This message was prepared by Lewis-Burke Associates LLC.
EARTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES POLICY NEWSLETTER
September 4, 2020 | Lewis-Burke Associates LLC

A View from Washington

As the congressional recess draws to a close, Members of the U.S. Congress return to Capitol Hill eager to close out business so they can get back to the campaign trail.  While environmental issues have had some visibility in the Presidential election, they are poised to play a larger role in determining the composition of the House and Senate chambers.  Democrats would need to flip four seats to gain a majority in the Senate, and Republicans in the most vulnerable seats have been taking a pro-environment position to win favor in environmentally conscious swing states such as Colorado, Maine, Arizona, Montana, and North Carolina.  Republican incumbents from each of these states were quick to join as co-sponsors of one of the only environmentally focused bills to become law this year, the Great American Outdoors Act (Public Law No: 116-152) -- in fact, Senator Cory Gardner (R-CO), whose seat is considered highly vulnerable, was an original co-sponsor of the legislation in the Senate.  President Trump likely agreed to sign the bill, which aims to reduce the maintenance backlog at National Parks, due to pressure from the Republican Party to give these swing state Senators an environmental win.
 
Republicans are not the only ones looking to move voters based on their environmental stances; the progressive movement and calls for action on the Green New Deal also brought new primary challengers in some solidly Democratic seats.  Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO), a twelve-term senior member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, saw a challenge from the left this year, but ultimately won the primary contest.  Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX), an eight-term incumbent, saw a similar challenge from a young progressive touting support for the Green New Deal which ended with the incumbent winning the primary by fewer than 3,000 votes.  Perhaps one of the most visible primary challenges this cycle has been for the Senate seat held by the Green New Deal's original sponsor, Ed Markey (D-MA).  Rep. Joe Kennedy III challenged him, calling for new leadership, but progressives stood firm with Senator Markey in large part due to his long history of pro-environmental policies.  Ultimately, Senator Markey was victorious and is virtually guaranteed re-election in November.
 
Turning to the presidential election, should Joe Biden win, environmental issues would be a major focus among early actions taken to undo executive orders made by the Trump Administration.  In the research realm, federal agencies would prioritize crosscutting issues such as environmental justice and health, sustainable infrastructure, and applied technologies to develop scalable sustainability practices and tools.  There would also be an intentional focus on climate change and messaging around climate science to draw a contrast to the Trump Administration’s hostility toward the issue.  A second-term Trump Administration would continue its focus on energy, ocean exploration, basic sciences, and defense applications.  Environmental issues will continue to be prominently featured in the 2020 election cycle at every level of government and have the potential to be featured in future stimulus packages given the influx of natural disasters in recent weeks.


IN THIS ISSUE: 

Congressional Updates­­ Agency and Administration Updates Funding Opportunities
 
Congressional Updates

COVID-19 Negotiations at an Impasse, White House Takes Executive Action, Research Relief Uncertain
As the COVID-19 pandemic drags on into its sixth month, chances of another major relief package being agreed upon and signed into law this fall remain slim.  Democrats and Republicans have each crafted their own versions, which remain far apart in size and scope, and although researchers across all scientific fields have experienced disruptions to their work, the current proposals being discussed would not directly benefit earth and environmental research.  Amid these protracted negotiations between parties, the White House has attempted to provide some relief through executive action, however the legality of those actions has been challenged and the effectiveness called into question. 
 
Following the passage of four emergency packages to address COVID-19 this spring, the continued health and economic tolls of the pandemic made it apparent to both sides of the aisle that another large package would be needed.  House Democrats moved quickly to introduce and pass the $3 trillion Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions (HEROES) Act in mid-May, which would provide funding for state and local governments, as well as additional unemployment benefits, food and housing assistance, aid to schools and universities, medical research funding, and environmental justice grants.  Senate Republicans responded later in the summer by introducing a series of eight bills collectively called the Health, Economic Assistance, Liability Protection, and Schools (HEALS) Act, which would offer $1 trillion in economic relief.  Major elements of the package include a second round of tax rebate checks, slimmed-down unemployment benefits, a second round of forgivable small-business loans, education relief, testing and contact tracing support, and liability protection for employers.  Both parties flatly rejected their opponents’ proposals, with Republicans dismissing the HEROES Act as a laundry list of liberal priorities and Democrats calling the HEALS Act entirely inadequate to address the nation’s challenges.  
 
