salvage with the appropriate NMFS Regional Office within 
30 days after the taking or death occurs.
    c. Holds or has applied for a NMFS scientific research and/or 
enhancement permit to take marine mammals requested under authority of 
the MMPA of 1972, as amended (16 U. S. C. 1361 et seq.), the 
Regulations Governing the Taking and Importing of Marine Mammals (50 
CFR part 216), the ESA of 1973, as amended (16 U. S. C. 1531 et seq.), 
and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of 
endangered fish and wildlife (50 CFR part 222, subpart C).
    d. Have at least one designated co-Investigator(s) that is an 
active NMFS-authorized stranding network participant in good 
standing\3\.
    e. Not a current full-time or part-time employee of DOC or DOI.
4. Northwest Region Participants
    a. Active as a NMFS-recognized participant for the past 3 years or 
more in Northwest Region network activities\2\ and named in the Draft 
2002 National Contingency Plan for Response to Marine Mammal Unusual 
Mortality Events.
    b. Participating in good standing\3\.
    c. Not a current full-time or part-time employee of DOC or DOI.
    5. State, Local, or Federal Government Participants
    a. Actively involved as an authorized participant in stranding 
response and/or rehabilitation during the past 3 years in an area of 
geographic need (i.e., municipality or larger region with no existing 
responder)\2\.
    b. Participating in good standing\3\.
    c. State and local government officials or employees participating 
pursuant to MMPA section 109(h)(16 U.S.C. 1379(h)) for marine mammal 
species not listed under the Endangered Species Act and fulfilling 
reporting obligations outlined in 50 CFR 216.22 (i.e., submission of 
written report to NMFS every 6 months containing description of 
animal(s) involved, circumstances of taking, method of taking, name and 
position of official or employee involved, and disposition of 
animal(s)).
    d. Not a current full-time or part-time employee of DOC or DOI.
    Applicants must submit the required documentation in their proposal 
(see section III, How to Apply) as evidence that they are an LOA holder 
participant, designee participant, researcher participant, NMFS-
recognized Northwest Region participant, or a state,

[[Page 6896]]

local, or Federal government participant. All eligibility criteria 
specified for the participant's category must be met in order for a 
proposal to be considered for funding. Proposals that are not eligible 
for funding according to the above criteria will be returned to the 
applicant with explanation.
    We support cultural and gender diversity in our programs and 
encourage eligible women and minority individuals and groups to submit 
proposals. Furthermore, we recognize the interest of the Secretaries of 
Commerce and Interior in defining appropriate marine management 
policies and programs that meet the needs of the U. S. insular areas, 
so we also encourage proposals from eligible individuals, government 
entities, universities, colleges, and businesses in U. S. insular areas 
as described in the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) (section 3(14), 
16 U. S. C. 1362). This includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the 
U. S. Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and the Northern Mariana 
Islands.
    We are also strongly committed to broadening the participation of 
Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs), which include Historically Black 
Colleges and Universities, Hispanic Serving Institutions, and Tribal 
Colleges and Universities, in our programs. The DOC/NOAA/NMFS vision, 
mission, and goals are to achieve full participation by MSIs, to 
advance the development of human potential, strengthen the Nation's 
capacity to provide high-quality education, and increase opportunities 
for MSIs to participate in and benefit from Federal financial 
assistance programs. Therefore, we encourage all eligible applicants to 
include meaningful participation of MSIs whenever practicable.
    Applicants are not eligible to submit a proposal under this program 
if they are an employee of the DOC or DOI. NOAA/NMFS employees (whether 
full-time, part-time, or intermittent) are not allowed to help in the 
preparation of proposals. MMHSRP staff (at the regional and national 
level) are available to provide information regarding statistics on 
strandings, MMHSRP programmatic goals and objectives, ongoing marine 
mammal programs, funding priorities for the 2003/2004 Prescott Grant 
Program cycle, and, along with other Federal Program Officers, can 
provide guidance on application procedures and proper completion of 
required Federal forms. Since this is a competitive program, NMFS and 
NOAA employees cannot provide assistance in conceptualizing, 
developing, or structuring proposals, or write letters of support for 
any proposal. NMFS or NOAA employees may provide information to 
applicants on appropriate analytical techniques including costs and 
time lines for such analyses. For activities that involve collaboration 
with current NOAA programs including, but not limited to, the National 
Marine Mammal Tissue Bank (NMMTB) and laboratories conducting analysis 
of tissues for contaminants, employees of NOAA or the DOC/National 
Institute of Standards and Technology can write a letter verifying that 
they are collaborating with the proposed project, that the applicant is 
trained to participate in the NMMTB, or that the applicant is currently 
participating in the National Marine Analytical Quality Assurance 
Program. Funds from the Prescott Grant Program cannot be used for NOAA 
or NMFS employee travel or salaries. Proposals selected for funding 
from a non-NOAA Federal agency will be funded through an inter-agency 
transfer.
    Unsatisfactory performance under prior or current Federal awards 
can result in proposals not being considered for funding under the 
2003/2004 Prescott Grant Program cycle.

G. Other Permits and Approvals

    It is the applicant's responsibility to obtain all necessary 
Federal, state, and local government permits and approvals. In order to 
determine whether such permits and approvals have been obtained or 
requested, the applicant must include in the proposal package either:1) 
an application cover letter from the Prescott applicant to the 
appropriate authorizing entity requesting permits (e.g., MMPA 
scientific research permit) or approvals (e.g., Institutional Animal 
Care and Use Committee (IACUC) review), or 2) a copy of the final 
permit or approval.
    For projects on live stranded or rehabilitated and/or released 
marine mammals, if the stranding network participant or researcher 
works for a research facility (e.g., University, Aquarium, animal care 
facility) with an IACUC, that applicant must have requested or obtained 
approval from the IACUC prior to applying for funding under this 
program (as required by the regulations under the Animal Welfare Act, 9 
CFR 2.30-2.31). If the proposed project involves intrusive research (50 
CFR 216.27(c)(6)) or if animals must be held after rehabilitation has 
been completed, the applicant must have applied for or obtained a MMPA 
and/or ESA scientific research and/or enhancement permit before the 
proposal will be considered for funding. Intrusive research is defined 
under 50 CFR 216.3. For proposed intrusive research at a research 
facility, the facility must have applied for registration or already be 
registered by the U. S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant 
Health Inspection Service (APHIS) as a research facility. For more 
information on obtaining research facility registration please refer to 
the APHIS, Animal Care Program home page at http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ac/.
    Activities directly related to the individual animal's health 
assessment, standard diagnostics, treatment, approved post-release 
monitoring, or release are separately authorized by NMFS under the 
authorizations for stranding network participants and therefore do not 
require an additional permit.
    It is the applicant's responsibility to request and obtain all 
water quality, air quality, or other waste disposal permits as well as 
wetland and building permits, when required. If applicable, 
documentation of the requests or approvals of all such environmental 
permits must be included in the proposal package. Such documentation 
must include any environmental impact analyses that is required to be 
submitted to the appropriate Federal, state, or local permitting 
authority as well as a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 
checklist (form available on the Prescott Grant Program web site
    http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ prot--res/ PR2/ Health--and-- Stranding--
Response-- Program/ Prescott.html). These documents will help the 
Prescott Grant Program staff determine if the application requires the 
preparation of an environmental assessment. At initial screening, all 
applications will be reviewed to ensure that they have sufficient 
environmental documentation to allow program staff to determine whether 
the proposal is categorically excluded from further NEPA analysis or 
whether an environmental assessment is necessary. For those 
applications needing an environmental assessment, affected applicants 
will be so informed after the initial screening stage and will be 
requested to prepare a draft of the assessment by the merit review 
panel meeting in Summer 2003. Applicants are expected to design their 
proposals so that they minimize their potential adverse impacts on the 
environment. Applicants who believe that the work or funding for the 
work under their applications may require an environmental assessment, 
for example those proposing construction activities under Category C, 
should not wait until the initial screening to plan for

