[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 206 (Wednesday, October 25, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62441-62457]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-17895]



[[Page 62441]]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-8234-5]


Guidelines for Awarding Clean Water Act Section 319 Base Grants 
to Indian Tribes and Request for Proposals From Indian Tribes for 
Competitive Grants Under Clean Water Act Section 319 in FY 2007 (CFDA 
66.460--Nonpoint Source Implementation Grants; Funding Opportunity 
Number EPA-OW-OWOW-07-1)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Guidelines for Section 319 Base Grants and Request 
for Proposals for Section 319 Competitive Grants.

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

SUMMARY: This notice publishes EPA's national guidelines for the award 
of base grants and EPA's Request for Proposals (RFP) for the award of 
supplemental funding in the form of competitive grants under the Clean 
Water Act (CWA) section 319(h) nonpoint source (NPS) grants program to 
Indian Tribes in FY 2007. Section 319 of the CWA authorizes EPA to 
award grants to eligible Tribes for the purpose of assisting them in 
implementing approved NPS management programs developed pursuant to 
section 319(b). The primary goal of the NPS management program is to 
control NPS pollution through implementation of management measures and 
practices to reduce pollutant loadings resulting from each category or 
subcategory of NPSs identified in the Tribe's NPS assessment report 
developed pursuant to section 319(a). EPA anticipates, pending 
enactment of its FY 2007 appropriations, awarding a total of $7,000,000 
to eligible Tribes which have approved NPS assessments and management 
programs and (treatment-as-a-state'' (TAS) status as of October 13, 
2006. EPA expects the allocation of funds will be similar to the amount 
distributed in FY 2006, which included approximately $3.2 million in 
base grants awarded to 95 Tribes and $3.8 million awarded to 28 Tribes 
through a competitive process. Section A includes EPA's national 
guidelines which govern the process for awarding base grants to all 
eligible Tribes, and section B is the national RFP for awarding the 
remaining funds on a competitive basis. In future years, EPA intends to 
post the RFP for competitive grants under section 319 at http://www.grants.gov and on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal.

DATES: These guidelines are effective October 25, 2006.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrea Matzke, U.S. EPA, Office of 
Wetlands, Oceans, and Watersheds, Assessment and Watershed Protection 
Division, telephone: (202) 566-1155; fax: (202) 566-1331; e-mail: 
[email protected]. Also contact the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal 
NPS Coordinator identified in section B.VII and also listed on EPA's 
website under ``EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators'' at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    EPA anticipates that Congress will, for the eighth year in a row, 
authorize EPA to award NPS control grants to Indian Tribes in FY 2007 
in an amount that exceeds the statutory cap (in section 518(f) of the 
CWA) of \1/3\ of 1 percent of the total section 319 appropriation. 
There is continuing recognition that Indian Tribes need increased 
financial support to implement NPS programs that address critical water 
quality concerns on Tribal lands. EPA will continue to work closely 
with the Tribes to assist them in developing and implementing effective 
Tribal NPS pollution programs.
    EPA was pleased by the quality of the Tribes' work plans that 
formed the basis of the grants awarded to Tribes in FY 2006, which 
included approximately $3.2 million in base grants awarded to 95 Tribes 
and $3.8 million awarded to 28 Tribes for specific watershed projects 
through a competitive process. We believe that the FY 2006 grants were 
directed towards high-priority activities that will produce improved 
water quality. We look forward to working with Tribes again in FY 2007 
to implement successful projects addressing the extensive NPS control 
needs throughout Indian country.

Guidelines for Awarding CWA Section 319 Base Grants to Indian Tribes 
(See Section A Below)

Overview Information
    Section 319 of the CWA authorizes EPA to award grants to eligible 
Tribes for the purpose of assisting them in implementing approved NPS 
management programs developed pursuant to section 319(b). The primary 
goal of the NPS management program is to control NPS pollution through 
implementation of management measures and practices to reduce pollutant 
loadings resulting from each category or subcategory of NPSs identified 
in the Tribe's NPS assessment report developed pursuant to section 
319(a). EPA anticipates awarding section 319 base grants to eligible 
Tribes in the amount of $30,000 or $50,000 of Federal section 319 
funding (depending on land area). Section 319 base funds may be used 
for a range of activities that implement the Tribe's approved NPS 
management program, including: Hiring a program coordinator; conducting 
NPS education programs; providing training and authorized travel to 
attend training; updating the NPS management program; developing 
watershed-based plans; and implementing, alone or in conjunction with 
other agencies or other funding sources, watershed-based plans and on-
the-ground watershed projects.

Request for Proposals From Indian Tribes for Competitive Grants Under 
Clean Water Act Section 319 in FY 2007 (See Section B Below)

Overview Information
    This RFP is issued pursuant to section 319(h) of the CWA. Section 
319 of the CWA authorizes EPA to award grants to eligible Tribes for 
the purpose of assisting them in implementing approved NPS management 
programs developed pursuant to section 319(b). The primary goal of the 
NPS management program is to control NPS pollution through 
implementation of management measures and practices to reduce pollutant 
loadings resulting from each category or subcategory of NPSs identified 
in the Tribe's NPS assessment report developed pursuant to section 
319(a). EPA anticipates setting aside a portion of section 319 funds 
for competitive grant awards to Tribes for the purpose of funding the 
development and implementation of watershed-based plans and other on-
the-ground projects that result in a significant step towards solving 
NPS impairments on a watershed-wide basis. Tribes are strongly 
encouraged to submit proposals that develop and/or implement watershed-
based plans designed to protect unimpaired waters and restore NPS-
impaired waters. EPA believes that watershed-based plans provide the 
best means for preventing and resolving NPS problems and threats. 
Watershed-based plans provide a coordinating framework for solving 
water quality problems by providing a specific geographic focus, 
integrating strong partnerships, integrating strong science and data, 
and coordinating priority setting and integrated solutions. EPA 
anticipates awarding approximately 25 competitive grants, subject to 
availability of funds and the quality of proposals submitted. Eligible 
Tribes may apply for competitive funding by submitting a proposal for 
up to a maximum budget of $150,000 of Federal section 319 funding

[[Page 62442]]

(plus the additional required match of the total project cost).
    Federal Agency Name: EPA.
    Funding Opportunity Title: Tribal Nonpoint Source Implementation 
Grants.
    Announcement Type: Request for Proposals.
    Funding Opportunity Number: EPA-OW-OWOW-07-1.
    Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 66.460.
    Dates: Deadline EPA uses to determine eligibility to receive 
competitive 319 grants. October 13, 2006.
    Deadline for receipt of proposals in hard copy by Region or 
electronically through Grants.gov. December 19, 2006.
    Headquarters notifies Regions/Tribes of selections for competitive 
319 grants. March 5, 2007.
    Tribes submit final grant application to Region for competitive 319 
grants. April 5, 2007.
    Other than the date EPA will use to determine eligibility to 
receive 319 grants and the deadline for receipt of proposals in 
response to the RFP (Section B), the dates above are the anticipated 
dates for those actions.

Section A. Guidelines for Awarding Clean Water Act Section 319 Base 
Grants to Indian Tribes

I. General

    EPA has developed guidelines for awarding CWA section 319 base 
grants to Indian Tribes. These guidelines apply to section 319 base 
grants awarded from funds appropriated by Congress in FY 2007 and in 
subsequent years.
1. Environmental Results
    Grants awarded under these guidelines will advance the protection 
and improvement of water quality in support of Goal 2 (Clean and Safe 
Water), Objective 2 (Protect Water Quality), Sub-objective 1 (Protect 
and Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis) of EPA's 2003-2008 
Strategic Plan (see http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan/documents/Goal2.pdf). In support of Sub-objective 2.2.1, and consistent with EPA 
Order 5700.7, Environmental Results under EPA Assistance Agreements 
(see http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/award/5700.7.pdf), it is anticipated 
that grants awarded under these guidelines will be expected to 
accomplish various environmental outputs and outcomes as described 
below. All proposed work plans must include specific statements 
describing the environmental results of the proposed project in terms 
of well-defined outputs, and, to the maximum extent practicable, well-
defined outcomes that demonstrate how the project will contribute to 
the overall protection and improvement of water quality.
    Environmental outputs (or deliverables) refer to an environmental 
activity, effort, and/or associated work product related to an 
environmental goal or objective, that will be produced or provided over 
a period of time or by a specified date. Outputs may be quantitative or 
qualitative, but must be measurable during an assistance agreement 
funding period. Examples of environmental outputs anticipated as a 
result of section 319 grant awards may include but are not limited to: 
a watershed-based plan, progress reports, or a particular number of on-
the-ground management measures or practices installed or implemented 
during the project period.
    Environmental outcomes mean the result, effect, or consequence that 
will occur from carrying out an environmental program or activity that 
is related to an environmental or programmatic goal or objective. 
Outcomes may be environmental, behavioral, health-related or 
programmatic in nature, must be quantitative, and may not necessarily 
be achieved within an assistance agreement funding period. Examples of 
environmental outcomes anticipated as a result of section 319 grants to 
be awarded may include but are not limited to: an increased number of 
NPS-impaired waterbodies that have been partially or fully restored to 
meet water quality standards or other water quality-based goals 
established by the Tribes; and/or an increased number of waterbodies 
that have been protected from NPS pollution.
2. Allocation Formula
    Each eligible Tribe will receive Federal section 319 base funding 
in accordance with the following land area scale:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Square miles (acres)                      Base amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 1,000 sq. mi. (less than 640,000 acres).......         $30,000
Over 1,000 sq. mi. (over 640,000 acres).................          50,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The land area scale is the same as used in previous years. EPA 
continues to rely upon land area as the deciding factor for allocation 
of funds because NPS pollution is strongly related to land use; thus 
land area is a reasonable factor that generally is highly relevant to 
identifying Tribes with the greatest needs (recognizing that many 
Tribes have needs that significantly exceed available resources).
3. Eligible Activities
    Section 319 base funds may be used for a range of activities that 
implement the Tribe's approved NPS management program, including: 
Hiring a program coordinator; conducting NPS education programs; 
providing training and authorized travel to attend training; updating 
the NPS management program; developing watershed-based plans; and 
implementing, alone or in conjunction with other agencies or other 
funding sources, watershed-based plans and on-the-ground watershed 
projects. In general, base funding should not be used for general 
assessment activities (e.g., monitoring the general status of 
reservation waters, which may be supported with CWA section 106 
funding). EPA encourages Tribes to use section 319 funding, and explore 
the use of other funding such as CWA section 106 funding, to support 
project-specific water quality monitoring, data management, data 
analysis, assessment activities, and the development of watershed-based 
plans.