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, and White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows have met several times in recent weeks to attempt to work out a compromise package agreeable to both sides, but negotiations have thus far been unproductive.  Other congressional priorities, including appropriations for fiscal year (FY) 2021 and funding for the U.S. Postal Service, have diverted some attention from hammering out a large-scale COVID-19 package, and the upcoming November election is likely to further detract from progress.  Congress will need to enact a continuing resolution (CR) by September 30 in order to avert a government shutdown, which, as a must-pass item, could serve as a vehicle for some COVID-19 related aid if the two parties can come to an agreement on which provisions to include and at what level.
 
As negotiations between Democratic congressional leaders and executive branch officials faltered, President Trump issued a series of Presidential Memorandums and an Executive Order in early August to provide some relief.  The executive actions were aimed to support temporary payroll tax relief, an extension of unemployment benefits, a moratorium on evictions, and student loan relief.  The efforts were immediately challenged by Democrats and some Republicans on the grounds that the President’s actions may not be legal and fall short of the relief needed.  Actions by the courts or a deal struck by Congress would render the actions by President Trump moot. 
 
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the biomedical research community stand to gain the most from a new COVID-19 relief package.  The House Democrats’ HEROES Act would include $3 billion in relief for NIH-funded researchers, while the Senate Republicans’ HEALS Act would provide $10.1 billion in relief funding.  Although the HEROES Act does include a $125 million boost for the National Science Foundation (NSF) RAPID program, neither proposal specifically includes research relief through other funding agencies.
 
Sources and Additional Information: Senate Democratic Climate Committee Releases Climate Action Report
The Senate Democrats’ Special Committee on the Climate Crisis, created after Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell rejected calls for the creation of a bipartisan climate committee, released a report outlining the Democratic plan for climate change policy.  Earlier this summer, the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis released a similar report.  Both plans call for reaching net-zero emissions in the U.S. by 2050 and leveraging improvements in sustainability and the green economy to drive job growth.  However, the Select Committee considered input from the Committee’s Republican members, whereas the Special Committee report only reflects Democratic priorities. 

The Senate Democrats’ report provides details on improvements that could be made in nearly every sector, from transportation, agriculture, and labor, to the health and social science sectors.  In addition to addressing the concerns of the effect of industry and human activity on the climate, the report also notes current concerns such as public health and pandemic preparedness, disaster relief and resilience, environmental justice, and money in politics.  Cross-agency communication and coordination are also highlighted, aiming to reduce duplication and efficiently address the climate crisis in the U.S. and with international collaboration.

Regarding research and development (R&D), the Senate report emphasizes the importance of using technology to transition the major polluting sectors of energy, transportation, and industry into sustainable alternatives wherever possible.  The report specifically highlights the importance of the Department of Energy’s Office of Science and the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) in developing and scaling innovative technologies to reach the net-zero emissions and clean, efficient energy goals.  While the report does not give specific recommended funding amounts for each agency, it does cite sources calling for doubling the investment in energy R&D and making “consistent and substantial” investments in “all stages of the innovation process, including basic and applied research, development, demonstration, and deployment.”  The report also touches on the need for decarbonization and research on carbon removal technologies, energy efficient vehicles, and sustainable agriculture R&D.

While this report is not legislation and cannot be directly acted upon, it serves as messaging for priorities in the scenario that the Senate flips to Democratic control in the next Congress and/or there is a new occupant in the White House.

Sources and Additional Information:
Mark Menezes Confirmed as Deputy Secretary of Energy  
The Senate confirmed Mark Menezes as Deputy Secretary of the Department of Energy (DOE) by a bipartisan 79-16 vote on August 4.  Since 2017, Mr. Menezes has served with both DOE Secretary Dan Brouillette and former Secretary Rick Perry as Under Secretary of Energy, a position which also required Senate confirmation.   

Throughout his confirmation process, Mr. Menezes spoke with the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on the priorities of quantum computing, energy accessibility, renewable fuel standards, and “breaking down the silos” to encourage more cross-cutting efforts among the DOE basic and applied energy offices.  He also touched on questions about the role of the DOE national laboratories, carbon capture technologies, the civilian nuclear fleet, and environmental issues.  The Committee, particularly Chairman Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Ranking Member Joe Manchin (D-WV) praised Mr. Menezes for his extensive experience across the agency and federal government including his tenure as chief counsel to the House Energy and Commerce Committee and role in creating DOE’s cybersecurity office. 

Notably, concern over a resumption of explosive nuclear testing in Nevada caused two Senators from the state, Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV) and Jacky Rosen (D-NV), to vote against his nomination.i  Senator Cortez Masto, a member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, also voted no when the Committee advanced Mr. Menezes’ nomination to the full Senate in June.  Despite assurance from Mr. Menezes on the issue, the Nevada Senate delegation fought the Trump Administration’s efforts to revive storing nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain and its push to resume nuclear testing. 