[[Page 6897]]

conducting an environmental assessment. Category C applicants are 
encouraged to contact the Prescott Grant Program staff as early as 
possible for guidance on preparing an assessment. This process is 
intended to assist NMFS' compliance with NEPA.
    If proposed activities in Category A, B, or C will take place 
within National Marine Sanctuaries, National Parks, National Seashores, 
and other Federally-designated or State-designated protected areas, it 
is the applicant's responsibility to request and obtain from the 
appropriate government agencies any necessary permits or letters of 
agreement.
    For further information on permit requirements and applications 
procedures for Federal scientific research or MMPA enhancement permits, 
contact the NMFS Office of Protected Resources (see FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT) or see the following website:http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/prot_res/PR1/Permits/pr1permits_types.html.
    If a proposal is selected for funding, any necessary MMPA and/or 
ESA scientific research and/or enhancement permits must be received 
prior to receipt of funds. Failure to obtain other Federal, state, and 
local permits, approvals, letters of agreement, or failure to provide 
environmental analyses where necessary (i.e., NEPA environmental 
assessment) will also delay the receipt of funds if a project is 
otherwise selected for funding.

H. Duration and Terms of Funding

    2003/2004 awards under the Prescott Grant Program will have a 
maximum project period of 3 years. However, the total Federal award 
cannot exceed $100,000 regardless of the length of the project period. 
We will not accept proposals requesting incrementally funded projects 
exceeding $100,000 in Federal funds.
    If an applicant wishes to continue work on a project funded through 
this program beyond the project period and obligated award funds have 
not been expended by the end of this period, the applicant can notify 
the assigned Federal Program Officer 30 days prior to the end of the 
period to determine eligibility for a no-cost extension. If, however, 
the money is expended and funds are needed to continue the project, the 
applicant should submit another proposal during the next competitive 
award cycle (FY 2005) or seek an alternate source of funding.
    If a proposal is selected for funding, we have no obligation to 
provide any additional future funding in connection with that award. 
Renewal of an award to increase funding up to the maximum of $100,000 
in the Federal share or to extend the period of performance is totally 
at our discretion.

I. Non-Federal Match or Cost Sharing

    Legislation under which the Prescott Grant Program operates 
requires a non-Federal match, or cost share, in order to leverage the 
limited funds available for this program and to encourage partnerships 
among government, private organizations, non-profit organizations, the 
stranding network, and academia to address the needs of marine mammal 
health and stranding response. All proposals submitted must provide a 
minimum non-Federal match of 25 percent of the total budget (i.e., .25 
x total project costs = total non-Federal share). Therefore, the total 
Federal share will be 75 percent or less of the total budget. For 
example, if the proposed total budget was $133,334, the minimum total 
non-Federal share would be $33,334 (.25 x $133,334 = $33,334) and the 
maximum total Federal share would be $100,000 (.75 x $133,334 = 
$100,000). The applicant can include a non-Federal match for more than 
25 percent of the total budget, but this obligation will be binding. In 
order to reduce calculation error in determining the correct non-
Federal match amounts, we urge all applicants to use the cost share 
calculator on the Prescott Grant Program web page (see section I. L. 
Electronic Access Addresses).
    The Federal Program Officer will determine the appropriateness of 
all non-Federal match proposals, including the valuation of in-kind 
contributions, according to the regulations codified at 15 CFR 14.23 
and 24.24. An in-kind contribution is a non-cash contribution, donated 
or loaned, by a third party to the applicant. In general, the value of 
in-kind services or property used to fulfill a non-Federal match will 
be the fair market value of the services or property. Thus, the value 
is determined by the cost of obtaining such services or property if 
they had not been donated, or of obtaining such services or property 
for the period of the loan. The applicant must document the in-kind 
services or property used to fulfill the non-Federal match. If we 
decide to fund a proposal, we will require strict accounting of the in-
kind contributions within the total non-Federal match included in the 
award document. The Grants Officer (i.e., the Department of Commerce 
official responsible for all business management and administrative 
aspects of a grant and with delegated authority to award, amend, 
administer, close out, suspend, and/or terminate awards) is the final 
approving authority for the award, including the budget and any non-
Federal match proposals.

J. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance

    The Prescott Grant Program will be listed in the ``Catalog of 
Federal Domestic Assistance'' under number 11.439, titled ``Marine 
Mammal Data Program''. This information should be included on the 
Application Form, 424, space 10 (see section III, How to Apply, below).

K. Where to Send Proposals

    All proposals for the annual award cycle should be sent to NOAA/
NMFS/Office of Protected Resources, Marine Mammal Health and Stranding 
Response Program, Attn: Michelle Ordono, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 
12604, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3283, phone 301-713-2322 ext 177. 
Proposals for the emergency assistance component of the Prescott Grant 
Program should be sent to the NMFS Regional Office that oversees the 
area of action (see the NMFS Prescott Grant Program web page at:http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ prot--res/ PR2/ Health--and-- Stranding--Response-- 
Program/ Prescott.html for addresses). We cannot accept completed 
applications via the Internet or facsimile at this time.

L. Electronic Access Addresses

    This solicitation, complete proposal packages (including required 
Federal forms) with instructions, a cost share calculator and addresses 
for submission are available on the NMFS Prescott Grant Program web 
page at:http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ prot--res/ PR2/ Health--and-- 
Stranding-- Response-- Program/ Prescott.html.

II. Program Goals and Regional Funding Priorities

    For each of the proposal categories, national and regional funding 
priorities have been identified that are either essential to 
accomplishing the overarching goals of the Prescott Grant Program or 
address specific needs of each stranding region. The MMHSRP has 
identified national funding priorities that are nation-wide in scope or 
that cross regional boundaries in implementation. For the 2003/2004 
annual cycle, each NMFS Region identified regional funding priorities 
that will improve the capabilities of their regional stranding network. 
These national and regional funding priorities will be reviewed prior 
to each annual award cycle in order to incorporate new needs that arise 
and eliminate priorities that have been met in previous award cycles.

[[Page 6898]]

    Each proposal must identify one of the 3 categories and at least 
one national or regional funding priority under that category that is 
directly related to the project's goals and objectives. Proposals not 
clearly identifying one of the 3 categories will be returned to the 
applicant after initial review and will not be considered further in 
the 2003/2004 cycle.

Category A - Recovery or treatment of live stranded marine mammals 
(i.e.,rescue of live stranded marine mammals including treatment, 
assessment, and/or rehabilitation)