II. Eligibility and Match Requirements

    To be eligible for NPS base grants, a Tribe or intertribal 
consortium must: (1) Be Federally recognized; (2) have an approved NPS 
assessment report in accordance with CWA section 319(a); (3) have an 
approved NPS management program in accordance with CWA section 319(b); 
and (4) have ``treatment-as-a-state'' (TAS) status in accordance with 
CWA section 518(e). To be eligible for base and competitive NPS grants 
in FY 2007, Tribes must meet these eligibility requirements as of 
October 13, 2006, as announced in the FY 2006 guidelines on January 17, 
2006, at 71 FR 2531. To be eligible for NPS grants in years beyond FY 
2007, Tribes must meet these eligibility requirements as of the second 
Friday in October for the applicable fiscal year unless otherwise 
announced. Tribes should contact their EPA Regional Tribal NPS 
Coordinator for further information about the eligibility process (see 
section B.VII for Agency contact information and also EPA's Web site 
under ``EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators'' at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal).
    Section 319(h)(3) of the CWA requires that the match for NPS grants 
is 40 percent of the total project cost. In general, as required in 40 
CFR 31.24, the match requirement can be satisfied by any of the 
following: allowable costs incurred by the grantee, subgrantee, or a 
cost-type contractor, including those allowable costs borne by non-
Federal

[[Page 62443]]

grants; by cash donations from non-Federal third parties; or by the 
value of third party in-kind contributions.
    EPA's regulations also provide that EPA may decrease the match 
requirement to as low as 10 percent if the Tribe can demonstrate in 
writing to the Regional Administrator that fiscal circumstances within 
the Tribe or within each Tribe that is a member of the intertribal 
consortium are constrained to such an extent that fulfilling the match 
requirement would impose undue hardship (see 40 CFR 35.635). In making 
grant awards to Tribes that provide for a reduced match requirement, 
Regions must include a brief finding in the final award package that 
the Tribe has demonstrated that it does not have adequate funds to meet 
the required match.

III. Application Requirements for Base Grants

1. Address To Request Application Package for Base Grants
    Grant application forms, including Standard Form (SF) 424, are 
available at http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/how_to_apply.htm and by 
mail upon request by calling the EPA Headquarters Grants Administration 
Division at (202) 564-5320. Tribes may also contact their EPA Regional 
Tribal NPS Coordinator for further information about the application 
process (see section B.VII for Agency contact information and also 
EPA's Web site under ``EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators'' at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal).
2. Content and Form of Application Submission for Base Grants
    Please note that only the proposed work plan, including all of the 
components outlined in the section immediately below, needs to be 
included in the initial application for base grants (see section A.VIII 
for deadlines and milestones for FY 2007 base grants).
    To apply for section 319 base grants, you must submit a proposed 
work plan to the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator (see 
section B.VII for Agency contact information and also EPA's Web site 
under ``EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators'' at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal). You may submit the proposed work plan as either a hard copy or 
an electronic submission. If you submit a hard copy proposed work plan, 
you have the option to submit it by U.S. Postal Mail, express delivery 
service, hand delivery, or courier service only. EPA will not accept 
faxed submissions. If you submit a hard copy proposed work plan, you 
are encouraged (not required) to include a compact disc (CD) with the 
electronic version of the proposed work plan. If you submit your 
proposed work plan electronically, it should be sent to the appropriate 
EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator at the e-mail address listed in 
section B.VII of this announcement and also on EPA's Web site under 
``EPA Tribal NPS Coordinators'' at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal.
    The specific content and form of the proposed work plan for the 
award of section 319 base grants is as follows:
    a. Proposed Work Plan. Tribes must submit a work plan to receive 
base funding. All work plans must be consistent with the Tribe's 
approved NPS management program and conform to legal requirements that 
are applicable to all environmental program grants awarded to Tribes 
(see 40 CFR 35.507 and 35.515) as well as the grant requirements which 
specifically apply to NPS management grants (see 40 CFR 35.638). As 
provided in those regulations, and in accordance with EPA Order 5700.7, 
Environmental Results under EPA Assistance Agreements, all work plans 
must include:
    i. Description of each significant category of NPS activity to be 
addressed;
    ii. Work plan components;
    iii. Work plan commitments for each work plan component, including 
anticipated environmental outputs and outcomes (as required by EPA 
Order 5700.7) and the applicant's plan for tracking and measuring its 
progress towards achieving the expected outputs and outcomes;
    iv. Estimated funding amounts for each work plan component;
    v. Estimated work years for each work plan component;
    vi. Roles and responsibilities of the recipient and EPA in carrying 
out the work plan commitments; and
    vii. Reporting schedule and a description of the performance 
evaluation process that will be used that accounts for: (a) A 
discussion of accomplishments as measured against work plan commitments 
and anticipated environmental outputs and outcomes; (b) a discussion of 
the cumulative effectiveness of the work performed under all work plan 
components; (c) a discussion of existing and potential problem areas; 
and (d) suggestions for improvement, including, where feasible, 
schedules for making improvements.
    b. Work Plan to Develop a Watershed-Based Plan. If a Tribe submits 
a work plan to develop a watershed-based plan, it must include a 
commitment to incorporate the nine components of a watershed-based plan 
identified in section A.V.1 below.
    c. Work Plan to Implement a Watershed-Based Plan. If a Tribe 
submits a work plan to implement a watershed-based plan, it must be 
accompanied by a statement that the Region finds that the watershed-
based plan to be implemented includes the nine components of a 
watershed-based plan identified in section A.V.1 below.

IV. Submission Dates and Times for Proposed Work Plans for Base Grants

    In FY 2007, eligible Tribes must submit to the appropriate EPA 
Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator proposed work plans for base funding by 
December 19, 2006 (see section B.VII for Agency contact information; 
Agency contact information is also posted on EPA's Web site under ``EPA 
Tribal NPS Coordinators'' at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal). Each 
EPA Region will review the proposed work plan for base funding and, 
where appropriate, recommend improvements to the plan by January 19, 
2007. The Tribe must submit a final work plan by February 20, 2007. If 
a Tribe has not submitted an approvable work plan for base funding by 
February 20, 2007, its allocated amount will be added to the 
competitive pool which will be used to fund Tribal NPS competitive 
grants (see section B).
    Submission dates and times for proposed work plans for NPS base 
grant funding for years beyond FY 2007 are described in section A.IX 
below.

V. Watershed-Based Plans

    EPA strongly encourages Tribes to use section 319 funding for the 
development and/or implementation of watershed-based plans to protect 
unimpaired waters and restore NPS-impaired waters. EPA also encourages 
Tribes to explore the use of other funding such as CWA section 106 
funding to support the development of watershed-based plans. EPA 
believes that watershed-based plans provide the best means for 
preventing and resolving NPS problems and threats. Watershed-based 
plans provide a coordinating framework for solving water quality 
problems by providing a specific geographic focus, integrating strong 
partnerships, integrating strong science and data, and coordinating 
priority setting and integrated solutions. This section outlines the 
specific information that should be included in all watershed-based 
plans that are developed or implemented using section 319 funding. This 
information correlates with the elements of a watershed-based plan 
outlined in the NPS grants guidelines for States (see FY 2004 Nonpoint 
Source

[[Page 62444]]

Program and Grants Guidelines for States and Territories, available at 
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/cwact.html). One significant difference 
from the State guidelines is that a watershed-based plan for Tribes 
provides for the integration of ``water quality-based goals'' (see 
element (c) below), whereas the State guidelines call for specific 
estimates of load reductions that are expected to be achieved by 
implementing the plan. EPA has incorporated this flexibility for Tribes 
in recognition that not all Tribes have yet developed water quality 
standards and many Tribes may need additional time and/or technical 
assistance in order to develop more sophisticated estimates of the NPS 
pollutants that need to be addressed. Where such information does 
exist, or is later developed, EPA expects that it will be incorporated 
as appropriate into the watershed-based plan.
    To the extent that information already exists in other documents 
(e.g., NPS assessment reports or NPS management programs), the 
information may be incorporated by reference into the watershed-based 
plan. Thus, the Tribe need not duplicate any existing process or 
document that already provides needed information.
1. Components of a Watershed-Based Plan
    a. An identification of the causes and sources or groups of similar 
sources that will need to be controlled to achieve the goal identified 
in element (c) below. Sources that need to be controlled should be 
identified at the significant subcategory level with estimates of the 
extent to which they are present in the watershed (e.g., X number of 
dairy cattle feedlots needing upgrading, including a rough estimate of 
the number of cattle per facility; Y acres of row crops needing 
improved nutrient management or sediment control; or Z linear miles of 
eroded streambank needing remediation).
    b. A description of the NPS management measures that will need to 
be implemented to achieve a water quality-based goal described in 
element (c) below, as well as to achieve other watershed goals 
identified in the watershed-based plan, and an identification (using a 
map or a description) of the critical areas for which those measures 
will be needed to implement the plan.
    c. An estimate of the water quality-based goals expected to be 
achieved by implementing the measures described in element (b) above. 
To the extent possible, estimates should identify specific water 
quality-based goals, which may incorporate, for example: load 
reductions; water quality standards for one or more pollutants/uses; 
NPS total maximum daily load allocations; measurable, in-stream 
reductions in a pollutant; or improvements in a parameter that 
indicates stream health (e.g., increases in fish or macroinvertebrate 
counts). If information is not available to make specific estimates, 
water quality-based goals may include narrative descriptions and best 
professional judgment based on existing information.
    d. An estimate of the amounts of technical and financial assistance 
needed, associated costs, and/or the sources and authorities that will 
be relied upon to implement the plan. As sources of funding, Tribes 
should consider other relevant Federal, State, local and private funds 
that may be available to assist in implementing the plan.
    e. An information and education component that will be used to 
enhance public understanding and encourage early and continued 
participation in selecting, designing, and implementing the NPS 
management measures that will be implemented.
    f. A schedule for implementing the NPS management measures 
identified in the plan that is reasonably expeditious.
    g. A description of interim, measurable milestones for determining 
whether NPS management measures or other control actions are being 
implemented.
    h. A set of criteria that can be used to determine whether the 
water quality-based goals are being achieved over time and substantial 
progress is being made towards attaining water quality-based goals and, 
if not, the criteria for determining whether the watershed-based plan 
needs to be revised.
    i. A monitoring component to evaluate the effectiveness of the 
implementation efforts over time, measured against the criteria 
established under element (h) above.
    EPA recognizes the difficulty of developing the information 
described above with precision and, as these guidelines reflect, 
believes that there must be a balanced approach to address this 
concern. On one hand, it is absolutely critical that Tribes make, at 
the subcategory level, a reasonable effort to identify the significant 
sources; identify the management measures that will most effectively 
address those sources; and broadly estimate the expected water quality-
based goals that will be achieved. Without such information to provide 
focus and direction, it is much less likely that a project that 
implements the plan can efficiently and effectively address the NPSs of 
water quality impairments. On the other hand, EPA recognizes that even 
with reasonable steps to obtain and analyze relevant data, the 
available information at the planning stage (within reasonable time and 
cost constraints) may be limited; preliminary information and estimates 
may need to be modified over time, accompanied by mid-course 
corrections in the watershed plan; and it often will require a number 
of years of effective implementation to achieve the goals. EPA fully 
intends that the watershed planning process described above should be 
implemented in a dynamic and iterative manner to assure that projects 
implementing the plan may proceed even though some of the information 
in the watershed plan is imperfect and may need to be modified over 
time as information improves.
2. Scale and Scope of Watershed-Based Plans
    The watershed-based plan should address a large enough geographic 
area so that its implementation addresses all of the significant 
sources and causes of impairments and threats to the waterbody in 
question. EPA recognizes that many Tribes may face jurisdictional 
limitations outside reservation boundaries. To the extent possible, EPA 
encourages Tribes to engage other partners and include mixed ownership 
watersheds when appropriate to solve the water quality problems (e.g., 
Tribal, Federal, State, and private lands). While there is no rigorous 
definition or delineation for this concept, the general intent is to 
avoid single segments or other narrowly defined areas that do not 
provide an opportunity for addressing a watershed's stressors in a 
rational and economical manner. At the same time, the scale should not 
be so large as to minimize the probability of successful 
implementation.
    Once a watershed-based plan that contains the information 
identified above has been established, it can be used as the foundation 
for preparing annual work plans. Like the NPS management program 
approved under section 319(b), a watershed-based plan may be a multi-
year planning document. Whereas the NPS management program provides 
overall program guidance to address NPS pollution on Tribal lands, a 
watershed-based plan focuses NPS planning on a particular watershed 
identified as a priority in the NPS management program. Due to the 
greater specificity of a watershed-based plan, it will generally have 
considerably more detail than a NPS management program, and identified 
portions may be implemented through highly specific

[[Page 62445]]

annual work plans. While the watershed-based plan can be considered a 
subset of the NPS management program, the annual work plan can be 
considered a subset of the watershed-based plan.
    A Tribe may choose to implement the watershed-based plan in 
prioritized portions (e.g., based on particular segments, other 
geographic subdivisions, NPS categories in the watershed, or specific 
pollutants or impairments), consistent with the schedule established 
pursuant to item (f) above. In doing so, Tribes may submit annual work 
plans for section 319 grant funding that implement specific portions of 
the watershed-based plan. A watershed-based plan is a strategic plan 
for long-term success; annual work plans are the specific ``to-do 
lists'' to achieve that long-term success.