Sources and Additional Information: 
Agency and Administration Updates 

Trump Administration Releases FY 2022 R&D Budget Priorities  
The Trump Administration released its annual memorandum on priorities for research and development (R&D) for fiscal year (FY) 2022, offering a forecast of federal agencies’ science and technology (S&T) investments in the next President’s budget request.  Like prior years, the memo was developed and issued jointly by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).  As the first R&D memo released since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, a new priority area is “American Public Health Security and Innovation.”  The purpose of this priority area is to bring “under a single, comprehensive umbrella biomedical and biotechnology research and development aimed at responding to the pandemic and ensuring the U.S. S&T enterprise is maximally prepared for any health-related threats.”  This includes new investments in diagnostic, vaccine, device, and therapeutic development as well as infectious disease modeling, prediction, and forecasting.  

The memo includes four new priority R&D areas: diagnostic, vaccine, and therapeutic R&D; infectious disease modeling, prediction, and forecasting; meteorological services as part of earth system predictability; and the Arctic.  The first two are related to addressing COVID-19 and future pandemics as described earlier.  Meteorological services refer to leveraging earth system capabilities to improve the application of weather, climate, hydrologic, ocean, and other environmental data to benefit society.  The focus on the Arctic is a recognition of growing geostrategic competition and growing access to its resources due to climate change.  R&D would be focused on improved observation, understanding and predictability of the “physical, biological, and socio-economic processes of the Arctic.”   

Below are the environmentally relevant R&D priority areas identified in the memo (new areas of emphasis in bold):  
  • American Public Health Security and Innovation  
    • Diagnostic, Vaccine, and Therapeutic R&D  
    • Infectious Disease Modeling, Predication, and Forecasting  
    • Biomedicine and Biotechnology  
    • Bioeconomy  
  • American Energy and Environmental Leadership  
    • Energy 
    • Earth System Predictability and Meteorological Services  
    • Oceans   
    • Arctic  
Of note, for the first time during the Trump Administration, national security and advanced military capabilities are not the top R&D priority.  Due to public health and economic impacts of COVID-19, public health and biotechnology has been elevated from the fourth priority last year to the first this year.  Industries of the Future remains the second priority, but the highest funding priority and national security fell to third place.  Within national security, issues related to resilience and in particular capabilities to anticipate, prevent, respond, and recover from “physical threats and natural disasters,” “infectious diseases and other biological threats,” and “extreme terrestrial and space weather events” overtook advanced military capabilities as the top priority.    

The memo also emphasizes and elevates issues related to diversity, equity, and inclusion in STEM research and education.  For investments in the workforce of the future, the memo directs federal agencies to “prioritize investments in research programs and other related activities” that “…increase diversity, equity, and inclusion in STEM” including “mechanisms to attract, prepare and support all Americans to pursue STEM pathways, especially for underrepresented and underserved populations…”  A stated priority is to create “safe, diverse, inclusive, and equitable research environments for all members of the research enterprise, paying particular attention to the burdens COVID-19 has placed on the S&T workforce.”  Further, federal agencies should increase collaborations with “underrepresented populations, and Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) and minority serving institutions (MSIs) through multi-sector engagement that accelerates entrepreneurship and innovation to support the next generation of industry leaders.”  
 
Sources and Additional Information: Draft National Spatial Data Infrastructure Strategic Plan Open for Comments 
The Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC), an interagency committee focused on geospatial data, is soliciting feedback on a new draft strategic plan for the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI), with comments due by mid-September.  The NSDI looks to provide a framework across the federal government “to ensure geospatial data from multiple sources are available, accessible, and easily integrated,” according to the FGDC website.  The creation of this new spatial infrastructure as well as the formation of the FGDC are part of the implementation of the Geospatial Data Act of 2018.  

As noted in the request for comment, the Geospatial Data Act defines the NSDI as “the technology, policies, criteria, standards, and employees necessary to promote geospatial data sharing throughout the Federal Government, State, tribal, and local governments, and the private sector (including nonprofit organizations and institutions of higher education).” 

Comments are due by September 17, 2020, and may be submitted by email to nsdicomments@fgdc.gov.  A form for comments is available on the NSDI Strategic Plan website linked below. 
 