1. National Funding Priorities
    Enhance the response to live animal strandings including transport, 
treatment, rehabilitation, or euthanasia.
    Enhance rehabilitation practices to protect wild animals in 
rehabilitation from exposure to novel pathogens and prevent 
introduction of new or altered diseases into the wild.
2. Regional Funding Priorities
    a. Northeast Region
    Enhance response to live strandings of large whales (excluding 
right whale) and mass strandings.
    Enhance safe and efficient transport of live stranded marine 
mammals, especially cetaceans, including aerial transport.
    Operational needs to improve access to veterinary care, including 
on-site (lab or field) equipment or instruments for more rapid 
assessment and treatment of medical condition(s) and for monitoring of 
treatment response.
    b. Northwest Region
    Enhance network operations to respond to, rescue, transport, and 
treat stranded marine mammals that are sick or injured.
    Improve the handling, stabilization, or treatment of live stranded 
odontocetes.
    Train responders to enhance the consistency and quality of 
assessments and improve documentation of live marine mammal strandings 
for the potential of human interactions and diseases.
    c. Southeast Region
    Enhance network preparedness to respond to live strandings of large 
whales (excluding right whale) and mass strandings of live cetaceans.
    Enhance the capability to respond to live stranded marine mammals 
that are at risk from oil or other hazardous material spills.
    Enhance all aspects of live stranded marine mammal response and 
transport.
    Develop outreach and educational materials regarding live stranded 
marine mammals for both network members and the general public.
d. Southwest Region
California only
    Enhance response, treatment, and transport of live stranded marine 
mammals.
    Enhance capability to respond to live stranded marine mammals 
entangled in fishing gear\4\.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\Authorization to conduct disentanglement activities on marine 
mammals can only be carried out under an MMPA Letter of Authority 
from NMFS or by state, local, or federal officials or employees 
under MMPA Section 109(h).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Enhance capabilities to respond to live strandings of marine 
mammals during El Nino years.
    Equipment for routine transport of live stranded marine mammals.
Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, and Northern Mariana Islands
    Operational and staffing needs for increasing quality of care, 
including veterinary care, during live stranding events throughout the 
U.S. Pacific Islands (e.g., Guam, American Samoa, and Northern Mariana 
Islands).
    Enhance coverage and response to live strandings of marine mammals 
throughout the U. S. Pacific Islands, particularly in remote or rural 
areas.
    Outreach and training in the U.S. Pacific Islands (e.g., Guam, 
American Samoa, and Northern Mariana Islands) for response readiness 
and treatment of live stranded marine mammals.
    Public outreach and education on protocols for communication and 
response to live stranding events.
    Facility operation needs to improve access to veterinary care of 
stranded marine mammals, including facility improvements, on-site (lab 
or field) equipment, instruments for more rapid assessment of medical 
condition, and instruments for monitoring of treatment response.
    Equipment needs to improve live stranded cetacean response and 
transport safety.
    e. Alaska Region
    Enhance response to live strandings of marine mammals throughout 
the state, particularly in remote and rural areas.
    Enhance capability for the care and treatment of live stranded 
marine mammals.
    Respond to live fur seal entanglements on the Pribilof Islands\4\
    Facility operation or equipment needs for stranding response and 
live stranded marine mammal treatment.

Category B - Data collection from living or dead stranded marine 
mammals (i.e., recovery of stranded marine mammals for collection of 
level A\5\ and level B and C\6\ data, specimens, and/or analyses)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\Level A data = Reporting which includes investigator's name, 
species, stranding location, number of animals, date and time of 
stranding and recovery, length and condition, and sex; marine mammal 
parts retention or transfer; annual reports. (Data collected through 
NOAA Form 89-864, OMB No. 0648-0178.)
    \6\Level B data = Supplementary information regarding sample 
collection related to life history and to the stranding event. Level 
C data = Necropsy results. (Data collection is not required, but is 
collected on a voluntary basis by stranding network participants.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. National Funding Priorities
    Collect specimens or data from stranded marine mammals to assess 
health trends in wild populations of cetaceans and pinnipeds, with 
emphasis on diseases that have potential for epizootics (e.g., 
morbillivirus), are endemic and may have a significant impact on 
survival/reproduction (e.g., herpes and other viruses), or have 
zoonotic potential.
    Collect and assess human impact and post-Unusual Mortality Event 
data for baseline information on population demographics, life history, 
movement and distribution, and health, particularly from species of 
national concern such as beaked whales.
    Enhance the quality and quantity of level B and C data\6\ collected 
from stranded marine mammals.
2. Regional Funding Priorities
    a. Northeast Region
    Equipment to enhance recovery, examination, and necropsy of large 
whales and mass stranded cetaceans, including transport of carcasses to 
salvage sites or facilities and ultimately disposal sites.
    Collect data to enhance the assessment of the causes of single or 
mass stranded marine mammals through the use of biological, 
physiological, or medical diagnostic studies.
    Collect data on post-release survival of marine mammals including 
releases from rehabilitation and/or beach releases.
    Collect consistent level A data\5\, validate historic data, and 
improve the collection and sharing of level B and C data6 from stranded 
marine mammals.
    Collect specimens and data from stranded marine mammals for the 
development of quality training materials on marine mammal anatomy and 
descriptive pathology.
    Collect biological samples from stranded marine mammals in support 
of cooperative research projects using

[[Page 6899]]

quality control techniques (e.g., serological, histopathological, and 
chemical analyses, and tissue banking).
    Develop training for data collection to enhance the consistency and 
quality of assessing marine mammal strandings for human-induced 
injuries and mortalities.
    Enhance the quality, using quality control techniques (e.g., 
serological), of biological sample collection from live stranded marine 
mammals for analysis in support of cooperative research projects.
    Upgrade facility information management systems and capabilities to 
improve or allow access to the Marine Mammal Health and Stranding 
Response national databases.
    b. Northwest Region
    Collect data from stranded marine mammals to investigate the 
incidence of human interactions and diseases affecting marine mammals.
    Collect data from stranded marine mammals to use in comparative 
studies of contaminant exposures and burdens in marine mammals.
    Development of protocols for the identification, processing, and 
disposal of dead marine mammals that carry contaminant burdens 
exceeding allowable limits for disposal in the environment.
    Collect data from stranded southern resident killer whales to 
investigate overall health parameters.
    Collect data from stranded killer whales and harbor porpoise to 
clarify taxonomic and stock identification in the wild populations of 
these two species.
    c. Southeast Region
    Enhance network preparedness to collect information from strandings 
of large whales (excluding right whale) and mass strandings of 
cetaceans.
    Collect and evaluate information from stranded marine mammals that 
can be used in assessing the incidence or prevalence of human-induced 
injury or mortality.
    Collect consistent level A data\5\, validate historic data, and 
improve the collection of level B and level C data\6\ from stranded 
marine mammals.
    Enhance the capability to record information from stranded marine 
mammals impacted by oil or other hazardous material spills.
    Collect biological samples from stranded marine mammals for 
analysis in support of marine mammal research projects through 
cooperative investigations using quality control techniques (e.g., 
serological, histo-pathological, and chemical analyses).
    Collect post-Unusual Mortality Event data from stranded marine 
mammals for comparisons with mortality and disease observed during die-
offs.
    d. Southwest Region
California only
    Collect specimens and data from stranded marine mammals to assess 
health trends in wild populations of cetaceans, with emphasis on 
diseases that have potential for epizootics (e.g., morbillivirus and 
others).
    Full examination of dead-stranded California sea lions to determine 
the extent of purposeful human-induced mortality in the Southern 
California Bight.
    Collect specimens and data from stranded marine mammals that will 
support baseline information on population demographics and life 
history (e.g., genetics, age-to-maturity, reproductive status, etc.).
    Enhance the response to and collection of data from dead-stranded 
marine mammals.
Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, and Northern Mariana Islands
    Collect specimens and data from stranded marine mammals to assess 
the overall health trends in wild marine mammal populations.
    Collect specimens and data from stranded, rehabilitated marine 
mammals to assess the conditions that affect releasability and identify 
health risks to wild populations.
    Collect appropriate data to investigate the occurrence of 
epizootics (e.g., morbillivirus) in live stranded odontocetes.
    Conduct thorough necropsies and collect biological samples that 
will enhance the ability to detect purposeful and incidental human-
induced injuries and mortalities.
    Collect consistent level A data\5\ throughout the jurisdiction, 
including remote areas, and collect level B and C data6 from strandings 
of dead marine mammals.
    Development of partnerships with marine mammal experts and others, 
to respond to and conduct studies supporting MMHSRP objectives related 
to live strandings of marine mammals.
    e. Alaska Region
    Collect consistent level A data\5\ throughout the state, including 
remote areas.
    Collect level B and C data\6\ from dead-stranded marine mammals.
    Conduct necropsies and diagnostics of stranded marine mammals.
    Collect tissue samples appropriate for genetic analysis from 
stranded harbor seals and Steller sea lions.
    Operational needs to improve in-house sample tracking and archiving 
for participation in the National Marine Mammal Tissue Bank and the 
Marine Mammal Health and Stranding national database.