VI. Base Grant Requirements

1. Grant Requirements
    A listing and description of general EPA regulations applicable to 
the award of assistance agreements may be viewed at http://www.epa.gov/ogd/AppKit/appplicable_epa_regulations_and_description.htm.
    All applicable legal requirements including, but not limited to, 
EPA's regulations on environmental program grants for Tribes (see 40 
CFR 35.500 to 35.735) and regulations specific to NPS grants for Tribes 
(see 40 CFR 35.630 to 35.638), apply to all section 319 grants.
2. Performance Partnership Grants
    Performance Partnership Grants (PPG) enable Tribes to combine funds 
from more than one environmental program grant into a single grant with 
a single budget. If the Tribe includes the section 319 grant as a part 
of an approved PPG, the match requirement may be reduced to 5 percent 
of the allowable cost of the work plan budget for the first 2 years in 
which the Tribe receives a PPG; after 2 years, the match may be 
increased up to 10 percent of the work plan budget (as determined by 
the Regional Administrator). (See 40 CFR 35.536).
    Where the stated purpose is to include the section 319 base grant 
in a PPG, a Tribe may prepare a budget and proposed work plan based 
upon the assumption that EPA will approve the waiver amount for PPGs 
under 40 CFR 35.536. If a proposed PPG work plan differs significantly 
from the section 319 work plan approved for funding, the Regional 
Administrator must consult with the National Program Manager. (See 40 
CFR 35.535). The purpose of this consultation requirement is to address 
the issue of ensuring that a project which is awarded section 319 base 
funding is implemented once commingled with other grant programs in a 
PPG.
    If the Tribe does not or cannot include the section 319 base grant 
as part of an approved PPG, or chooses to withdraw the section 319 
grant from their PPG, the Tribe must then meet the match requirements 
identified in section A.II above and, as applicable, negotiate a 
revised work plan with the EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator.
3. Intertribal Consortia
    Some Tribes have formed intertribal consortia to promote 
cooperative work. An intertribal consortium is a partnership between 
two or more Tribes that is authorized by the governing bodies of those 
Tribes to apply for and receive assistance under this program. (See 40 
CFR 35.502.) Individual Tribes who are a part of intertribal consortia 
that is awarded a section 319 base grant may not also be awarded an 
individual section 319 base grant. (Note that individual Tribes may 
still be eligible to apply for competitive funds described in section B 
if they do not also submit a proposal for competitive funds as part of 
an intertribal consortium.)
    The intertribal consortium is eligible only if the consortium 
demonstrates that all its members meet the eligibility requirements for 
the section 319 program and authorize the consortium to apply for and 
receive assistance in accordance with 40 CFR 35.504. An intertribal 
consortium must submit with their proposed work plan to EPA adequate 
documentation of the existence of the partnership and the authorization 
of the consortium by its members to apply for and receive the grant. 
(See 40 CFR 35.504.) In making grant awards to Tribes who are part of 
intertribal consortia, Regions must include a brief finding in the 
final award package that the Tribes have demonstrated the existence of 
the partnership and the authorization of the consortium by its members 
to apply for and receive the grant.
4. Non-Tribal Lands
    The following discussion explains the extent to which section 319 
grants may be awarded to Tribes for use outside the reservation. We 
discuss two types of off-reservation activities: (1) Activities that 
are related to waters within a reservation, such as those relating to 
sources upstream of a waterway entering the reservation; and (2) 
activities that are unrelated to waters of a reservation. As discussed 
below, the first type of these activities may be eligible; the second 
is not.
    a. Activities That Are Related to Waters Within a Reservation. 
Section 518(e) of the CWA provides that EPA may treat an Indian Tribe 
as a State for purposes of section 319 of the CWA if, among other 
things, ``the functions to be exercised by the Indian Tribe pertain to 
the management and protection of water resources which are * * * within 
the borders of an Indian reservation'' (see 33 U.S.C. 1377(e)(2)). EPA 
already awards grants to Tribes under section 106 of the CWA for 
activities performed outside of a reservation (on condition that the 
Tribe obtains any necessary access agreements and coordinates with the 
State, as appropriate) that pertain to reservation waters, such as 
evaluating impacts of upstream waters on water resources within a 
reservation. Similarly, EPA has awarded section 106 grants to States to 
conduct monitoring outside of State borders. EPA has concluded that 
grants awarded to an Indian Tribe pursuant to section 319 may similarly 
be used to perform eligible section 319 activities outside of a 
reservation if: (1) The activity pertains to the management and 
protection of waters within a reservation; and (2) just as for on-
reservation activities, the Tribe meets all other applicable 
requirements.
    b. Activities That Are Unrelated to Waters of a Reservation. As 
discussed above, EPA is authorized to award section 319 grants to 
Tribes to perform eligible section 319 activities if the activities 
pertain to the management and protection of waters within a reservation 
and the Tribe meets all other applicable requirements. In contrast, EPA 
is not authorized to award section 319 grants for activities that do 
not pertain to waters of a reservation. For off-reservation areas, 
including ``usual and accustomed'' hunting, fishing, and gathering 
places, EPA must determine whether the activities pertain to waters of 
a reservation prior to awarding a grant.
5. Administrative Costs
    Pursuant to CWA section 319(h)(12), administrative costs in the 
form of salaries, overhead, or indirect costs for services provided and 
charged against activities and programs carried out with the grant 
shall not exceed 10 percent of the grant award. The costs of 
implementing enforcement and regulatory activities, education, 
training, technical assistance, demonstration projects, and technology 
transfer are not subject to this limitation.

[[Page 62446]]

6. Satisfactory Progress
    For a Tribe that received section 319 funds in the preceding fiscal 
year, section 319(h)(8) of the CWA requires that the Region determine 
whether the Tribe made ``satisfactory progress'' during the previous 
fiscal year in meeting the schedule of activities specified in its 
approved NPS management program. The Region will base this 
determination on an examination of Tribal activities, reports, reviews, 
and other documents and discussions with the Tribe in the previous 
year. Regions must include in each section 319 base grant award (or in 
a separate document, such as the grant-issuance cover letter, that is 
signed by the same EPA official who signs the grant), a written 
determination that the Tribe has made satisfactory progress during the 
previous fiscal year in meeting the schedule of milestones specified in 
its NPS management program. The Regions must include brief explanations 
that support their determinations.
7. Operation and Maintenance
    Each section 319 grant must contain a condition requiring that the 
Tribe assure that any management practices implemented for the project 
be properly operated and maintained for the intended purposes during 
its life span. Operation includes the administration, management, and 
performance of non-maintenance actions needed to keep the completed 
practice safe and functioning as intended. Maintenance includes work to 
prevent deterioration of the practice, repairing damage, or replacement 
of the practice to its original condition if one or more components 
fail. Management practices and projects that are damaged or destroyed 
due to a natural disaster (e.g., earthquakes, storm events, floods, 
etc.) or events beyond the control of the grantee are exempt from this 
condition.
    The condition must require the Tribe to assure that any 
subrecipient of section 319 funds similarly include the same condition 
in the subaward. Additionally, such condition must reserve the right of 
EPA and the Tribe, respectively, to conduct periodic inspections during 
the life span of the project to ensure that operation and maintenance 
are occurring, and shall state that, if it is determined that 
participants are not operating and maintaining practices in an 
appropriate manner, EPA or the Tribe, respectively, will request a 
refund for the project supported by the grant.
    The life span of a project will be determined on a case-by-case 
basis, tailored to the types of practices expected to be funded in a 
particular project, and should be specified in the grant condition. For 
assistance in determining the appropriate life span of the project, 
Tribes may wish to examine other programs implementing similar 
practices, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture's conservation 
programs. For example, for conservation practices, it may be 
appropriate to construct the life span consistent with the life span 
for similar conservation practices as determined by the Commodity 
Credit Corporation (pursuant to the implementation of the Environmental 
Quality Incentives Program). Following the approach used in many 
Federal funding programs, practices will generally be operated and 
maintained for a period of at least 5 to 10 years.
8. Reporting
    As provided in 40 CFR 31.40, 31.41, 35.507, 35.515, and 35.638, all 
section 319 grants must include a set of reporting requirements and a 
process for evaluating performance. Some of these requirements have 
been explicitly incorporated into the required work plan components 
that all Tribes must include in order to receive section 319 grant 
funding.
    The work plan components required for section 319 funding, 
specifically those relating to work plan commitments and timeframes for 
their accomplishment, facilitate the management and oversight of Tribal 
grants by providing specific activities and outputs by which progress 
can be monitored. The performance evaluation process and reporting 
schedule (both work plan components) also establish a formal process by 
which accomplishments can be measured. Additionally, the satisfactory 
progress determination (for Tribes that received section 319 funding in 
the preceding fiscal year) helps ensure that Tribes are making progress 
in achieving the goals in their NPS management programs.
    Regions will ensure that the required evaluations are performed 
according to the negotiated schedule (at least annually) and that 
copies of the performance evaluation reports are placed in the official 
files and provided to the recipient.

VII. Technical Assistance to Tribes

    In addition to providing NPS grant funding to Tribes, EPA remains 
committed to providing continued technical assistance to Tribes in 
their efforts to control NPS pollution. During the past ten years, EPA 
has presented many workshops to Tribes nationwide to assist them in 
developing: (1) NPS assessments to further their understanding of NPS 
pollution and its impact on water quality; (2) NPS management programs 
to apply solutions to address their NPS problems; and (3) specific 
projects to effect on-the-ground solutions. The workshops have provided 
information on related EPA and other programs that can help Tribes 
address NPS pollution, including the provision of technical and funding 
assistance. Other areas of technical assistance include watershed-based 
planning, water quality monitoring, section 305(b) reports on water 
quality, and section 303(d) lists of impaired waters. EPA intends to 
continue providing NPS workshops to interested Tribes in FY 2007 (and 
beyond) and to provide other appropriate technical assistance as 
needed. EPA also intends to include special emphasis in the workshops 
on the development and implementation of watershed-based plans that are 
designed to address on-the-ground water quality improvements.