Sources and Additional Information: United States Chapter of the Global Trillion Trees Initiative Launches with 26 Participants 
The United States has joined the One Trillion Trees Initiative, a global program led by the World Economic Forum and the American Forests with the objective to grow, conserve, and restore one-trillion trees worldwide by 2030 to help fight climate change in support the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration 2021-2030.  On August 27, the U.S. chapter of the One Trillion Trees Initiative launched with 26 companies, cities, and organizations committed to participate to reach the U.S. goal of planting at least 855 trees by 2030.  To date, the U.S. participants of the initiative include the cities of Detroit and Dallas; companies including Mastercard, Microsoft, Salesforce, and Bank of America; as well as organizations including the American Forest Foundation, Arbor Day Foundation, National Association of State Foresters, and the National Forest Foundation. 

Although the One Trillion Trees Initiative has been offered as a component to a Republican alternative to the Green New Deal and has the support of President Trump, it is not clear how the U.S. agencies and Congress will contribute to the effort.  President Trump announced that the U.S. would join the One Trillion Trees Initiative during his address to global business leaders at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland in January of 2020.  In February of 2020, U.S. Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-AR) proposed the “Trillion Trees Act,” which aims to support the planting of one trillion trees globally by 2050 and incentivize the use of wood products as carbon sequestration devices.
 
Sources and Additional Information:
Funding Opportunities

NSF Releases Solicitation for Biology Integration Institutes  
The National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Directorate for Biological Sciences (BIO) released the second solicitation for its Biology Integration Institutes (BII) as part of its continued effort to facilitate a “unification of biology.”  BII will support research collaborations across disciplines, both within and beyond biology, that address an overarching biological theme and will fund awards of up to $12.5 million over five years with the opportunity for a five-year extension.    

The BII effort is linked to the broader “Reintegrating Biology” initiative launched in 2018 with the goal of integrating biological disciplines to address larger, more complex biological research questions that fall beyond the scope of BIO’s core programs.  The new BII has eliminated the Design track that supported “workshops, development of partnerships, exploratory analyses, engagement of stakeholders” and focuses solely on the Implementation track.   

Proposed institutes should identify a theme to guide proposals based on “critical, cross-cutting biological questions that are larger in scope than typical proposals to BIO Core Programs.”  While the goal of the program is to integrate the biological disciplines, any scientific field may be included to address the theme of the proposal.  Proposals should also highlight approaches to how students learn biology, how diverse participation can be expanded, and how the discipline can be advanced.  Additionally, the solicitation encourages proposers to give thought to “strategies that leverage rapid advances in cyberinfrastructure and other technologies to bridge and integrate across subdisciplines and make resources accessible, re-usable, and adaptable for unanticipated purposes.”  

The solicitation identifies, and further explains, several “Hallmarks of Successful Proposals”:  
  1. “The proposed research plan must tackle critical, cross-cutting biological questions that are larger in scope than typical proposals to BIO Core Programs.  
  2. The institute must have outcomes that are greater than the sum of its parts.   
  3. The proposed research plan should include a range of objectives and research approaches that are clearly integrated under a coordinated vision.   
  4. Investigative teams should be optimally configured.   
  5. Investigative teams should be diverse.  
  6. The management plan should promote the synthetic nature of the project.   
  7. The proposal must include a robust, integrated education and training component.   
  8. The proposal should attempt to leverage prior NSF investments in biological research, training, and cyberinfrastructure resources, as appropriate.   
  9. Broadening participation must be inherent to the project as well as in the institute leadership.   
  10. Outreach activities should include a clear assessment plan.    
  11. Public access and timely release of project outputs should be clear and routine.    
  12. International collaborations, if included, must be fully justified.”  
Total Funding and Award Size: Up to $15 million is available in FY 2021 for approximately 4-6 Cooperative Agreements.  Cooperative Agreements will be for five years with no more than $12.5 million over the initial five-year period.  There is a possibility for the Cooperative Agreement to be extended another five years, subject to evaluation and funding availability.    

Due Dates: Full proposals are due by January 13, 2021 by 5:00 PM submitter’s local time.  Letter of Intent is no longer required.  

Eligibility: Eligible applicants under this opportunity include institutes of higher education, non-profits, and research labs.  There is no limit on the number of proposals per organization; however, individuals may only be designated as PI or Co-PI, on one proposal. Additionally, proposals that involve multiple organizations must identify a lead organization and a single proposal describing the entire project must be submitted by that organization with a budget form submitted for each subawardee.  

