[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 7, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32112-32116]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-15960]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
[Docket No. 0906261096-91096-01]
RIN 0648-ZC08
Comparative Analysis of Marine Ecosystem Organization (CAMEO)
AGENCIES: Fisheries Headquarters Program Office (FHQ), National Marine
Fisheries Service (NMFS), National
[[Page 32113]]
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce; National
Science Foundation (NSF).
ACTION: Notice of funding availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This announcement solicits proposals for the Comparative
Analysis of Marine Ecosystem Organization (CAMEO) Program which is
implemented as a partnership between the NOAA National Marine Fisheries
Service and National Science Foundation Division of Ocean Sciences. The
purpose of CAMEO is to strengthen the scientific basis for an ecosystem
approach to the stewardship of our ocean and coastal living marine
resources. The program will support fundamental research to understand
complex dynamics controlling ecosystem structure, productivity,
behavior, resilience, and population connectivity, as well as effects
of climate variability and anthropogenic pressures on living marine
resources and critical habitats. CAMEO encourages the development of
multiple approaches, such as ecosystem models and comparative analyses
of managed and unmanaged areas (e.g., marine protected areas) that can
ultimately form a basis for forecasting and decision support. Further
information is available on the CAMEO web site (http://cameo.noaa.gov).
DATES: Full proposals must be received and validated by Grants.gov,
postmarked, or provided to a delivery service on or before 11:59 p.m.
ET, October 5, 2009. Please note: Validation or rejection of your
application by Grants.gov may take up to 2 business days after
submission. Please consider this process in developing your submission
timeline. Applications received after the deadline will be rejected/
returned to the sender without further consideration. Use of U.S. mail
or another delivery service must be documented with a receipt. No
facsimile or electronic mail applications will be accepted.
ADDRESSES: Electronic application packages are strongly encouraged and
are available at: http://www.grants.gov/. If the applicant's only mode
of submitting a proposal is via paper application, or if the applicant
has difficulty accessing Grants.gov or downloading the required forms,
they should contact: Lora Clarke, CAMEO, NOAA Fisheries, 1315 East-West
Highway, Room 14505, Silver Spring, MD, 20910 or by phone at (301) 713-
2239, or via internet at Lora.Clarke@noaa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Ford, CAMEO Program Manager,
NOAA/NMFS, (301) 713-2239, Michael.Ford@noaa.gov; Lora Clarke,
Associate Program Manager, NOAA/NMFS, (301) 713-2239,
Lora.Clarke@noaa.gov; Cynthia Suchman, Associate Program Director,
Biological Oceanography, OCE/GEO/NSF, (703) 292-8582, csuchman@nsf.gov;
David Garrison, Program Director, Biological Oceanography, OCE/GEO/NSF,
(703) 292-8582, dgarriso@nsf.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: CAMEO will be implemented as an interagency
partnership between NOAA-NMFS and NSF. The interests of these agencies
overlap in funding basic scientific research that will lead to
discovery and a deeper understanding of the factors controlling
ecosystem dynamics, with the potential to create tools for effective
living marine resource management. The first competition for the
program was held in 2008, with several initial projects selected for
FY2009 funding. This announcement provides guidance to researchers
wishing to apply for CAMEO support in FY2010. We expect that CAMEO
proposals will continue to focus on comparisons of environments where
there is a rich base of environmental and biological data, where there
are clear and compelling management issues, and where further research
is likely to result in a deeper understanding of ecosystem processes
that ultimately can lead to management tools or solutions. Projects
with a strong probability of producing results that can be widely
applied are likely to be most compelling. A substantial challenge is to
develop research that integrates across spatial and temporal scales --
from conducting local, short-term investigations to evaluating
regional, decadal processes. The over-arching goal is to produce
information applicable to stocks of managed resources and ecosystems
that will support management decisions. Because of their link to
management, CAMEO projects must emphasize population and community
processes affecting upper trophic levels and/or multi-species
interactions. Proposals should not be submitted that focus on areas
(such as microbial dynamics, biogeochemical cycling, and ocean
acidification) that overlap existing programs within NSF and NMFS.
Questions about whether proposals are appropriate for the CAMEO program
should be directed to the NOAA or NSF technical contacts. As
appropriate to each proposal, applicants should employ one or more of
the approaches below, providing sufficient detail for critical
evaluation of methodology and connection to CAMEO objectives.
1. Synthesis of existing time series and/or ongoing observation
programs
Projects may draw on a wide range of existing data and
observations, including historical data sets and ongoing programs. If
this approach is chosen, it is expected that the project will primarily
focus on the synthesis of information rather than the development or
support of new observational capabilities. Any new field studies must
be well justified and integrated with existing data.