VIII. Anticipated Deadlines and Milestones for FY 2007 Base Grants

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deadline for Tribes to be eligible for 319   October 13, 2006.
 grants.
Tribes submit base grant proposed work plan  December 19, 2006.
 to Region.
Region comments on Tribe's base grant        January 19, 2007.
 proposed work plan.
Tribes submit final base grant work plan to  February 20, 2007.
 Region.
Tribes submit final base grant application   April 5, 2007.
 to Region.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 62447]]

    Other than the date EPA will use to determine eligibility to 
receive 319 grants, the dates above are the anticipated dates for those 
actions.

IX. Anticipated Deadlines and Milestones for Base Grants Beyond FY 2007

    Listed below are the anticipated deadlines and milestones for NPS 
base grants for years beyond FY 2007 unless otherwise announced. The 
deadlines and milestones below refer to the dates within the particular 
fiscal year for which the Tribe is applying for NPS base grants. Each 
year, the specific dates will be posted on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal. Tribes should also contact their EPA 
Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator for further information about deadlines 
and milestones for years beyond FY 2007 (see EPA's Web site under ``EPA 
Tribal NPS Coordinators'' at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal for 
Agency contact information).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deadline for Tribes to be eligible for 319   Second Friday in October.
 grants.
Tribes submit base grant proposed work plan  First Friday in December.
 to Region.
Region comments on Tribe's base grant        Second Wednesday in
 proposed work plan.                          January.
Tribes submit final base grant work plan to  Second Friday in February.
 Region.
Tribes submit final base grant application   First Wednesday in April.
 to Region.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and is therefore not 
subject to OMB review. Because this grant action is not subject to 
notice and comment requirements under the Administrative Procedures Act 
or any other statute, it is not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act (5 U.S.C. Section 601 et seq.) or sections 202 and 205 of the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1999 (UMRA) (Pub. L. 104-4). In 
addition, this action does not significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments. Although this action does not generally create new binding 
legal requirements, where it does, such requirements do not 
substantially and directly affect Tribes under Executive Order 13175 
(63 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action will not have federalism 
implications, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 
August 10, 1999). This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it 
is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. 
This action does not involve technical standards; thus, the 
requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and 
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This action 
does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The 
Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., generally provides that 
before certain actions may take effect, the Agency promulgating the 
action must submit a report, which includes a copy of the action, to 
each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United 
States. Since this grant action contains legally binding requirements, 
it is subject to the Congressional Review Act, and EPA will submit its 
final action in its report to Congress under the Act. This applies only 
to section A of this announcement.

Section B. Request for Proposals From Indian Tribes for Competitive 
Grants Under Clean Water Act Section 319 in FY 2007 (Funding 
Opportunity Number EPA-OW-OWOW-07-1)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deadline EPA uses to determine eligibility   October 13, 2006.
 to receive competitive 319 grants.
Deadline for receipt of proposals in hard    December 19, 2006.
 copy by Region or electronically through
 Grants.gov.
Headquarters notifies Regions/Tribes of      March 5, 2007.
 selections for competitive 319 grants.
Tribes submit final grant application to     April 5, 2007.
 Region for competitive 319 grants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other than the date EPA will use to determine eligibility to 
receive 319 grants and the deadline for receipt of proposals in 
response to this RFP, the dates above are the anticipated dates for 
those actions.

I. Funding Opportunity Description for Competitive Grants

    This RFP is issued pursuant to section 319(h) of the Clean Water 
Act (CWA). Section 319 of the CWA authorizes EPA to award grants to 
eligible Tribes for the purpose of assisting them in implementing 
approved nonpoint source (NPS) management programs developed pursuant 
to section 319(b). The primary goal of the NPS management program is to 
control NPS pollution through implementation of management measures and 
practices to reduce pollutant loadings resulting from each category or 
subcategory of NPSs identified in the Tribe's NPS assessment report 
developed pursuant to section 319(a). EPA anticipates, pending 
enactment of its FY 2007 appropriations, setting aside a portion of 
section 319 funds for competitive grant awards to Tribes for the 
purpose of funding the development and implementation of watershed-
based plans and other on-the-ground projects that result in a 
significant step towards solving NPS impairments on a watershed-wide 
basis. Tribes are strongly encouraged to submit proposals that develop 
and/or implement watershed-based plans designed to protect unimpaired 
waters and restore NPS-impaired waters.
    Grants awarded under this RFP will advance the protection and 
improvement of water quality in support of Goal 2 (Clean and Safe 
Water), Objective 2 (Protect Water Quality), Sub-objective 1 (Protect 
and Improve Water Quality on a Watershed Basis) of EPA's 2003-2008 
Strategic Plan (see http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan/documents/Goal2.pdf). In support of Sub-objective 2.2.1, and consistent with EPA 
Order 5700.7, Environmental Results under EPA Assistance Agreements 
(see http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/award/5700.7.pdf), it is anticipated 
that grants awarded under this RFP will accomplish various 
environmental outputs and outcomes described below. All proposed work 
plans must include specific statements describing the anticipated 
environmental results of the proposed project in terms of well-defined 
outputs, and, to the maximum extent practicable, well-defined outcomes 
that demonstrate how the

[[Page 62448]]

project will contribute to the overall protection and improvement of 
water quality.
    Environmental outputs (or deliverables) refer to an environmental 
activity, effort, and/or associated work product related to an 
environmental goal or objective, that will be produced or provided over 
a period of time or by a specified date. Outputs may be quantitative or 
qualitative but must be measurable during an assistance agreement 
funding period. Examples of environmental outputs anticipated as a 
result of grants awarded under this RFP may include but are not limited 
to: a watershed-based plan, progress reports, or a particular number of 
on-the-ground management measures or practices installed or implemented 
during the project period. Including the environmental output of a 
watershed-based plan furthers progress towards achieving the specific 
indicator measure for Sub-objective 2.2.1 in EPA's Strategic Plan which 
measures the number of Tribes that have developed and begun to 
implement a watershed-based plan for Tribal waters (see Measure WQ-28, 
EPA's National Water Program Guidance for FY 2007 at http://www.epa.gov/water/waterplan/#nwp07).
    Environmental outcomes mean the result, effect, or consequence that 
will occur from carrying out an environmental program or activity that 
is related to an environmental or programmatic goal or objective. 
Outcomes may be environmental, behavioral, health-related or 
programmatic in nature, must be quantitative, and may not necessarily 
be achieved within an assistance agreement funding period. Examples of 
environmental outcomes anticipated as a result of grants to be awarded 
under this RFP may include but are not limited to: an increased number 
of NPS-impaired waterbodies that have been partially or fully restored 
to meet water quality standards or other water quality-based goals 
established by the Tribes; and/or an increased number of waterbodies 
that have been protected from NPS pollution.

II. Award Information

    In FY 2006, EPA awarded approximately $3.8 million to 28 Tribes for 
specific watershed projects through a competitive process. EPA 
anticipates that the amount of competitive funding available in FY 2007 
will be similar or slightly lower than the amount available in FY 2006, 
since the availability of competitive funding is dependent, in part, 
upon the amount of funding that remains after a portion is first 
distributed as base grants to all eligible Tribes (which may increase 
due to additional Tribes entering the NPS program).
    EPA anticipates awarding approximately 25 competitive grants, 
subject to availability of funds and the quality of proposals submitted 
under this RFP. Eligible Tribes may apply for competitive funding by 
submitting a proposal up to a maximum budget of $150,000 of Federal 
section 319 funding (plus the additional required match of the total 
project cost). Proposals evaluated, but not selected for this funding, 
may be retained for consideration for possible future awards under this 
RFP if additional funding materializes. Any additional selections for 
award under this RFP based on additional funding will be in accordance 
with the rankings developed by the review Committee (discussed below in 
section B.V.2) and Agency policy, and must be made within six months of 
the original competitive funding decisions.
    EPA reserves the right to make partial awards by funding discrete 
activities, portions, or phases of the proposal. If EPA decides to 
partially fund the proposal, it will do so in a manner that does not 
prejudice any applicants or affect the basis upon which the proposal, 
or portion thereof, was evaluated and selected for award, and that 
maintains the integrity of the competition and the evaluation/selection 
process. EPA reserves the right to reject all proposals and make no 
award as a result of this announcement, or make fewer awards than 
anticipated. The EPA Award Official is the only official that can bind 
the Agency to the expenditure of funds for selected projects resulting 
from this announcement.

III. Eligibility Information

1. Eligible Applicants
    To be eligible for NPS grants, a Tribe or intertribal consortium 
must: (1) Be Federally recognized; (2) have an approved NPS assessment 
report in accordance with CWA section 319(a); (3) have an approved NPS 
management program in accordance with CWA section 319(b); and (4) have 
``treatment-as-a-state'' (TAS) status in accordance with CWA section 
518(e). To be eligible for NPS grants in FY 2007, Tribes must meet 
these eligibility requirements as of October 13, 2006.
    Some Tribes have formed intertribal consortia to promote 
cooperative work. An intertribal consortium is a partnership between 
two or more Tribes that is authorized by the governing bodies of those 
Tribes to apply for and receive assistance under this program. (See 40 
CFR 35.502.) Individual Tribes who are a part of an intertribal 
consortia that is awarded a section 319 competitive grant may not also 
be awarded an individual section 319 competitive grant.
    The intertribal consortium is eligible only if the consortium 
demonstrates that all its members meet the eligibility requirements for 
the section 319 program and authorize the consortium to apply for and 
receive assistance in accordance with 40 CFR 35.504. An intertribal 
consortium must submit with its proposal to EPA adequate documentation 
of the existence of the partnership and the authorization of the 
consortium by its members to apply for and receive the grant. (See 40 
CFR 35.504.)
2. Cost Sharing or Matching
    Section 319(h)(3) of the CWA requires that the match for NPS grants 
is 40 percent of the total project cost. In general, as required in 40 
CFR 31.24, the match requirement can be satisfied by any of the 
following: allowable costs incurred by the grantee, subgrantee, or a 
cost-type contractor, including those allowable costs borne by non-
Federal grants; by cash donations from non-Federal third parties; or by 
the value of third party in-kind contributions.
    EPA's regulations also provide that EPA may decrease the match 
requirement to as low as 10 percent if the Tribe can demonstrate in 
writing to the Regional Administrator that fiscal circumstances within 
the Tribe or within each Tribe that is a member of the intertribal 
consortium are constrained to such an extent that fulfilling the match 
requirement would impose undue hardship. (See 40 CFR 35.635.) Where the 
stated purpose is to decrease the match requirement based upon undue 
hardship, a Tribe may prepare a budget and proposal based upon the 
assumption that EPA will approve the reduced match under 40 CFR 35.635. 
If the Tribe does not demonstrate undue hardship, the Tribe must then 
meet the 40 percent match requirement. The Tribe must also provide a 
new budget with the final grant application based upon the program's 40 
percent match requirement and the Federal award will be reduced to 
reflect the work plan and budget provided in the original proposal. The 
purpose of this requirement is to ensure that all work plan activities 
for a project which is evaluated and competitively awarded will be 
implemented as described in the original proposal.