Category C - Facility operations directly related to Categories A or B 
above(i.e., physical plant renovations, maintenance, facility 
modifications/upgrades and/or construction)

1. National Funding Priority
    Enhance physical plant capabilities to increase the quality of care 
of live stranded marine mammals or enhance the safety and quality of 
data or sample collection from living or dead stranded marine mammals.
2. Regional Funding Priorities
    a. Northeast Region
    Facility operation needs to enhance and support existing 
rehabilitation facilities in general or to upgrade existing facilities 
to meet upcoming rehabilitation facility guidelines.
    Facility operation needs to improve access to veterinary care, 
including on-site (lab or field) equipment or instruments for more 
rapid assessment and treatment of medical condition(s) and for 
monitoring of treatment response.
    b. Northwest Region
    Enhance or upgrade facilities to handle and treat stranded marine 
mammals that must be kept in rehabilitation due to injury or disease.
    Upgrade facilities for handling, stabilizing or treating stranded 
odontocetes.
    Enhance or upgrade existing facilities in anticipation of NMFS 
guidelines on rehabilitation.
    c. Southeast Region
    Upgrade existing rehabilitation facilities, with special attention 
to active facilities (based on rehabilitation records and historic 
data) and facilities requiring improvements to meet upcoming NMFS 
guidelines on rehabilitation.
    Enhancements or upgrades of necropsy facilities involved in 
analysis of samples collected from stranded marine mammals.
    d. Southwest Region
California only
    Facility operation needs or upgrades and renovations associated 
with veterinary care of stranded marine mammals.
    Expansion and renovation of existing stranding and rehabilitation 
facilities.
    Facility upgrades associated with treatment and feeding of stranded 
marine mammals.

[[Page 6900]]

Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, Northern Mariana Islands
    Renovations, upgrades, or expansions to live stranding and 
rehabilitation facilities.
    e. Alaska Region
    Facility upgrades and renovations for stranding response and live 
stranded marine mammal treatment.
    Facility operation needs to improve in-house sample tracking and 
archiving for participation in the National Marine Mammal Tissue Bank 
and the Marine Mammal Health and Stranding national database.

III. Proposal Instructions and Requirements

    The instructions in this document are designed to help applicants 
in preparing and submitting a proposal for federal funding under the 
2003/2004 annual cycle and the emergency assistance component of the 
Prescott Grant Program. All required Federal forms, the narrative 
description of the budget and proposed project, and applicable 
supporting documentation must be complete and must follow the format 
described here. One signed original and two signed copies of the 
complete proposal package must be submitted. The original proposal and 
copies should not be permanently bound in any manner and must be 
printed on one side only. In addition, we are requesting that 
applicants submit an electronic copy, on diskette or CD (in Microsoft 
Word v. 97 or earlier or WordPerfect v. 6.1 or lower), of the narrative 
project description. The required unbound original and two copies, and 
the optional electronic copy must be sent to the address listed in 
section I. K. of this document and postmarked by the submission 
deadline (see DATES) in order to be considered in the 2003/2004 annual 
award cycle. If a package does not contain all of the required Federal 
forms and proposal elements described in this section it will be 
returned to the applicant and will not be considered further in the 
this funding cycle. Note that there will be no extensions of the 
deadline.
    Category A and B proposals and Category C proposals (i.e., those 
that involve build-outs, alterations, upgrades, and renovations to 
existing facilities) require different federal forms depending on the 
percentage of federal funds being requested. That is, Category C 
proposals with 50 percent or more of their requested federal amount 
going to construction activities require the federal forms for 
construction (i.e., SF-424C and SF-424D) and do not require the federal 
forms for non-construction (i.e, SF-424A and SF-424B).

A. Required Federal Forms for Category A and B Proposals (i.e., non-
construction)

Cover Sheets
    SF-424 ``Application for Federal Assistance'' (``Catalog of Federal 
Domestic Assistance'' number is 11.439, and title is ``Marine Mammal 
Data Program'')
    SF-424B ``Assurances - Non-Construction Programs''
Project Budget
    SF-424A ``Budget Information - Non-Construction Programs``
Certifications and Disclosures
    CD-511 ``Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other 
Responsibility Matters; Drug-Free Workplace Requirements and Lobbying''
    SF-LLL ``Disclosure of Lobbying Activities'' (as required under 15 
CFR part 28)
    CD-346 ``Name Check''

B. Required Federal Forms for Category C Proposals (i.e., construction)

    Construction proposals with 50 percent or more of their requested 
federal amount going to construction activities such as build-outs, 
alterations, upgrades, and renovations to existing facilities must 
submit the following forms as part of their proposal package:
Cover Sheets
    SF-424 ``Application for Federal Assistance'' (``Catalog of Federal 
Domestic Assistance'' number is 11.439, and title is ``Marine Mammal 
Data Program'')
    SF-424D ``Assurances - Construction Programs''
Project Budget
    SF-424C ``Budget Information - Construction Programs''
Certifications and Disclosures
    CD-511 ``Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension and Other 
Responsibility Matters; Drug-Free Workplace Requirements and Lobbying''
    SF-LLL ``Disclosure of Lobbying Activities'' (as required under 15 
CFR part 28)
    CD-346 ``Name Check''

C. Required Elements of all Project Proposals

    A complete proposal package must include the following elements in 
this order:
    1. Cover Sheets (Required Federal forms)
    2. Project Budget (Required Federal form(s), budget justification 
and narrative, and, if applicable, a current and approved negotiated 
indirect cost agreement with the Federal government)
    3. Title Page
    4. Project Summary (6 sentences or less)
    5. Narrative Project Description (10 pages or less, in format 
described below)
    6. Supporting Documentation (other Federal forms, proof of 
eligibility, proof of non-profit status (if applicable), curriculum 
vitae/resumes for the Principal and Co-Investigators, and background 
documents)
    Assistance in filling out required forms and avoiding common 
problems, complete proposal requirements, supplemental instructions for 
completing all Federal forms and the budget narrative, and questions 
and answers related to applying for funds under the Prescott Grant 
Program can be found on the Prescott Grant Program web site:http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ prot--res/ PR2/ Health--and-- Stranding-- Response-- 
Program/ Prescott.html.

1. Cover Sheet

    Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Standard Forms 424 and 424B 
or 424D must be the cover sheets for each proposal. Under Standard Form 
424, Item 5, ``Legal Name'' must match the name of the eligible 
applicant (i.e., LOA holder, LOA designee, authorized researcher, 
Northwest Contingency Plan participant, or state, local, or Federal 
entity). To complete item 10 of Standard Form 424, the Catalog of 
Federal Domestic Assistance number is 11.439, and the title is ``Marine 
Mammal Data Program''. Since the 2003/2004 cycle will use funds from 
two fiscal years, we recommend for item 13 of Standard Form 424 a start 
date no earlier than December 2003 for project proposals beginning in 
2003 and January 2004 for project proposals beginning in 2004.