2. Modeling
Modeling is likely to be an approach common to many CAMEO
proposals. These efforts may range from the development of conceptual
models for emergent properties such as connectivity or resilience to
more specific numerical models used for ecosystem comparisons or
predictions. Among the many possible modeling approaches, different
models (or sets of assumptions) may be compared for the same ecosystem,
or the same (or similar) models may be applied to compare different
ecosystems.
3. Experimental approach
Carefully planned experiments can shed light on the mechanisms
driving large-scale patterns and processes. Moreover, experiments can
provide information to parameterize models, e.g., environmental
tolerances and reproductive, growth, survival, and trophic transfer
rates. In CAMEO, comparative experimental approaches may include
traditional field, mesocosm, or laboratory experiments as well as non-
traditional opportunities provided by experimental adaptive management
(conducted at large spatial scales with the potential to illuminate
mechanisms structuring ecosystems).
4. Human dimensions
Human activities have compounded climate-related and other
environmental changes affecting marine ecosystems. In turn, human
systems need to respond and adapt to changes in the availability of
marine living resources and other goods and services resulting from
ecosystem processes. In CAMEO, collaborations between natural and
social scientists may undertake interdisciplinary comparative research
on ecosystems, living resources and human interactions.
5. Taking multiple and integrative approaches
In some cases, the aim of CAMEO -- to develop links between
fundamental research on marine ecosystems and issues of living
resources management -- may be addressed effectively through
integration of the above approaches.
[[Page 32114]]
Therefore, research strategies combining approaches may provide an
important contribution to the CAMEO Program.
Program Priorities:
This funding opportunity will implement CAMEO research by
supporting the development of research tools and strategic approaches.
The following types of proposals are encouraged:
1. Development of strategies and methodologies for comparative
analyses that can be applied consistently across spatial and temporal
scales and ecosystems, and that facilitate the design of decision
support tools for marine populations, ecosystems and habitats.
2. Development of models that address key scientific questions by
comparing ecosystems and ecosystem processes. Models that are
geographically and temporally portable, and that incorporate assessment
of modeling skill, are particularly encouraged.
3. Retrospective studies that analyze, re-analyze or synthesize
existing information (historic, time-series, ongoing program, etc.)
using a comparative approach.
4. Studies that integrate the human dimension within ecosystem
dynamics. The CAMEO program seeks to promote interdisciplinary research
using comparative approaches to link marine ecosystem research with the
social and behavioral sciences in new and vital ways.
ELECTRONIC ACCESS:
The full text of the full funding opportunity announcement for this
program can be accessed via the Grants.gov web site at http://www.grants.gov. The announcement will also be available by contacting
the program officials identified under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Applicants must comply with all requirements contained in the full
funding opportunity announcement.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY:
Authority for CAMEO is provided by the following: 33 U.S.C. 1442
for the National Marine Fisheries Service and 42 U.S.C. 1861-75 for the
National Science Foundation.
CFDA:
11.472, Unallied Science Program
FUNDING AVAILABILITY:
It is anticipated that up to $6 million will be available to
support 2-3 year projects in response to this announcement
ELIGIBILITY:
Eligible applicants are U.S. institutions of higher education,
other non-profits, state, local, Indian Tribal Governments, and Federal
agencies that possess the statutory authority to receive financial
assistance. International collaborations are encouraged, but
international partners are not eligible to receive funding, including
travel funds. Collaborative partnerships between academic or private
researchers and NOAA scientists are highly encouraged. Federal
employees are not eligible to apply for salary.
COST SHARING REQUIREMENTS:
None is required. Applicants may seek supplementary funding from
other agencies or foundations (non-profits, state, local etc).
Applicants are encouraged to discuss funding opportunities with these
entities prior to submitting proposal applications to NOAA/NSF and
should list any supplementary funding in their applications.
EVALUATION AND SELECTION PROCEDURES:
The general evaluation criteria and selection factors that apply to
full applications to this funding opportunity are summarized below.
Further information about the evaluation criteria and selection factors
can be found in the full funding opportunity announcement.
EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR PROJECTS:
The general evaluation criteria that apply to full applications to
this funding opportunity are summarized below. For the purposes of this
competition, NOAA will adopt the NSF evaluation criteria. NSF merit
review criteria are listed below. Following each criterion are
potential considerations that the reviewer may employ in the
evaluation. These are suggestions and not all will apply to any given
proposal. Each reviewer will be asked to address only those that are
relevant to the proposal and for which he/she is qualified to make
judgments. Principal Investigators (PIs) should be aware that a
component of Criterion 2 will be how well the project meets CAMEO
program goals.