[[Page 62449]]

    Performance Partnership Grants (PPG) enable Tribes to combine funds 
from more than one environmental program grant into a single grant with 
a single budget. If the Tribe includes the section 319 competitive 
grant as a part of an approved PPG, the match requirement may be 
reduced to 5 percent of the allowable cost of the work plan budget for 
the first 2 years in which the Tribe receives a PPG; after 2 years, the 
match may be increased up to 10 percent of the work plan budget (as 
determined by the Regional Administrator). (See 40 CFR 35.536).
    Where the stated purpose is to include the section 319 grant in a 
PPG, a Tribe may prepare a budget and proposal based upon the 
assumption that EPA will approve the waiver amount for PPGs under 40 
CFR 35.536. If a proposed PPG work plan differs significantly from the 
section 319 work plan approved for funding under this RFP, the Regional 
Administrator must consult with the National Program Manager. (See 40 
CFR 35.535). The purpose of this consultation requirement is to address 
the issue of ensuring that a project which is competitively awarded is 
implemented once commingled with other grant programs in a PPG. If the 
Tribe does not or cannot include the section 319 grant as part of an 
approved PPG, or chooses to withdraw the section 319 grant from their 
PPG, the Tribe must then meet the 40 percent match requirement (or 10 
percent if undue hardship is demonstrated). The Tribe must also provide 
a new budget with the final grant application based upon the program's 
match requirement and the Federal award will be reduced to reflect the 
budget provided in the original proposal. The purpose of this 
requirement is to ensure that all work plan activities for a project 
which is competitively awarded will be implemented in accordance with 
the same budget and as described in the original proposal.
3. Threshold Evaluation Criteria
    In addition to applicant eligibility and cost-share (discussed 
above in sections B.III.1 and B.III.2, respectively), all of the 
following threshold evaluation criteria must be met in order for a 
Tribe's proposal to be evaluated under section B.V and be considered 
for award. The appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator will 
notify applicants who do not meet the threshold eligibility criteria 
under this section within 15 calendar days of EPA's decision on 
applicant eligibility.
    a. An individual Tribe (or intertribal consortium) may not be 
awarded competitive funding for more than one competitive grant 
proposal in a given year.
    b. An individual Tribe (or intertribal consortium) may apply for 
competitive funding by submitting a proposal up to a maximum budget of 
$150,000 of Federal section 319 funding (plus the additional required 
match of the total project cost). If a Tribe submits a proposal that 
exceeds $150,000 of Federal section 319 funding, it will be rejected 
from further consideration.
    c. All proposals must propose to fund activities that are related 
to waters within a reservation or they will be rejected. Section 319 
grants may be awarded to Tribes for use outside the reservation only if 
they fund activities that are related to waters within a reservation, 
such as those relating to sources upstream of a waterway entering the 
reservation.
    i. Activities That Are Related to Waters Within a Reservation. 
Section 518(e) of the CWA provides that EPA may treat an Indian Tribe 
as a State for purposes of section 319 of the CWA if, among other 
things, ``the functions to be exercised by the Indian Tribe pertain to 
the management and protection of water resources which are * * * within 
the borders of an Indian reservation'' (see 33 U.S.C. 1377(e)(2)). EPA 
already awards grants to Tribes under section 106 of the CWA for 
activities performed outside of a reservation (on condition that the 
Tribe obtains any necessary access agreements and coordinates with the 
State, as appropriate) that pertain to reservation waters, such as 
evaluating impacts of upstream waters on water resources within a 
reservation. Similarly, EPA has awarded section 106 grants to States to 
conduct monitoring outside of State borders. EPA has concluded that 
grants awarded to an Indian Tribe pursuant to section 319 may similarly 
be used to perform eligible section 319 activities outside of a 
reservation if: (1) the activity pertains to the management and 
protection of waters within a reservation; and (2) just as for on-
reservation activities, the Tribe meets all other applicable 
requirements.
    ii. Activities That Are Unrelated to Waters of a Reservation. As 
discussed above, EPA is authorized to award section 319 grants to 
Tribes to perform eligible section 319 activities if the activities 
pertain to the management and protection of waters within a reservation 
and the Tribe meets all other applicable requirements. In contrast, EPA 
is not authorized to award section 319 grants for activities that do 
not pertain to waters of a reservation. For off-reservation areas, 
including ``usual and accustomed'' hunting, fishing, and gathering 
places, EPA must determine whether the activities pertain to waters of 
a reservation prior to awarding a grant.
    d. All work plans must address one of the following four factors:
    i. The work plan develops a watershed-based plan and implements a 
watershed-based plan;
    ii. The work plan develops a watershed-based plan and implements a 
watershed project (that does not implement a watershed-based plan);
    iii. The work plan implements a watershed-based plan; or
    iv. The work plan implements a watershed project that is a 
significant step towards solving NPS impairments or threats on a 
watershed-wide basis.
    e. All work plans must be consistent with the Tribe's approved NPS 
management program and conform to legal requirements that are 
applicable to all environmental program grants awarded to Tribes (see 
40 CFR 35.507 and 35.515) as well as the legal requirements that 
specifically apply to NPS management grants (see 40 CFR 35.638). As 
provided in those regulations, and in accordance with EPA Order 5700.7, 
Environmental Results under EPA Assistance Agreements, all work plans 
must include:
    i. Description of each significant category of NPS activity to be 
addressed;
    ii. Work plan components;
    iii. Work plan commitments for each work plan component, including 
anticipated environmental outputs and outcomes (as required by EPA 
Order 5700.7) and the applicant's plan for tracking and measuring its 
progress towards achieving the expected outputs and outcomes including 
those identified in section B.I of this RFP;
    iv. Estimated funding amounts for each work plan component;
    v. Estimated work years for each work plan component;
    vi. Roles and responsibilities of the recipient and EPA in carrying 
out the work plan commitments;
    vii. Reporting schedule and a description of the performance 
evaluation process that will be used that accounts for: (a) A 
discussion of accomplishments as measured against work plan commitments 
and anticipated environmental outputs and outcomes; (b) a discussion of 
the cumulative effectiveness of the work performed under all work plan 
components; (c) a discussion of existing and potential problem areas; 
and (d) suggestions for improvement, including, where feasible, 
schedules for making improvements; and

[[Page 62450]]

    viii. Description of past performance on reporting environmental 
results, including a description of Federally funded assistance 
agreements performed within the last 3 years (no more than 5 
agreements, and preferably EPA agreements) and how progress towards 
achieving the expected results (i.e., outputs and outcomes) under those 
agreements was documented and/or reported. If there was no progress, 
please indicate whether, and how, this was documented. If information 
on relevant or available environmental results past performance does 
not exist, please indicate this in the proposal and a neutral score 
will be given for this factor under Section B.V.
    f. Except as stated above in sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e, 
proposals must substantially comply with the proposal submission 
instructions and requirements set forth below in section B.IV of this 
announcement or they will be rejected.
    g. Proposals submitted in hard copy must be received by the 
appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator (identified in section 
B.VII) or received electronically through Grants.gov on or before the 
submission closing date and time published in section B.IV.3. EPA will 
not accept faxed or e-mail submissions and they will be rejected from 
consideration. Proposals received after the published closing date and 
time will be returned to the sender without further consideration.

IV. Application and Submission Information

    EPA will respond to questions from individual applicants regarding 
threshold eligibility criteria, administrative issues related to the 
submission of the proposal, and requests for clarification about this 
announcement. Questions must be submitted before December 5, 2006 in 
writing to the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator and 
written responses will be posted on EPA's Web site at http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal. In accordance with EPA's Competition 
Policy (EPA Order 5700.5A1), EPA staff will not meet with individual 
applicants to discuss draft proposals, provide informal comments on 
draft proposals, or provide advice to applicants on how to respond to 
ranking criteria. Applicants are responsible for the contents of their 
proposals.
1. Address to Request Application Package
    Grant application forms, including SF 424s, are available at http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/how_to_apply.htm and by mail upon request by 
calling the EPA Headquarters Grants Administration Division at (202) 
564-5320. Tribes may also contact their EPA Regional Tribal NPS 
Coordinator for further information about the application process (see 
section B.VII for Agency contact information).
2. Content and Form of Application Submission
    You may submit either a hard copy proposal or an electronic 
proposal through http://www.grants.gov (but not both) for this 
announcement. If you submit a hard copy proposal, you have the option 
to submit it by express delivery service, hand delivery, or courier 
service. EPA will not accept faxed submissions and they will be 
rejected from consideration. If you submit a hard copy proposal, you 
are encouraged (not required) to include with it a CD with the 
electronic version of the narrative work plan. If you submit your 
proposal electronically, it must be submitted through http://www.grants.gov. EPA will not accept submissions by e-mail and they will 
be rejected from consideration.
    All proposal packages, regardless of how submitted, must include 
the following documents:
    a. Complete narrative work plan addressing the requirements 
described above in sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e.
    b. Signed SF 424.
    c. Any supplemental information, if applicable, relating to:
    i. Eligibility (e.g., adequate documentation to demonstrate 
eligibility of intertribal consortium);
    ii. Documentation of a finding from the Region that the watershed-
based plan to be implemented includes the nine components identified in 
Attachment A (if the work plan includes a component to implement a 
watershed-based plan); and
    iii. Any other supplemental information that may be relevant or 
applicable to the proposal.
3. Submission Dates and Times for Proposals for Competitive Funding
    If you submit a hard copy proposal, the appropriate EPA Regional 
Tribal NPS Coordinator must receive the signed SF 424, work plan, and 
any other supplemental information that may be relevant or applicable 
to the proposal by 5 p.m. local time on December 19, 2006 (see section 
B.VII for Agency contact information). If you submit your proposal 
electronically through http://www.grants.gov, you must meet the 
requirements for electronic submission outlined in section B.IV.6 below 
and your proposal must be received through http://www.grants.gov no 
later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on December 19, 2006. Any 
hard copy or electronic proposals received after the due date and time 
will not be considered for funding.
4. Funding Restrictions
    The use of competitive funding for the development of a watershed-
based plan will be limited to 20 percent of the total competitive grant 
(e.g., up to $30,000 of a $150,000 grant) to assure that these 
competitive funds are primarily focused on implementation activities. 
If a Tribe submits a work plan to develop a watershed-based plan, it 
must be submitted as a component of the overall work plan for 
implementing a watershed project (i.e., a Tribe will not receive 
competitive funding only for the development of a watershed-based 
plan).
5. Confidential Business Information
    In accordance with 40 CFR 2.203, applicants may claim all or a 
portion of their proposal as confidential business information. EPA 
will evaluate confidentiality claims in accordance with 40 CFR part 2. 
Applicants must clearly mark proposals or portions of proposals they 
claim as confidential. If no claim of confidentiality is made, EPA is 
not required to make the inquiry to the applicant otherwise required by 
40 CFR 2.204(c)(2) prior to disclosure.
6. Submission Instructions for Electronic Applications Using Grants.gov
    In lieu of hard copy submission, you may submit the proposal 
electronically through http://www.grants.gov as explained below. The 
electronic submission of your proposal must be made by an official 
representative of your institution who is registered with Grants.gov 
and is authorized to sign applications for Federal assistance. For more 
information, go to http://www.grants.gov and click on ``Get 
Registered'' on the left side of the page. Note that the registration 
process may take a week or longer to complete. If your organization is 
not currently registered with Grants.gov, please encourage your office 
to designate an Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) and ask 
that individual to begin the registration process as soon as possible.
    To begin the application process under this grant announcement, go 
to www.grants.gov and click on the ``Apply for Grants'' tab on the left 
side of the page. Then click on ``Apply Step 1: Download a Grant 
Application Package and Instructions'' to download the PureEdge viewer 
and obtain the

[[Page 62451]]

application package for the announcement. To download the PureEdge 
viewer click on the ``PureEdge Viewer'' link. Once you have downloaded 
the viewer, you may retrieve the application package by entering the 
Funding Opportunity Number, EPA-OW-OWOW-07-1, or the CFDA number that 
applies to the announcement (CFDA 66.460). You may also be able to 
access the application package by clicking on the button ``How To 
Apply'' at the top right of the synopsis page for this announcement on 
http://www.grants.gov (to find the synopsis page, go to http://www.grants.gov and click on the ``Find Grants Opportunities'' button on 
the left side of the page and then go to Search Opportunities and use 
the Browse by Agency feature to find EPA opportunities.
    Proposal Submission Deadline: Your organization's AOR must submit 
your complete proposal electronically to EPA through Grants.gov (http://www.grants.gov) no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Standard Time on 
December 19, 2006.