2. Project Budget

    Each proposal must include clear and concise budget information, 
both on the required federal forms, in summary and in narrative detail.
    Category A and B proposals (i.e., proposals requesting a federal 
amount that does not include construction activities or in which 
construction activities are less than 50 percent of the total federal 
amount) must use OMB standard form 424A, ``Budget Information - Non 
Construction Programs'' and associated form instructions.
    Category C proposals (i.e., proposals requesting a federal amount 
for construction activities that is equal to or greater than 50 percent 
of the total

[[Page 6901]]

federal amount requested) must use OMB standard form 424C ``Budget 
Information - Construction Programs'' and associated form instructions.
    All instructions should be read before completing the appropriate 
budget form(s). Note that both Federal and non-Federal columns on 
Standard Form 424A must be filled in completely and separately and the 
amounts per category and total amounts on both the Standard Form 424A 
and 424C must correspond with the budget narrative and justification.
    On a separate sheet, describe and justify in narrative detail or on 
a spreadsheet the itemized costs per category between Federal and non-
Federal shares and the corresponding direct and indirect cost totals. 
For the non-Federal share, the itemized costs should be separated into 
cash and in-kind contributions. If in-kind contributions are included, 
describe briefly the basis for estimating the value of these 
contributions.
    If the applicant currently has a negotiated indirect cost rate with 
the Federal government, an amount for indirect costs can be included in 
the budget. Indirect costs are overhead costs for basic operational 
functions (e.g., lights, rent, water, insurance) that are incurred for 
common or joint objectives and therefore cannot be identified 
specifically within a particular project. Indirect costs can be 
included in both the Federal and non-Federal cost shares as long as the 
method of calculation is clear and certain rules are followed. The 
first rule is that generally the Federal share of the indirect costs 
cannot exceed 25 percent of the total proposed direct costs. The second 
rule is that if the approved indirect cost rate is above 25 percent of 
the total proposed direct cost, the amount above the 25-percent level 
can only be used as part of the non-Federal share if it is part of a 
negotiated rate. If indirect costs are included, the package should 
include a copy of the current, approved, negotiated indirect cost 
agreement with the Federal government. However, if the applicant is 
still in the process of obtaining or updating an indirect cost rate 
agreement, then the proposal package should include a copy of the 
transmittal letter and supporting documentation sent to the appropriate 
Federal agency (i.e., cognizant agency) in order to establish a new 
rate. If the applicant has never received a Federal grant, they should 
contact the Department of Commerce, Office of Executive Assistance 
Management (DOC/OEAM) via their web site:http://www.osec.doc.gov/oebam/grants.htm before submitting the proposal package to the Prescott Grant 
Program. DOC/OEAM will help determine what documents must be submitted 
to obtain an indirect cost rate with the Department of Commerce.
    We will not consider fees, fund-raising activities, travel for DOC 
or DOI employees, salaries for DOC or DOI employees, or profits as 
allowable costs in the proposed budget. The total costs of a project 
consist of all allowable costs you incur, including the value of in-
kind contributions, in accomplishing project activities during the 
project period. A project begins on the effective date of an award 
agreement between you and the Grants Officer and ends on the date 
specified in the award. Accordingly, we cannot reimburse applicants for 
time expended or costs incurred in developing a project or preparing 
the application, or in any discussions or negotiations with us prior to 
the award. We will not accept such expenditures as part of your cost 
share.

3. Title Page

    A Title Page must be included for each project. The Title Page must 
list the project title, project duration (with a start date no earlier 
than December 2003 or January 2004), applicant name (must match the 
``legal name'' on Standard Form 424, Item 5), name of Principal 
Investigator or Contact, address and phone number of the Principal 
Investigator or Contact, the proposal category and funding priority 
under which the project fits (see section II. of this document), the 
project's objective(s), and a statement regarding the Federal, non-
Federal, and total costs of the project.

4. Project Summary

    In 6 sentences or less, briefly summarize:project goals and 
objectives as they relate to the Prescott proposal categories (i.e., 
Category A, Category B, or Category C), national or Regional funding 
priorities; proposed activities; geographic area where activities would 
occur; and expected outcomes and benefits from the activities (e.g., 
increased number of responses to live stranded cetaceans, greater and 
higher quality data collected from pinniped strandings, renovate and 
upgrade a marine mammal rehabilitation facility, etc.) of the project. 
This summary will be posted on our website if the project is funded.

5. Narrative Project Description

    The narrative description of the proposed project must not exceed 
10 pages (not including documents in the Supporting Documentation 
section) and must be typed in Courier size 12 font, either single or 
double-spaced. The narrative should demonstrate the applicant's 
knowledge of the need for the project, describe how the applicant will 
manage the business aspects of the grant (i.e., sound accounting 
practices), and show how the proposed project builds upon any past and 
current work in the subject area, presents novel or unique solutions, 
as well as relates to on-going work in related fields. Applicants 
should not assume that reviewers already know the relative merits of 
the project.
    The narrative project description must include each of the 
following elements in the order listed here:
    (1) Project goals and objectives (maximum 2 pages). Identify the 
Prescott Grant Program national or regional funding priorities, listed 
earlier in this document, to which the project's goals and objective(s) 
correspond. Identify the problem/opportunity the project intends to 
address and describe its significance to the marine mammal health and 
stranding response and rehabilitation community. State expected project 
accomplishments. Although actual stranding events cannot be predicted, 
historic stranding data in the region of proposed activities should be 
used to assess season, species, numbers, and likelihood of future 
strandings. These data are critical in linking proposed project 
objectives with the Prescott Grant Program's goals, funding priorities, 
and in assuring an equitable distribution of funds among regions. 
Therefore, we encourage applicants to provide stranding data and 
statistics by year and geographic area in sufficient detail to provide 
a historic and need-based context to the project.
    (2) Project management (maximum 4 pages, excluding resumes, 
curriculum vitae, and agreements between Principal Investigators and 
other participants or grant fund managers where applicable). Describe 
how the proposed project will be organized and managed. Financial 
accounting systems to be used must be explained and a business point of 
contact responsible for managing those systems must be given. Identify 
whether the applicant is applying as an LOA holder, designee, 
researcher, Northwest Region contingency plan organization/individual, 
or state, local, or Federal entity under 109(h) of the MMPA. 
Researchers must describe who will administer the business aspects of 
the grant (i.e., on their own, through their current employer, an 
affiliated institution, or through a third-party organization) and why 
this method of administration has been chosen.

[[Page 6902]]