Criterion 1 (50%): What is the intellectual merit of the proposed
activity? How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge
and understanding within its own field or across different fields? How
well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the
project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of
prior work.) To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and
explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts? How
well conceived and organized is the proposed activity? Is there
sufficient access to resources?
Criterion 2 (50%): What are the broader impacts of the proposed
activity? How well does the activity advance discovery and
understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning? How
well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of
underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability,
geographic, etc.)? To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure
for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation,
networks, and partnerships? Will the results be disseminated broadly to
enhance scientific and technological understanding? What may be the
benefits of the proposed activity to society? Each proposal that
requests funding to support postdoctoral researchers must include a
description of the mentoring activities that will be provided for such
individuals. Mentoring activities provided to postdoctoral researchers
supported on the project, as described in a one-page supplementary
document, will be evaluated under the Broader Impacts criterion. PIs
should address the following elements in their proposal to provide
reviewers with the information necessary to respond fully to the above-
described merit review criteria. NSF and NOAA staff will give these
elements careful consideration in making funding decisions.
Integration of Research and Education: One of the principal
strategies in support of NSF's goals is to foster integration of
research and education through the programs, projects and activities it
supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions
provide abundant opportunities where individuals may concurrently
assume responsibilities as researchers, educators, and students, and
where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse education with the
excitement of discovery and enrich research through the diversity of
learning perspectives.
Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities:
Broadening opportunities and enabling the participation of all citizens
-- women and men, underrepresented minorities, and persons with
disabilities -- are essential to the health and vitality of science and
engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems
it central to the programs,
[[Page 32115]]
projects, and activities it considers and supports.
REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS:
Proposals will be evaluated individually in accordance with the
assigned weights of the above evaluation criteria by independent peer
mail review and/or by independent peer panel review. Both Federal and
non-Federal experts in the field may be used in this process. The peer
mail reviewers have expertise in the subjects addressed by the
proposals. Each mail reviewer will see only certain individual
proposals within his or her area of expertise, and will score them
individually on the following scale: Excellent (1), Very Good (2), Good
(3), Fair (4), Poor (5). Those proposals receiving an average mail
review score of ``Fair'' or ``Poor'' will not be given further
consideration, in which case proposers will be notified of non
selection. The peer panel will comprise 8 to 12 individuals, with each
individual having expertise in a separate area, so that the panel, as a
whole, covers a range of scientific expertise. The panel will have
access to all mail reviews of proposals, and will use the mail reviews
in discussion and evaluation of the entire slate of proposals. All
proposals will be evaluated and scored individually. The peer panel
shall rate the proposals using the evaluation criteria and scores
provided above. Scores from each peer panelist shall be averaged for
each application and presented to the program officers. No consensus
advice will be given by the independent peer mail review or the review
panel. The program officers will neither vote or score proposals as
part of the independent peer panel nor participate in discussion of the
merits of the proposal. Those proposals receiving an average panel
score of ``Fair'' or ``Poor'' will not be given further consideration,
and proposers will be notified of non selection. For the proposals
rated by the panel as either ``Excellent,'' ``Very Good,'' or ``Good'',
the program officers will (a) select the proposals to be recommended
for funding according to the averaged ratings, and/or by applying the
project selection factors listed below; (b) determine the total
duration of funding for each proposal; and (c) determine the amount of
funds available for each proposal subject to the availability of fiscal
year funds. Awards may not necessarily be made in rank order. In
addition, proposals rated by the panel as either ``Excellent,'' ``Very
Good,'' or ``Good'' that are not funded in the current fiscal period,
may be considered for funding in another fiscal period without having
to repeat the competitive, review process. Proposals recommended for
funding by the Program Officers are then forwarded to the NMFS
selecting official and/or NSF Ocean Sciences Division Director for the
final funding recommendations. Final recommendations are based upon the
reviewer/program officer recommendations, project funding priorities
and availability of funds. Final decisions for all recommended
proposals will be made within the Grants Divisions at NOAA and NSF. At
the conclusion of the review process, the NOAA Program Officer and the
NSF Biological Oceanography Program Officer will notify lead proposers
for those projects recommended for support, and negotiate revisions in
the proposed work and budget. All proposals selected for funding by NSF
will be required to be resubmitted to NSF's FastLane system. Final
awards will be issued by the agency responsible for a specific project
after receipt and processing of any specific materials required by the
agency. Investigators may be asked to modify objectives, work plans or
budgets, and provide supplemental information required by the agency
prior to the award. When a decision has been made (whether an award or
declination), verbatim anonymous copies of reviews and summaries of
review panel deliberations, if any, will be made available to the
proposer. Declined applications will be held by NOAA for 3 years in
accordance with the current retention requirements, and then destroyed.