Proposal Materials

    The application package must include the following materials:
    a. Signed SF 424. Complete the form. There are no attachments. 
Please be sure to include organization fax number and e-mail address in 
Block 5 of the signed SF 424.
    b. Narrative Work Plan. The work plan must include the components 
set forth in sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e of this RFP and will be 
evaluated based on the selection criteria set forth in section B.V.1 of 
this announcement. Applicants who elect to use http://www.grants.gov to 
apply will need to refer to sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e of this 
RFP when preparing the work plan.
    c. Supplemental Information. The work plan may include additional 
required information, if applicable, relating to:
    i. Eligibility (e.g., adequate documentation to demonstrate 
eligibility of intertribal consortium);
    ii. Documentation of a finding from the Region that the watershed-
based plan to be implemented includes the nine components identified in 
Attachment A (if the work plan includes a component to implement a 
watershed-based plan); and
    iii. Any other supplemental information that may be relevant or 
applicable to the proposal.

Application Preparation and Submission Instructions

    Documents a and b listed under Proposal Materials above should 
appear in the ``Mandatory Documents'' box on the Grants.gov Grant 
Application Package page.
    For document a, click on the SF 424 form and then click ``Open 
Form'' below the box. The fields that must be completed will be 
highlighted in yellow. Optional fields and completed fields will be 
displayed in white. If you enter an invalid response or incomplete 
information in a field, you will receive an error message. When you 
have finished filling out the form, click ``Save.'' When you return to 
the electronic Grant Application Package page, click on the form you 
just completed, and then click on the box that says, ``Move Form to 
Submission List.'' This action will move the document over to the box 
that says, ``Mandatory Completed Documents for Submission.''
    For document b, you will need to attach electronic files. Prepare 
your work plan as described in sections B.III.3.d and B.III.3.e of the 
RFP and save it to your computer as an MS Word, PDF, or WordPerfect 
file. When you are ready to attach your work plan to the application 
package, click on ``Project Narrative Attachment Form,'' and open the 
form. Click ``Add Mandatory Project Narrative File,'' and then attach 
your work plan (previously saved to your computer) using the browse 
window that appears. You may then click ``View Mandatory Project 
Narrative File'' to view it. Enter a brief descriptive title of your 
project in the space beside ``Mandatory Project Narrative File 
Filename;'' the file name should be no more than 40 characters long. If 
there are other attachments that you would like to submit to accompany 
your proposal (e.g., the supplemental information described above), you 
may click ``Add Optional Project Narrative File'' and proceed as 
before. When you have finished attaching the necessary documents, click 
``Close Form.'' When you return to the ``Grant Application Package'' 
page, select the ``Project Narrative Attachment Form'' and click ``Move 
Form to Submission List.'' The form should now appear in the box that 
says, ``Mandatory Completed Documents for Submission.''
    Once you have finished filling out all of the forms/attachments and 
they appear in one of the ``Completed Documents for Submission'' boxes, 
click the ``Save'' button that appears at the top of the Web page. It 
is suggested that you save the document a second time, using a 
different name, since this will make it easier to submit an amended 
package later if necessary. Please use the following format when saving 
your file: ``Applicant Name--FY07 Tribal 319 Competitive Grants--1st 
Submission'' or ``Applicant Name--FY07 Tribal 319 Competitive Grants--
Back-up Submission.'' If it becomes necessary to submit an amended 
package at a later date, then the name of the 2nd submission should be 
changed to ``Applicant Name--FY07 Tribal 319 Competitive Grants--2nd 
Submission.''
    Once your application package has been completed and saved, send it 
to your AOR for submission to U.S. EPA through Grants.gov. Please 
advise your AOR to close all other software programs before attempting 
to submit the application package through Grants.gov.
    In the ``Application Filing Name'' box, your AOR should enter your 
organization's name (abbreviate where possible), the fiscal year (e.g., 
FY07), and the grant category (e.g., Tribal 319 Grants). The filing 
name should not exceed 40 characters. From the ``Grant Application 
Package'' page, your AOR may submit the application package by clicking 
the ``Submit'' button that appears at the top of the page. The AOR will 
then be asked to verify the agency and funding opportunity number for 
which the application package is being submitted. If problems are 
encountered during the submission process, the AOR should reboot his/
her computer before trying to submit the application package again. [It 
may be necessary to turn off the computer (not just restart it) before 
attempting to submit the package again.] If the AOR continues to 
experience submission problems, he/she may contact Grants.gov for 
assistance by phone at 1-800-518-4726 or e-mail at http://www.grants.gov/help/help.jsp or contact Andrea Matzke, EPA 
Headquarters, at 202-566-1155 or by e-mail at [email protected].
    Proposal packages submitted through Grants.gov will be time/date 
stamped electronically.
    If you have not received a confirmation of receipt from EPA (not 
from Grants.gov) within 15 calendar days of the proposal deadline, 
please contact Andrea Matzke, EPA Headquarters, at 202-566-1155 or by 
e-mail at [email protected]. Failure to do so may result in your 
proposal not being reviewed.

[[Page 62452]]

V. Application Review Information

1. Selection Criteria for Competitive Grants
    Tribes submitting proposals for competitive grants must comply with 
all of the threshold evaluation criteria described in section B.III.3 
of this RFP in order to be considered for further evaluation under this 
section. The EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator will determine whether 
the proposals comply with the threshold evaluation criteria, and will 
forward work plans that meet the threshold evaluation criteria to EPA 
Headquarters NPS Control Branch for distribution to EPA's Watershed 
Project Review Committee. Work plans that do not comply with the 
threshold evaluation criteria will be rejected and not evaluated under 
this section.
    EPA's Watershed Project Review Committee will evaluate work plans 
by assigning a value of 0 to 5 (with 5 being highest) for each factor 
described below based upon how well the following list of specific 
elements are addressed and represented in the work plan. Each factor 
has been assigned a specific weight which will be multiplied (by a 
value of 0 to 5) to calculate a total point score for the particular 
factor. The scores for each factor are then combined to result in a 
total score for the overall work plan--the total maximum score 
available is 825.
    EPA's Watershed Project Review Committee will evaluate work plans 
for competitive grants based upon the following evaluation factors (and 
corresponding weights):
    a. The extent, and quality, to which the subcategories of NPS 
pollution are identified and described. (Weight = 15; 75 points 
maximum.). The work plan will be evaluated based upon the extent, and 
quality, to which it identifies each significant subcategory of NPS 
pollution. Since identifying the categories of NPS pollution (e.g., 
agriculture) is a threshold evaluation criteria, the work plan will be 
evaluated based upon how well it identifies sources at the subcategory 
level with estimates of the extent to which these subcategories are 
present in the watershed (e.g., X number of dairy cattle feedlots 
needing upgrading, including a rough estimate of the number of cattle 
per facility; Y acres of row crops needing improved nutrient management 
or sediment control; or Z linear miles of eroded streambank needing 
remediation).
    b. The extent, and quality, to which the water quality problems or 
threats to be addressed are identified and described. (Weight = 15; 75 
points maximum.) The work plan will be evaluated based upon the extent, 
and quality, to which it identifies each water quality problem or 
threat to be addressed caused by the subcategories of NPS pollution 
identified in evaluation factor (a) above. EPA encourages Tribes to 
incorporate specific descriptions of water quality problems or threats, 
for example, in relation to impairments to water quality standards or 
other parameters that indicate stream health (e.g., decreases in fish 
or macroinvertebrate counts).
    c. The extent, and quality, to which the goals and objectives of 
the project specifically identify the project location and activities 
to be implemented. (Weight = 20; 100 points maximum.)
    The work plan will be evaluated based upon how well it specifically 
identifies where the NPS project will take place and the waterbody 
affected by the NPS pollutants; and the level of detail provided in 
relation to the specific activities that will be implemented (e.g., 
identifies specific management measures and practices to be 
implemented).
    d. The extent to which significant water quality benefits will be 
achieved as a result of the project. (Weight = 20; 100 points maximum.) 
The work plan will be evaluated based upon the extent to which it 
describes how significant water quality benefits will be achieved as a 
result of the project, either through restoring NPS-impaired waters or 
addressing threats to unimpaired waters. EPA encourages Tribes to 
incorporate specific water quality-based goals that are linked to: load 
reductions; water quality standards for one or more pollutants/uses; 
NPS total maximum daily load allocations; measurable, in-stream 
reductions in a pollutant; or improvements in a parameter that 
indicates stream health (e.g., increases in fish or macroinvertebrate 
counts). If information is not available to make specific estimates, 
water quality-based goals may include narrative descriptions and best 
professional judgment based on existing information.
    e. The specificity of the budget in relation to each work plan 
component. (Weight = 15; 75 points maximum.) The work plan will be 
evaluated based upon the level of specificity of the budget in relation 
to each work plan component, and the extent to which it outlines the 
total operational and construction costs of the project (including 
match). Budget categories may include, but are not limited to, the 
following items: personnel; travel; equipment; supplies; contractual; 
and construction costs.
    f. The level of detail in relation to the schedule for achieving 
the activities identified in the work plan. (Weight = 15; 75 points 
maximum.) The work plan will be evaluated based upon the level of 
detail and clarity that it includes in relation to the schedule of 
activities for each work plan component. Such information includes, but 
is not limited to, the following: Identifies a specific ``start'' and 
``end'' date for each work plan component; an estimate of the specific 
work years for each work plan component; and interim milestone dates 
for achieving each work plan component. A work plan that includes a 
schedule that can be implemented with minimal delay upon the award of 
the grant (i.e., indicates a ``readiness to proceed'') will score 
higher than work plans which may require significant further action 
before the project can be implemented.
    g. The extent to which the roles and responsibilities of the 
recipient and project partners in carrying out the work plan activities 
are specifically identified. (Weight = 15; 75 points maximum.) The work 
plan will be evaluated based upon how specifically and clearly it 
defines the roles and responsibilities of each responsible party in 
relation to each work plan component, which may include, but is not 
limited to, the following: defining the specific level of effort for 
the responsible parties for each work plan component; identifying 
parties who will take the lead in carrying out the work plan 
commitments; and identifying other programs, parties, and agencies that 
will provide additional technical and/or financial assistance.
    h. The extent to which the performance evaluation process meets 
each of the following sub-criteria: (Weight = 15; 75 points maximum.)
    (i) Extent and quality to which the work plan demonstrates 
potential environmental results (i.e., whether the project will result 
in the protection of water resources), anticipated outputs and 
outcomes, and how the outcomes are linked to EPA's Strategic Plan. 
(Value = 2 points maximum.)
    (ii) Extent and quality to which the work plan demonstrates a sound 
plan for measuring progress toward achieving the expected outputs and 
outcomes (examples of outputs and outcomes can be found in section B.I 
of this announcement). (Value = 1 point maximum.)
    (iii) Extent and quality to which the applicant adequately 
documented and/or reported on progress towards achieving the expected 
results (e.g., outputs and outcomes) under Federal agency assistance 
agreements performed within the last 3 years, and if such progress was 
not being made, whether

[[Page 62453]]

the applicant adequately documented and/or reported why not. (Value = 2 
points maximum.)