    One Principal Investigator must be designated on each project. If a 
Principal Investigator is not identified, we will return the proposal. 
The Principal Investigator is responsible for all technical oversight 
and implementation of the work plan as delineated in the Statement of 
Work (see below). The Principal Investigator may or may not be the 
applicant. However, if the applicant is not the Principal Investigator, 
there must be an explanation of the relationship between the applicant 
and Principal Investigator (e.g., applicant will be responsible for 
managing the grant funds and the Principal Investigator will be 
responsible for completing the project milestones on time and within 
budget while maintaining the integrity and meet the goals of the 
project, etc.). Project participants or organizations that will have a 
significant role in conducting the project should be listed as Co-
investigators. Organizations or individuals that support the project, 
for example, network members contributing data or samples, should be 
referred to as Cooperators. In this section, provide a statement of no 
more than one page on the qualifications and experience of consultants 
and/or subcontractors and any Cooperators that are not named as Co-
investigators. Copies of the Principal Investigator's and all Co-
investigator's current resumes or curriculum vitaes must be included in 
the package's Supporting Documentation section. In addition, the proof 
of eligibility documents (see II. C.6. Supporting Documentation) 
provided and listed in the Supporting Documents section of the proposal 
must name the Principal Investigator and/or Co-investigator. Resumes, 
curriculum vitaes, and proof of eligibility documents will not count as 
part of the 10 page limit.
    Reference should be made to any copies of agreements between the 
Principal Investigator and other participants in the project, 
describing the specific activities each participant would perform or 
any endorsements received from other marine mammal health and stranding 
response participants related to this project that are included in the 
Supporting Documentation section.
    This section should also explain who will be responsible for 
carrying out each activity proposed. Describe activities that will be 
conducted by Co-investigators, Cooperators, sub-contractors, or 
volunteers. Training of volunteers and use of volunteer staff time to 
complete project activities, as well as oversight of those volunteers, 
should be discussed in detail.
    If any portion of the project will be conducted through consultants 
and/or subcontracts, procurement guidance found in 15 CFR part 24, 
``Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments,'' 
and 15 CFR part 14, ``Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants 
and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, Other 
Non-Profit, and Commercial Organizations'' must be followed. This 
section should describe how requirements for competitive subcontracting 
will be met if applicable.
    (3) Project statement of work (maximum 5 pages). This is a 
narrative of the work plan that will ensure the proposed project's 
goals and objectives are met within the proposed award period. It 
should include detailed descriptions of activities, protocols, 
methodologies, milestones, and expected products resulting from a 
successfully completed project. The narrative should respond to the 
following questions:
    (a) What specific activities, protocols, and methodologies does the 
project include and how do these activities, protocols, and 
methodologies relate to the project's goals and objectives?
    (b) What are the project milestones? List milestones, describing 
specific activities and associated time lines necessary to meet them. 
Describe the time lines in increments (e.g., month 1, month 2, etc.), 
rather than by specific dates.
    (c) What are the major outcomes, results, or products expected? 
Describe expected outcomes, results, or products that will directly 
relate to the Prescott Grant Program proposal Categories A, B or C and 
the national and regional funding priorities.
    (d) How will outcomes, results, or products be disseminated or 
shared? Describe how project outcomes, results or products will be 
disseminated to or shared with stranding network participants and other 
potential users. In addition, describe how activities and results of 
the project will be shared outside the stranding network for education 
and outreach purposes. In both cases, indicate the method of 
information or product transfer (e.g., print media, video, training 
manual, educational displays, facility sharing, etc.)
    (4) Project impacts (maximum 1 page). Describe the potential 
impacts of this proposed project on both the recovery and treatment of 
stranded marine mammals and the collection of data from living or dead 
stranded marine mammals for use in scientific research on marine mammal 
health. Identify any other potential project impacts.
    (5) Project performance evaluation (maximum 1 page). Specify the 
quantitative and/or qualitative criteria to be used in evaluating the 
relative success or failure of the project in achieving the stated 
project goals and objectives. For Category C proposals, performance 
measures should be based on (but are not limited to) such criteria as 
meeting or exceeding project time lines within budget and meeting or 
exceeding environmental and safety standards for construction 
activities.
    (6) Need for government financial assistance(maximum 1 page). 
Explain the need for government financial assistance in successfully 
carrying out project activities. Describe resultant products of 
previous financial assistance, if applicable, referencing a list 
sources of funding received from the Federal government, either past or 
current, for this or a closely related project(s) included in the 
Supporting Documentation section (see below). In this section, describe 
other sources of Federal funding currently being sought for this same 
project.
    (7) Federal, state, and local government programs and activities 
(maximum 1 page). List any existing Federal, state, or local government 
programs or activities that this project would affect and reference any 
corresponding documentation (i.e., permits, approvals, environmental 
assessments) included in the proposal package.
    (8) Participation by persons or groups other than the applicant 
(maximum 1 page). Describe how government and non-government entities, 
particularly other members of the marine mammal health and stranding 
response community, will participate in the project and the nature of 
their participation. How much will other members of the marine mammal 
health and stranding response community participate in the project?

6. Supporting Documentation

    Supporting documents will not count as a part of the 10 page limit.
    In order to be considered for an award in this funding cycle, the 
applicant must provide proof of eligibility documents in this section. 
These include one or more of the following: LOA(s), LOA letter of 
designation, letter from NMFS Regional Administrator to collect or 
receive marine mammal specimens and parts under 50 CFR 216.22, if in 
the Northwest Region (Washington and Oregon) documentation that the 
applicant is a NMFS-recognized participant and named in the Draft 2002 
National Contingency Plan for Response to Marine Mammal Unusual 
Mortality

[[Page 6903]]

Events, or reports sent to NMFS under MMPA Section 109(h)(50 CFR 
216.22(b)) as a state, local, or Federal participant. Principal 
Investigators that are researchers and do not hold LOAs, are not LOA 
designees, are not NMFS-recognized Northwest Region participants, and 
are not MMPA Section 109(h) participants must include copies of letters 
from a NMFS Region or the MMHSRP authorizing them under 50 CFR 216.22, 
any MMPA and/or ESA scientific research and/or enhancement permits, as 
well as a Co-investigator's LOA or letter of designation. See section 
I. F., Eligibility, to determine what specific type of documentation is 
required.
    Applicants requiring MMPA and/or ESA scientific research and/or 
enhancement permits and/or IACUC approvals must include in this section 
a copy of either: (1) an application cover letter from the Prescott 
applicant to NMFS and/or the IACUC, or (2) a copy of the final permit 
and/or approval.
    If applicable, documentation of the requests or approvals of all 
environmental permits must be included in this section of the proposal. 
Such documentation should include any environmental analyses required 
for obtaining such permits, completed NEPA checklists (form available 
on the Prescott Grant Program web site http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ prot--
res/ PR2/ Health--and-- Stranding-- Response-- Program/ Prescott.html), 
and environmental assessments.
    Curriculum vitae or resumes of the Principals and Co-Investigators 
and all other required Federal forms (i.e., CD-511, SF-LLL, CD-346) 
must be included in this section.
    Applicants applying as non-profit organizations must include a 
letter from the Internal Revenue Service verifying non-profit 
classification under Internal Revenue Code and tax exempt status under 
section 501(c)(3) of the Code.
    Any other relevant documents and additional information (e.g., 
maps, additional stranding statistics for your geographic area or 
region, organizational history and information, schematics and 
architectural renderings of facility upgrades, photographs, etc.) that 
will help us to understand the proposed project and the problem/
opportunity the project seeks to address should be included in this 
section.

IV. Screening, Review, and Selection Procedures

    Screening, review, and selection procedures will take place in 5 
steps, described in detail in this section:initial screening, on-line 
review, peer review, merit review, and final selection by the Selecting 
Official (i.e., the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries or AA). The 
on-line review will involve at least one reviewer per proposal and the 
peer review will involve at least 3 reviewers per proposal; therefore, 
all proposals will be subject to review by a minimum of 4 independent 
reviewers. The AA will make the final decision regarding which 
proposals will be funded based on recommendations of the merit review 
team as well as policy considerations such as costs, geographical 
distribution, financial need, duplication with other Federally funded 
projects, and equitable distribution of funds among the stranding 
regions.