SELECTION FACTORS FOR PROJECTS:
The Selecting Official shall award in the rank order unless the
proposal is justified to be selected out of rank order based on one or
more of the following factors: 1. Availability of funding 2. Balance
and distribution of funds (by research area, project type, type of
institutions, type of partners, geographical location) 3. Duplication
of other projects funded or considered for funding by NOAA/NSF. 4.
FY2010 Program Priorities (listed above under Program Priorities, and
in Section I.B. of the FFO) 5. Applicant's prior award performance. 6.
Partnerships with/Participation of targeted groups. 7. Adequacy of
information necessary to make a National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) determination and draft necessary documentation before
recommendations for funding are made.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW:
Applications under this program are not subject to Executive Order
12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.
LIMITATION OF LIABILITY:
In no event will NOAA, the Department of Commerce, or NSF be
responsible for proposal preparation costs if these programs fail to
receive funding or are cancelled because of other agency priorities.
Publication of this announcement does not oblige NOAA or NSF to award
any specific project or to obligate any available funds.
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (NEPA):
NOAA must analyze the potential environmental impacts, as required
by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), for applicant projects
or proposals which are seeking NOAA federal funding opportunities.
Detailed information on NOAA compliance with NEPA can be found at the
following NOAA NEPA website: http://www.nepa.noaa.gov/, including our
NOAA Administrative Order 216-6 for NEPA, http://www.nepa.noaa.gov/NAO216_6_TOC.pdf, and the Council on Environmental Quality
implementation regulations, http://ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/regs/ceq/toc_ceq.htm. Consequently, as part of an applicant's package, and under
their description of their program activities, applicants are required
to provide detailed information on the activities to be conducted,
locations, sites, species and habitat to be affected, possible
construction activities, and any environmental concerns that may exist
(e.g., the use and disposal of hazardous or toxic chemicals,
introduction of non-indigenous species, impacts to endangered and
threatened species, aquaculture projects, and impacts to coral reef
systems). In addition to providing specific information that will serve
as the basis for any required impact analyses, applicants may also be
requested to assist NOAA in drafting of an environmental assessment, if
NOAA determines an assessment is required. Applicants will also be
required to cooperate with NOAA in identifying feasible measures to
reduce or avoid any identified adverse environmental impacts of their
proposal. The failure to do so shall be grounds for not selecting an
application. In some cases if additional information is required after
an application is selected, funds can be withheld by the Grants Officer
under a special award condition requiring the
[[Page 32116]]
recipient to submit additional environmental compliance information
sufficient to enable NOAA to make an assessment on any impacts that a
project may have on the environment.
THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE PRE-AWARD NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS FOR
GRANTS AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS:
The Department of Commerce Pre-Award Notification Requirements for
Grants and Cooperative Agreements contained in the Federal Register
notice of February 11, 2008 (73 FR 7696), are applicable to this
solicitation.
PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT:
This document contains collection-of-information requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The use of Standard Forms
424, 424A, 424B, and SF-LLL and CD-346 has been approved by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) under the respective control numbers
0348-0043, 0348-0044, 0348-0040, 0348-0046, and 0605-0001.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required to,
nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply with,
a collection of information subject to the requirements of the PRA
unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 12866:
This notice has been determined to be not significant for purposes
of Executive Order 12866.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 13132 (FEDERALISM):
It has been determined that this notice does not contain policies
with Federalism implications as that term is defined in Executive Order
13132.
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE ACT/REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ACT:
Prior notice and an opportunity for public comment are not required
by the Administrative Procedure Act or any other law for rules
concerning public property, loans, grants, benefits, and contracts (5
U.S.C. 553(a)(2)). Because notice and opportunity for comment are not
required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 or any other law, the analytical
requirements for the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
are inapplicable. Therefore, a regulatory flexibility analysis has not
been prepared.
Dated: June 29, 2009.
Steven A. Murawski, Ph.D.
NOAA Fisheries, Chief Scientific Advisor, Director of Scientific
Programs.
Dated: June 30, 2009.
Phillip R. Taylor
Section Head, Ocean Section, Division of Ocean Sciences, National
Science Foundation.
[FR Doc. E9-15960 Filed 7-6-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-S