    Note: In evaluating applicants under (iii) above, EPA will 
consider the information provided by the applicant and may also 
consider relevant programmatic information from other sources 
including Agency files and prior/current grantors (e.g., to verify 
and/or supplement the information supplied by the applicant). 
Applicants with no relevant or available past performance reporting 
history will not be penalized for absence of this information (and 
will receive 1 point for this factor).

    i. The extent, and quality, to which the work plan addresses one of 
the following four factors. (Weight = 35; 175 points maximum.)
    (i) The work plan develops a watershed-based plan and implements a 
watershed-based plan.
    If a work plan includes a plan to develop a watershed-based plan, 
it will be evaluated based on the extent to which it: Includes a 
commitment to incorporate the nine components of a watershed-based plan 
described in Attachment A; clearly identifies the geographical coverage 
of the watershed; includes a specific schedule for developing the 
watershed-based plan; and clearly identifies the estimated funds that 
will be used to develop the watershed-based plan (not to exceed 20 
percent of the total competitive grant).
    If a Tribe submits a work plan to implement a watershed-based plan, 
it will be evaluated based on the extent to which it: is accompanied by 
a statement that the Region finds that the watershed-based plan to be 
implemented includes the nine components of a watershed-based plan 
identified in Attachment A; identifies and briefly summarizes the 
watershed-based plan that will be implemented; and describes how the 
work plan will make progress towards achieving the overall goals of the 
watershed-based plan and the specific water quality-based goals 
identified in the watershed-based plan.
    (ii) The proposed work plan develops a watershed-based plan and 
implements a watershed project (that does not implement a watershed-
based plan).
    If a work plan includes a plan to develop a watershed-based plan, 
it will be evaluated based on the extent to which it: Includes a 
commitment to incorporate the nine components of a watershed-based plan 
described in Attachment A; clearly identifies the geographical coverage 
of the watershed; includes a specific schedule for developing the 
watershed-based plan; and clearly identifies the estimated funds that 
will be used to develop the watershed-based plan (not to exceed 20 
percent of the total competitive grant).
    If a work plan is designed to implement a watershed project that is 
not implementing a watershed-based plan, it will be evaluated based on 
the extent to which it can be linked to or expanded upon to address NPS 
impairments or threats on a watershed-wide basis. For example, a work 
plan that sets a precedent for future implementation on a watershed-
basis will be ranked higher than a work plan that implements an 
individual demonstration project designed to address an individual 
threat or problem.
    (iii) The work plan implements a watershed-based plan.
    If a Tribe submits a work plan to implement a watershed-based plan, 
it will be evaluated based on the extent to which it: is accompanied by 
a statement that the Region finds that the watershed-based plan to be 
implemented includes the nine components of a watershed-based plan 
identified in Attachment A; identifies and briefly summarizes the 
watershed-based plan that will be implemented; and describes how the 
work plan will make progress towards achieving the overall goals of the 
watershed-based plan and the specific water quality-based goals 
identified in the watershed-based plan.
    (iv) The work plan implements a watershed project that is a 
significant step towards solving NPS impairments or threats on a 
watershed-wide basis.
    If a work plan is designed to implement a watershed project that is 
not implementing a watershed-based plan, it will be evaluated based on 
the extent to which it can be linked to or expanded upon to address NPS 
impairments or threats on a watershed-wide basis. For example, a work 
plan that sets a precedent for future implementation on a watershed-
basis will be ranked higher than a work plan that implements an 
individual demonstration project designed to address an individual 
threat or problem.
2. Review and Selection Process for Competitive Funding
    The EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinators will determine whether the 
proposals comply with the threshold evaluation criteria described in 
section B.III.3. The EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator will notify 
applicants who do not meet the threshold eligibility criteria within 15 
calendar days of EPA's decision on applicant eligibility. The EPA 
Regional Tribal NPS Coordinators will forward those work plans that 
meet the threshold evaluation criteria to EPA Headquarters NPS Control 
Branch by approximately January 12, 2007.
    EPA will establish a Watershed Project Review Committee (Committee) 
comprised of 9 EPA staff, including 3 EPA Regional State NPS 
Coordinators, 3 EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinators, 2 staff members 
of the EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch, and 1 staff member of EPA's 
American Indian Environmental Office.
    EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch will forward copies of the work 
plans for competitive funding to the Committee and hold a conference 
call with the Committee on or around January 19, 2007, to ensure that 
all Committee members fully understand how to objectively and 
consistently apply the criteria discussed above. Scores for each work 
plan will be developed by each Committee member based on evaluating the 
work plans against the factors identified above in accordance with the 
weighting system described in section B.V.1.
    On or around February 16, 2007, each Committee member will forward 
the scores for each work plan to EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch. 
Based on these scores, EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch will 
calculate the average score for each work plan and then rank the work 
plans based on the resulting average scores. On or around February 23, 
2007, EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch will send the resulting 
average scores and rankings to the Committee and hold a conference call 
to provide a final opportunity for members of the Committee to discuss 
the rankings based on the average scores. The Committee will then make 
funding recommendations to EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch; in 
making the funding recommendations, in addition to considering the 
rankings, the Committee may also give priority consideration to high 
quality work plans that are designed to develop and/or implement a 
watershed-based plan. EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch then will 
make the final funding decisions based on the Committee's 
recommendations.
    The Committee will use the following ``Competitive Work Plan 
Evaluation Review Sheet'' to score and rank work plans in accordance 
with the evaluation criteria discussed above.

Competitive Work Plan Evaluation Review Sheet

    Tribe Name------------------------
    Reviewer------------------------

    (Weight x Value = Score) (Value: 0 is Lowest; 5 is Highest) 
(Maximum ``Max'' Score is 825)

[[Page 62454]]

    1. Assign a value of 0 to 5 for each evaluation factor (refer to 
section B.V.1 for further description of each factor). Use only whole 
numbers.
    2. Multiply the value by the designated weight to develop a score 
for each evaluation factor (the maximum score for each factor is shown 
in the score box).
    3. Add the score for each evaluation factor to calculate the total 
score at the end.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Value      Score
           Weight              Evaluation factors     (max)      (max)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
15..........................  (1) The extent, and           5         75
                               quality, to which
                               the subcategories
                               of NPS pollution
                               are identified and
                               described.
                              COMMENTS (strengths,
                               weaknesses):
15..........................  (2) The extent, and           5         75
                               quality, to which
                               the water quality
                               problems or threats
                               to be addressed are
                               identified and
                               described.
                              COMMENTS (strengths,
                               weaknesses):
20..........................  (3) The extent, and           5        100
                               quality, to which
                               the goals and
                               objectives of the
                               project
                               specifically
                               identify the
                               project location
                               and activities to
                               be implemented.
                              COMMENTS (strengths,
                               weaknesses):
20..........................  (4) The extent to             5        100
                               which significant
                               water quality
                               benefits will be
                               achieved as a
                               result of the
                               project.
                              COMMENTS (strengths,
                               weaknesses):
15..........................  (5) The specificity           5         75
                               of the budget in
                               relation to each
                               work plan component.
                              COMMENTS (strengths,
                               weaknesses):
15..........................  (6) The level of              5         75
                               detail in relation
                               to the schedule for
                               achieving the
                               activities
                               identified in the
                               work plan.
                              COMMENTS (strengths,
                               weaknesses):
15..........................  (7) The extent to             5         75
                               which the roles and
                               responsibilities of
                               the recipient and
                               project partners in
                               carrying out the
                               work plan
                               activities are
                               specifically
                               identified.
                              COMMENTS (strengths,
                               weaknesses):
15..........................  (8) The extent to             5         75
                               which the
                               performance
                               evaluation process
                               meets each sub-
                               criteria:
                              Demonstrates
                               environmental
                               results,
                               anticipated outputs
                               and outcomes, and
                               how outcomes are
                               linked to EPA's
                               Strategic Plan.
                               (Value = 2 points
                               maximum.)
                              (b) Demonstrates a
                               sound plan for
                               measuring progress
                               towards achieving
                               expected outcomes
                               and outputs. (Value
                               = 1 point maximum.).
                              (c) Documentation of
                               progress towards
                               achieving expected
                               results under
                               Federal agency
                               assistance
                               agreements within
                               last 3 years.
                               (Value = 2 points
                               maximum.) Note:
                               Applicants with no
                               relevant or
                               available past
                               performance
                               reporting history
                               will not be
                               penalized for
                               absence of this
                               information (and
                               will receive 1
                               point for this
                               factor)..
                              COMMENTS (strengths,
                               weaknesses):
35..........................  (9) The extent, and           5        175
                               quality, to which
                               the work plan
                               addresses one of
                               the following four
                               factors:
                              (a) The work plan
                               develops a
                               watershed-based
                               plan and implements
                               a watershed-based
                               plan.
                              (b) The work plan
                               develops a
                               watershed-based
                               plan and implements
                               a watershed project
                               (that does not
                               implement a
                               watershed-based
                               plan)..
                              (c) The work plan
                               implements a
                               watershed-based
                               plan..
                              (d) The work plan
                               implements a
                               watershed project
                               that is a
                               significant step
                               towards solving NPS
                               impairments or
                               threats on a
                               watershed-wide
                               basis..
                              COMMENTS (strengths,
                               weaknesses):
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total Maximum Score.....................825...
------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Anticipated Selection Date
    On or around March 5, 2007, EPA Headquarters NPS Control Branch 
will select the proposals for award and announce to the Regions which 
Tribes' proposals have been selected for competitive funding.