A. Initial Screening

    The initial screening will ensure that proposal packages have all 
required forms and proposal elements (listed below and in Section III), 
clearly relate to the 2003/2004 Prescott Grant Program proposal 
categories and funding priorities, and meet all of the eligibility 
criteria identified in Section I. F. of this document. Applicants that 
do not meet the required eligibility criteria described in section I. 
F. will not be eligible for funding in the 2003/2004 cycle. In 
addition, applicants proposing activities that may require an 
environmental assessment (i.e., Category C proposals) under NEPA must 
include sufficient environmental analyses (i.e., permit documentation 
and NEPA checklist) to allow program staff to determine whether or not 
the proposal can be categorically excluded from further analysis. If 
insufficient documentation is provided or if proposals cannot be 
categorically excluded from NEPA review, the applicant will be notified 
after initial screening that further information or an environmental 
assessment is necessary. Further documentation must be supplied 
immediately and the environmental assessments must be completed in time 
for the merit review panel in late Spring. Proposals requiring further 
NEPA review will still undergo on-line and peer review, unless there is 
some other reason for disqualification. Failure to complete an 
environmental assessment will delay processing of the proposal, and if 
selected for funding will delay receipt of funds.
    Proposal packages received in the Office of Protected Resources and 
postmarked by the submission deadline will be screened to ensure that 
they:were postmarked by the due date (see DATES); include one original 
and two signed copies of the entire proposal package; include the 
correct OMB forms (424, 424A for Categories A and B or 424D for 
Category C, and 424B for Categories A and B or 424C for Category C) 
signed and dated (see section III. A and III. B of this document); 
provide for at least a 25-percent non-Federal cost share (see section 
I. I); identify a Principal Investigator and provide current resumes or 
curriculum vitae for both the Principal and all Co-Investigators (see 
section III. C); provide proof of eligibility (see section I. F.); 
address one of the 3 proposal categories for species under NOAA's 
jurisdiction (see section III); include proposal package elements 1 
through 6 (see section III. C); include MMPA/ESA permit application 
cover letters or permits, IACUC letters or approvals, if applicable; 
include NEPA checklist and other environmental documentation, if 
applicable; and provide proof of non-profit status, if applicable. 
Proposals that pass this initial screening will be pooled based on the 
proposal category (i.e., Category A, B, or C) identified by the 
applicant and by the coast where activities are proposed resulting in 6 
review pools.
    The required unbound original and two copies, and the optional 
electronic copy must be sent to the address listed in section I. K. of 
this document and postmarked by the submission deadline (see DATES) in 
order to be considered in the 2003/2004 annual award cycle. If a 
package is not postmarked by the submission deadline, include a signed 
unbound original with two copies, and does not contain all of the 
required OMB forms and other documents described in this section it 
will be returned to the applicant and will not be considered further 
inthis funding cycle. Only those proposals satisfying all of the basic 
requirements above will enter the full evaluation phase of the review 
process, described in the next sections.

B. On-Line Review

    After initial screening, on-line reviewers will be asked to 
evaluate individual proposals in the reviewers' specific area of 
expertise for technical soundness and feasibility via an on-line 
process. The on-line review results will be used to provide comments on 
the technical aspects of each proposal to both the peer and merit 
review panels (described below).
    The proposal category (i.e., Category A, B, or C) and specific 
activities described in each proposal will be used in selecting the 
most appropriate expertise needed for the specific review. On-line 
reviewers will include private and public sector experts according to 
the Prescott Grant Program's proposal categories: Category A proposals 
will be reviewed by experts from fields such as marine mammal biology, 
rehabilitation,

[[Page 6904]]

animal husbandry, diagnostic medicine, veterinary medicine, medical 
science, conservation biology, and education and outreach; Category B 
proposals will be reviewed by experts in fields such as toxicology, 
epidemiology, veterinary medicine, veterinary pathology, virology, 
marine mammal biology, infectious diseases, physiology, acoustics, 
education, outreach, genetics, conservation biology, and other 
biological and physical sciences; and Category C proposals will be 
reviewed by experts in fields such as construction, water systems, life 
support systems, curation, animal care, architecture, structural 
engineering, facility managers, and marine mammal biology. Each on-line 
reviewer will be required to certify that they do not have a conflict 
of interest concerning the proposal(s) they are reviewing prior to 
their review.
    To determine the technical soundness and feasibility of each 
proposal, the on-line reviewers will provide an independent review 
using the weighted criteria outlined in Section IV. D. below. Depending 
on the type of activities proposed, on-line reviewers may focus their 
review on issues such as the likelihood of meeting milestones and 
achieving anticipated results in the time-line specified in the 
statement of work, the sufficiency of information to evaluate the 
project technically, the strengths and weaknesses of the technical 
design relative to securing productive results, and the inclusion of 
quality assurance considerations. Each proposal will be reviewed by at 
least one on-line reviewer. On a scale of 0-100, the reviewers will 
score the proposal in each criteria. An average, weighted score will be 
generated from each review using the numeric score per criteria and the 
weights assigned to each criteria (see Section IV. D. for numeric 
scores and assigned weights per criteria). Along with the peer review 
scores, these on-line review scores will be used in determining whether 
proposals will advance to merit review (i.e., each proposal scoring 
greater than 60 points in either the on-line or peer review will go on 
to merit review).

C. Peer Review

    After the initial screening, each accepted proposal will undergo a 
peer review by participants in the U. S. marine mammal stranding 
network. Peer reviewers will be asked to evaluate individual proposals 
based on the proposal category and funding priorities identified by the 
applicant, review criteria, and the specific technical evaluation from 
on-line reviews. The proposal categories (i.e., Category A, B, or C) 
and the geographic location of proposed activities will be used in 
selecting appropriate peer reviewers. Scoring and commenting on each 
proposal will be completed during these meetings. In addition, a 
summary of panel comments and discussion will be generated for each 
proposal. The peer review results will be used to numerically rank the 
proposals (based on the average weighted score of each proposal) and 
provide programmatic and regional stakeholder comments on each 
proposal. Each peer reviewer will be required to certify that they do 
not have a conflict of interest concerning the proposal(s) they are 
reviewing prior to their review.
    To determine the appropriateness of each proposal to the Prescott 
Grant Program's proposal categories and funding priorities, the peer 
reviewers will provide independent reviews using the weighted criteria 
outlined below (Section IV. D.). Depending on the type of activities 
proposed, peer reviewers will be asked to focus their review on issues 
such as the likelihood of meeting milestones and achieving anticipated 
results in the time-line specified in the statement of work, the 
contribution of potential outcomes, results, or products to the marine 
mammal stranding and rehabilitation communities, and the amount of 
collaboration with other stranding network participants. Each proposal 
will be reviewed by at least 3 peer reviewers. On a scale of 0-100, the 
reviewers will score the proposal in each criteria outlined in Section 
IV. D. below. An average, weighted score will be generated for each 
proposal using the numeric score per criteria and the weights assigned 
to each criteria (see Section IV. D. for numeric scores and assigned 
weights per criteria). All proposals will be numerically ranked based 
on this average, weighted score.

D. Review Criteria

1. Soundness of Project Goals, Objectives, and Activities
    Proposals will be evaluated on clear identification of project 
goals and objectives and the ability to link those goals and objectives 
to project activities, including protocols and methods proposed, and 
the applicability of the project's goals and objectives to the Prescott 
Grant Program's proposal categories and funding priorities. All 
reviewers will consider the potential environmental impacts (e.g., 
water quality, air quality, waste disposal, etc.) of the proposed 
activities. On-line reviewers will consider:the likelihood of meeting 
milestones and achieving anticipated results in the time-line specified 
in the statement of work; the sufficiency of information to evaluate 
the project technically; if such information is sufficient, the 
strengths and weaknesses of the technical design relative to securing 
productive results; and if data collection is proposed, the inclusion 
of quality assurance considerations. In addition to technical aspects 
of the proposal, peer reviewers will focus on:the contribution of 
potential outcomes, results, or products to the marine mammal stranding 
and rehabilitation communities; and, the amount of collaboration with 
other stranding network participants. (Numeric scores from 1-100; 
Assigned weight of 50 percent)
2. Adequacy of Project Management
    The management of the project will be evaluated based on the 
adequacy of the proposed project management plan in overseeing the 
technical aspects and implementation of the work plan as delineated in 
the proposal's Statement of Work. Reviewers will also review previous, 
related experiences of the applicant and qualifications of the 
project's Principal Investigator, Co-investigator(s) and other 
personnel (i.e., designated contractors, consultants, and Cooperators). 
Review of the proposal's description of financial accounting systems 
and grants administration oversight will also be ephasized. 
Consideration will also be given to previous awards received by the 
Principal Investigator and outcomes, results, or products resulting 
from such awards. (Numeric scores of 1-100; Assigned weight of 25 
percent)
3. Identification and Suitability of Project Performance Evaluation 
Methods
    Proposals will be scored based on their clear identification of 
performance evaluation methods and the suitability of those methods for 
evaluating the success or failure of the project in terms of meeting 
its original goals and objectives. For Category A and B proposals these 
methods should include quantitative or qualitative criteria to evaluate 
relative success of failure of project activities. For Category C 
proposals these methods should also include criteria for measuring 
success or failure in meeting project time lines within budget and 
success of failure in complying with environmental and safety standards 
for construction activities. (Numerical scores of 1-100; Assigned 
weight of 10 percent)