VI. Award Administration Information

1. Award Notices
    Following final selections, all applicants will be notified 
regarding their proposal's status.
    a. EPA anticipates notification to successful applicant(s) will be 
made by the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator via e-mail 
or U.S. Postal Mail on or around March 5, 2007. This notification, 
which advises that the applicant's proposal has been selected and is 
being recommended for award, is not an authorization to begin 
performance. The award notice signed by the EPA Award Official is the 
authorizing document and will be provided through U.S. Postal Mail. At 
a minimum, this process can take 90 days from the date of selection 
notification. EPA reserves the right to negotiate and/or adjust the 
final grant amount and work plan prior to award, as appropriate and 
consistent with Agency policy including the Assistance Agreement 
Competition Policy, EPA Order 5700.5A1. In addition, successful 
applicants will be required to certify that they have not been Debarred 
or Suspended from participation in Federal assistance awards in 
accordance with 40 CFR part 32.
    b. EPA anticipates notification to unsuccessful applicant(s) will 
be made by the appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator via e-
mail or U.S. Postal Mail within 15 calendar days after final selection 
of successful applicants. The notification will be sent

[[Page 62455]]

to the authorization official of the proposal.
    c. The appropriate EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator will notify 
applicants who do not meet the threshold eligibility criteria under 
section B.III.3 via e-mail or U.S. Postal Mail within 15 calendar days 
of EPA's decision on applicant eligibility.
2. Administrative and National Policy Requirements
    a. Grant Requirements. A listing and description of general EPA 
regulations applicable to the award of assistance agreements may be 
viewed at http://www.epa.gov/ogd/AppKit/appplicable_epa_regulations_and_description.htm.
    All applicable legal requirements including, but not limited to, 
EPA's regulations on environmental program grants for Tribes (see 40 
CFR 35.500 to 35.735) and regulations specific to NPS grants for Tribes 
(see 40 CFR 35.630 to 35.638), apply to all section 319 grants.
    b. Dun and Bradstreet Number. All applicants are required to 
provide a Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System 
(DUNS) number when applying for a Federal grant or cooperative 
agreement. Applicants can receive a DUNS number, at no cost, by calling 
the dedicated tollfree DUNS Number request line at 1-866-705-5711, or 
visiting the D&B Web site at: http://www.dnb.com.
    c. Administrative Costs. Pursuant to CWA section 319(h)(12), 
administrative costs in the form of salaries, overhead, or indirect 
costs for services provided and charged against activities and programs 
carried out with the grant shall not exceed 10 percent of the grant 
award. The costs of implementing enforcement and regulatory activities, 
education, training, technical assistance, demonstration projects, and 
technology transfer are not subject to this limitation.
    d. Satisfactory Progress. For a Tribe that received section 319 
funds in the preceding fiscal year, section 319(h)(8) of the CWA 
requires that the Region determine whether the Tribe made 
``satisfactory progress'' during the previous fiscal year in meeting 
the schedule of activities specified in its approved NPS management 
program in order to receive section 319 funding in the current fiscal 
year. The Region will base this determination on an examination of 
Tribal activities, reports, reviews, and other documents and 
discussions with the Tribe in the previous year. Regions must include 
in each section 319 grant award (or in a separate document, such as the 
grant-issuance cover letter, that is signed by the same EPA official 
who signs the grant), a written determination that the Tribe has made 
satisfactory progress during the previous fiscal year in meeting the 
schedule of milestones specified in its NPS management program. The 
Regions must include brief explanations that support their 
determinations.
    e. Operation and Maintenance. Each section 319 grant must contain a 
condition requiring that the Tribe assure that any management practices 
implemented for the project be properly operated and maintained for the 
intended purposes during its life span. Operation includes the 
administration, management, and performance of non-maintenance actions 
needed to keep the completed practice safe and functioning as intended. 
Maintenance includes work to prevent deterioration of the practice, 
repairing damage, or replacement of the practice to its original 
condition if one or more components fail. Management practices and 
projects that are damaged or destroyed due to a natural disaster (i.e., 
earthquakes, storm events, floods, etc.) or events beyond the control 
of the grantee are exempt from this condition.
    The condition must require the Tribe to assure that any 
subrecipient of section 319 funds similarly include the same condition 
in the subaward. Additionally, such condition must reserve the right of 
EPA and the Tribe, respectively, to conduct periodic inspections during 
the life span of the project to ensure that operation and maintenance 
are occurring, and shall state that, if it is determined that 
participants are not operating and maintaining practices in an 
appropriate manner, EPA or the Tribe, respectively, will request a 
refund for the project supported by the grant.
    The life span of a project will be determined on a case-by-case 
basis, tailored to the types of practices expected to be funded in a 
particular project, and should be specified in the grant condition. For 
assistance in determining the appropriate life span of the project, 
Tribes may wish to examine other programs implementing similar 
practices, such as the U.S. Department of Agriculture's conservation 
programs. For example, for conservation practices, it may be 
appropriate to construct the life span consistent with the life span 
for similar conservation practices as determined by the Commodity 
Credit Corporation (pursuant to the implementation of the Environmental 
Quality Incentives Program). Following the approach used in many 
Federal funding programs, practices will generally be operated and 
maintained for a period of at least 5 to 10 years.
    f. In making grant awards to Tribes who are part of an intertribal 
consortia, Regions must include a brief finding in the final award 
package that the Tribe has demonstrated the existence of the 
partnership and the authorization of the consortium by its members to 
apply for and receive the grant.
    g. In making grant awards to Tribes that provide for a reduced 
match requirement, Regions must include a brief finding in the final 
award package that the Tribe has demonstrated that it does not have 
adequate funds to meet the required match.
3. Reporting
    As provided in 40 CFR 31.40, 31.41, 35.507, 35.515, and 35.638, all 
section 319 grants must include a set of reporting requirements and a 
process for evaluating performance. Some of these requirements have 
been explicitly incorporated into the required work plan components 
that all Tribes must include in order to receive section 319 grant 
funding.
    The work plan components required for section 319 funding, 
specifically those relating to work plan commitments and timeframes for 
their accomplishment, facilitate the management and oversight of Tribal 
grants by providing specific activities and outputs by which progress 
can be monitored. The performance evaluation process and reporting 
schedule (both work plan components) also establish a formal process by 
which accomplishments can be measured. Additionally, the satisfactory 
progress determination (for Tribes that received section 319 funding in 
the preceding fiscal year) helps ensure that Tribes are making progress 
in achieving the goals in their NPS management programs.
    Regions will ensure that the required evaluations are performed 
according to the negotiated schedule (at least annually) and that 
copies of the performance evaluation reports are placed in the official 
files and provided to the recipient.
4. Dispute Resolution
    Assistance agreement competition-related disputes will be resolved 
in accordance with the dispute resolution procedures published in 70 FR 
3629, 3630 (January 26, 2005) which can be found at http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20051800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2005/05-1371.htm. Copies of these procedures may also be requested by 
contacting the EPA Regional Tribal NPS Coordinator listed in section 
B.VII below.

[[Page 62456]]

VII. Agency Contacts: EPA Headquarters and Regional Tribal NPS 
Coordinators

    EPA Headquarters--Andrea Matzke, Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and 
Watersheds, Assessment and Watershed Protection Division, telephone: 
202-566-1155; e-mail: [email protected].

Region I--Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode 
Island, Vermont

    Warren Howard; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region I, 1 Congress 
Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA 02203; telephone: 617-918-1587; e-
mail: [email protected].

Region II--New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands

    Donna Somboonlakana; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region II, 290 
Broadway--24th Floor (MC DEPP:WPB), New York, NY 10007; telephone: 
212-637-3700; e-mail: [email protected].

Region III--Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, 
Washington, DC

    Fred Suffian; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region III, 1650 Arch 
Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103; telephone: 215-814-5753; e-mail: 
[email protected].

Region IV--Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North 
Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee

    Yolanda Brown; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region IV, Sam Nunn 
Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, GA 30303; 
telephone: 404-562-9451; e-mail: [email protected].

Region V--Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin

    Daniel Cozza; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region V, 77 West 
Jackson Blvd. (MC: WS-15J), Chicago, IL 60604; telephone: 312-886-
7252; e-mail: [email protected].

Region VI--Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas

    George Craft; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region VI, 1445 Ross 
Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202; telephone: 214-665-6684; e-mail: 
[email protected].

Region VII--Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska

    Peter Davis; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region VII, 901 N 5th 
Street, Kansas City, KS 66101; telephone: 913-551-7372; e-mail: 
[email protected].

Region VIII--Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, 
Wyoming

    Mitra Jha; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region VIII, 999 18th 
Street, Suite 300 (MC: EPR-EP), Denver, CO 80202; telephone: 303-
312-6895; e-mail: [email protected].

Region IX--Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, American Samoa, Mariana 
Islands, Guam

    Tiffany Eastman; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region IX, 75 
Hawthorne Street (MC: WTR-10), San Francisco, CA 94105; telephone: 
1-800-735-2922, relay 415-972-3404; e-mail: 
[email protected].

Region X--Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington

    Susan Ennes; mailing address: U.S. EPA Region X, 1200 6th Avenue 
(MC: OWW-137), Seattle, WA 98101; telephone: 206-553-6249; e-mail: 
[email protected].

VIII. Other Information

1. Anticipated Deadlines and Milestones for FY 2008 Competitive Grants
    In future years, EPA intends to post the RFP for competitive grants 
under section 319 at http://www.grants.gov and on EPA's Web site at 
http://www.epa.gov/owow/nps/tribal. The following estimated dates are 
provided in order to assist Tribes in planning for EPA's FY 2008 
funding cycle for competitive grants:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deadline EPA uses to determine eligibility   Second Friday in October
 to receive competitive 319 grants.           2007.
Date for receipt of proposals in hard copy   December 7, 2007.
 by Region or electronically through
 Grants.gov.
Headquarters notifies Regions/Tribes of      March 3, 2008.
 selections for competitive 319 grants.
Tribes submit final grant application to     April 2, 2008.
 Region for competitive 319 grants.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Other than the date EPA will use to determine eligibility to 
receive 319 grants, the dates above are the anticipated dates for those 
actions.
2. Right to Reject All Proposals.
    EPA reserves the right to reject all proposals and make no award as 
a result of this announcement, or make fewer awards than anticipated. 
The EPA Award Official is the only official that can bind the Agency to 
the expenditure of funds for selected projects resulting from this 
announcement.

    Dated: October 19, 2006.
Benjamin H. Grumbles
Assistant Administrator for Water.

Attachment A--Components of a Watershed-Based Plan

    1. An identification of the causes and sources or groups of similar 
sources that will need to be controlled to achieve the goal identified 
in element 3 below. Sources that need to be controlled should be 
identified at the significant subcategory level with estimates of the 
extent to which they are present in the watershed (e.g., X number of 
dairy cattle feedlots needing upgrading, including a rough estimate of 
the number of cattle per facility; Y acres of row crops needing 
improved nutrient management or sediment control; or Z linear miles of 
eroded streambank needing remediation).
    2. A description of the NPS management measures that will need to 
be implemented to achieve a water quality-based goal described in 
element 3 below, as well as to achieve other watershed goals identified 
in the watershed-based plan, and an identification (using a map or a 
description) of the critical areas for which those measures will be 
needed to implement the plan.
    3. An estimate of the water quality-based goals expected to be 
achieved by implementing the measures described in element 2 above. To 
the extent possible, estimates should identify specific water quality-
based goals, which may incorporate, for example: load reductions; water 
quality standards for one or more pollutants/uses; NPS total maximum 
daily load allocations; measurable, in-stream reductions in a 
pollutant; or improvements in a parameter that indicates stream health 
(e.g., increases in fish or macroinvertebrate counts). If information 
is not available to make specific estimates, water quality-based goals 
may include narrative descriptions and best professional judgment based 
on existing information.
    4. An estimate of the amounts of technical and financial assistance 
needed, associated costs, and/or the sources and authorities that will 
be relied upon to implement the plan. As sources of funding, Tribes 
should consider other relevant Federal, State, local and private funds 
that may be available to assist in implementing the plan.
    5. An information and education component that will be used to 
enhance public understanding and encourage early and continued 
participation in selecting, designing, and implementing the NPS 
management measures that will be implemented.
    6. A schedule for implementing the NPS management measures 
identified in the plan that is reasonably expeditious.
    7. A description of interim, measurable milestones for determining 
whether NPS management measures or other control actions are being 
implemented.
    8. A set of criteria that can be used to determine whether the 
water quality-based goals are being achieved over time and substantial 
progress is being made

[[Page 62457]]

towards attaining water quality-based goals and, if not, the criteria 
for determining whether the watershed-based plan needs to be revised.
    9. A monitoring component to evaluate the effectiveness of the 
implementation efforts over time, measured against the criteria 
established under element 8 above.

 [FR Doc. E6-17895 Filed 10-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P