[[Page 6905]]

4. Justification, Clarity, and Allocation of Project Costs
    The proposed costs and overall budget of the project will be 
evaluated in terms of the work proposed. The itemized costs and the 
overall budget must be justified, clear to the reviewer, and consistent 
with fair market values for similar items or services. (Numeric scores 
of 1-100; Assigned weight of 15 percent)

E. Merit Review

    After proposals have undergone review, the MMHSRP staff, NMFS 
Regional Administrators (RAs) and Office Directors (ODs) will conduct a 
merit review in consultation with the Marine Mammal Commission and U. 
S. Fish and Wildlife Service, to consider the review results and 
develop recommendations for funding. Only those proposals having an 
average weighted score higher than 60 points in either the on-line or 
peer review will be evaluated.
    In order to make recommendations regarding equitable distribution 
of funds among regions and to justify any discrepancies between the 
reviewers' comments and the merit reviewers' recommendations, merit 
reviewers will review the on-line and peer review comments, 
discrepancies between the on-line and peer review average, weighted 
scores, numeric ranking of proposals by the peer reviewers, required 
proposal elements, stranding statistics by region (i.e., geographic 
need for proposed projects), environmental assessments or 
documentation, and the number of applications received by region and by 
funding year.
    Equitable distribution will be determined by review of proposals by 
stranding region using the best available data on episodic, anomalous 
or unusual stranding events, average annual strandings and mortalities, 
and sizes of marine mammal populations within each region. Merit 
reviewers will also consider the actual stranding statistics per region 
for the previous 5 non-El Nino years and for the last El Nino year. 
After proposals are prioritized within the regions using the best 
available data, preference will be given to facilities within each 
region that have established records for rescuing or rehabilitating 
sick or stranded marine mammals and whose activities are planned so 
that they minimize any potential adverse impacts on the environment.
    The merit review team will prepare a written justification for any 
recommendations for funding that fall outside the peer reviewer's 
numerical ranking or the equitable distribution order, and for any cost 
adjustments. In addition, the merit review team will prepare written 
recommendations regarding additional policy factors that the NMFS AA 
should consider in making final funding selections.

F. Final Selection Procedures

    The NMFS AA will review the funding recommendations from the merit 
review, comments of the reviewers, and select the projects to be 
funded. In making the final selections, the AA will consider costs, 
geographical distribution, financial need, duplication with other 
federally funded projects, potential environmental impacts, equitable 
distribution of funds among the designated stranding regions, and other 
policy factors. As a result, awards are not necessarily made to the 
highest technically ranked projects.

G. Project Funding

    The final, exact amount of funds, the scope of work, and terms and 
conditions of a successful award will be determined in pre-award 
negotiations between the applicant and NOAA/NMFS representatives. The 
funding instrument (grant or cooperative agreement) will be determined 
by NOAA Grants Management Division. If the proposed work entails 
substantial involvement between the applicant and NMFS, a cooperative 
agreement will be utilized. Work requiring substantial involvement 
between the applicant and NMFS includes the planning and upgrading of 
rehabilitation facilities, the development of protocols, and other 
types of projects where a high level of cooperation is necessary to 
ensure that the applicant is achieving the broader goals of the MMHSRP. 
Applicants should not initiate any project in expectation of Federal 
funding until they receive a grant award document signed by an 
authorized NOAA official in the Grants Management Division.

V. Administrative Requirements

    The Department of Commerce Pre-Award Notification Requirements for 
Grants and Cooperative Agreements contained in the Federal Register 
notice of October 1, 2001 (66 FR 49917), as amended by the Federal 
Register notice published on October 30, 2002 (67 FR 66109), is 
applicable to this solicitation. Copies of this notice can be obtained 
from the Government Printing Office Website:http://www.access.gpo.gov/ 
su--docs /aces /aces140.html
    or the Prescott Stranding Grants Program Website:
    http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov /prot--res/ PR2/ Health--and-- Stranding-- 
Response-- Program/ Prescott.html
    If costs are incurred prior to receiving an award agreement signed 
by an authorized NOAA official, applicants do so solely at their own 
risk of not being reimbursed by the Government. Notwithstanding any 
verbal or written assurance that applicants have received, the 
Department of Commerce has no obligation to cover pre-award costs.
    Proposals that are not accepted for funding in the 2003/2004 cycle 
will be filed in the Prescott Grant Program office for a minimum of 3 
years from date of receipt.

A. Obligations of Recipients (Successful Applicants)

    Applicants awarded a grant or cooperative agreement for a project 
must:
    1. Manage the day-to-day operations of the project, be responsible 
for the performance of all activities for which funds are granted, and 
be responsible for the satisfaction of all administrative and 
managerial conditions imposed by the award.
    2. Keep records sufficient to document any costs incurred under the 
award, and allow access to these records for audit and examination by 
the Secretary of Commerce, the Comptroller General of the United 
States, or their authorized representatives; and, submit financial 
status reports (SF 269) to NOAA's Grants Management Division in 
accordance with the award conditions.
    3. Submit semi-annual and annual reports, and for projects 
extending beyond a year, final reports within 90 days after completion 
of each project, to the individual identified as the NMFS Program 
Officer in the funding agreement. The final report must describe the 
project and include an evaluation of the work performed and the results 
and benefits in sufficient detail to enable us to assess the success of 
the completed project.
    We are committed to using available technology to achieve the 
timely and wide distribution of final reports to those who would 
benefit from this information. Therefore, we request submission of 
final reports in electronic format, in accordance with the award terms 
and conditions, for publication on the NMFS Protected Resources Home 
Page. Awardees can charge the costs associated with preparing and 
transmitting their final reports in electronic format to the grant 
award.
    4. In addition to the final report, we request that awardees submit 
any publications printed with award funds (such as manuals, surveys, 
etc.) to the NMFS Program Officer for dissemination to the public. 
These publications should be submitted either

[[Page 6906]]

as three hard copies or in an electronic version. Peer-reviewed 
publications published with or without award funds and manuscripts 
published without award funds are requested to be submitted to NMFS; 
however, these publications will not be disseminated to the public.

Classification

    Prior notice and an opportunity for public comments are not 
required by the Administrative Procedure Act or any other law for this 
notice concerning grants, benefits, and contracts (5 U.S.C. section 
553(a)(2)).
    Furthermore, a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required for 
purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. section 601 et 
seq).
    This action has been determined to be not significant for purposes 
of Executive Order 12866.
    Applications under this program are subject to Executive Order 
12372, ``Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.''
    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required 
to respond to, nor shall any 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.
    This document contains collection-of-information requirements 
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The use of Standard Forms 
424, 424A, 424B, 424C, 424D, 269, and SF-LLL have been approved by OMB 
under the respective control numbers 0348-0043, 0348-0044, 0348-0040, 
0348-0041, 0348-0042, 0348-0039, and 0348-0046.
    This document also contains collection-of-information requirements 
that have been approved by OMB under control number 0648-0178. Public 
reporting burden for the registration of the salvage of dead marine 
mammals, or for periodic reports by state or local government officials 
or employees is estimated to average 20 minutes per individual 
response, response, including the time for reviewing instructions, 
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data 
needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. 
Send comments regarding this burden estimate, or any other aspect of 
this data collection, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to 
NMFS (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

    Dated:February 3, 2003.
William T. Hogarth,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 03-3290 Filed 2-5-03; 4:23 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S