Sources and Additional Information: FEMA Announces New Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) Program 
In August, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) announced the new Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) Program to support pre-disaster hazard mitigation through a Notification of Funding Opportunities (NOFOs).  For fiscal year (FY) 2020, $500 million is available for states, local communities, tribes, and territories to engage in mitigation activities.  The BRIC funding level is a six percent set-aside from federal post-disaster grant funding to enable the program to use a portion of funding from disaster response to mitigate losses from future disasters.  The establishment of this program follows statutory requirements from the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018, and BRIC replaces the existing FEMA Pre-Disaster Mitigation (PDM) program.  FEMA plans to solicit proposals annually for this program, and the award performance period is three years. 

As stated by FEMA, FY 2020 program priorities are to “incentivize public infrastructure projects; incentivize projects that mitigate risk to one or more lifelines; incentivize projects that incorporate nature-based solutions; and increase funding to Applicants that facilitate the adoption and enforcement of the latest published editions of building codes.”  FEMA hopes that BRIC will enable innovative partnerships approaches, such as related to the funding mechanisms and project designs. 

A portion of BRIC funding is allocated to states and territories or set aside for federally recognized tribes.  However, most of the funding, $446.4 million in FY 2020, is available for a national competition to subapplicants.  The maximum federal share per subapplicant award is $50 million.  


Eligibility: Eligible applicants are states, U.S. territories, the District of Columbia, and federally recognized Indian tribal governments.  Local governments are considered subapplicants.  Non-profits and businesses are not eligible to apply, but applicants or subapplicants can apply on their behalf. States and territories are only eligible if they have experienced a major disaster declaration under the Stafford Act in the previous seven years, however currently all states and territories fall into that category. 

Deadlines: Applications for the BRIC program open September 30, 2020 and are due January 29, 2021 by 3:00 PM Eastern Time.  Subapplicants are encouraged by FEMA to coordinate early with applicants.  

Sources and Additional Information:

NSF Announces Mid-scale Infrastructure Conference and Planning Opportunities for the Biological Sciences 
The National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Directorate for Biological Sciences (BIO) issued a Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) announcing its intention to support conferences and planning awards as part of the Mid-scale Research Infrastructure Initiative (MSRI).  The MSRI program, launched in fiscal year 2019, is designed to support the implementation of research capabilities and infrastructure ranging from $6 million to $70 million.  

The DCL recognizes the infrastructure needs of the biological community are diverse and range from smaller instrumentation needs to major facilities.  The DCL also recognizes that the community itself is in different stages of readiness to pursue MSRI funding and thus offers two different opportunities, conferences, and planning grants, to help promote project design and development at all stages.  

Conference proposals: BIO expects to support up to ten conferences to conceptualize potential projects that address one or more high-priority science goals within the research community.  BIO encourages conferences to support a diverse set of 20 to 50 attendees including relevant scientists, engineers, and educators from industry, the federal government, and international organizations.  Conference activities should yield a deliverable report to the community with recommendations that identify the gap in research infrastructure and outlines the strategy and evaluation of the success and impact.  

Planning proposals: BIO expects to support up to ten planning proposals to assist teams in carrying out limited preliminary activities to prepare for infrastructure projects with strong scientific merit.  Investigators should generate baseline cost estimates that include anticipated operations and maintenance costs as part of the planning process.  Proposals should also develop “plans for effective student training and the involvement of a diverse workforce in instrumentation, facility development, or data management/analysis.” 

Before submitting a proposal, applicants must reach out to BIOInfrastructure@nsf.gov to confirm their proposal fits within the bounds of the DCL.  After doing so, they will be directed to the appropriate program officer who will decide if the proposal is best suited for a conference or planning proposal submission.  Proposals or requests where applicants have not contacted the appropriate program officer will not be considered. 

Once an applicant has spoken with the relevant program officer, conference proposals should be submitted through the normal submission processes outlined in Chapter II.E.7 of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG).  Planning proposals should be submitted to the Infrastructure Capacity for Biological Research solicitation.  The DCL does not specify a due date for conference or planning proposal submissions or anticipated award amounts from BIO.  

Sources and Additional Information:  

EPA and USDA Announce Competition to Advance Agricultural Sustainability in the United States 
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced that they are partnering to launch the Joint EPA-USDA Partnership and Competition Next Gen Fertilizers to Advance Agricultural Sustainability in the United States.  This Challenge aims to identify concepts for novel technologies for fertilizers and other product innovations that can reduce environmental effects while maintaining or increasing crop yields.  The initiative is divided into two Challenge areas: Enhanced Efficiency Fertilizer (EEF): Environmental and Agronomic Challenge and the Next Gen Fertilizer Innovations Challenge.   

An informational webinar for the two Next Gen Fertilizer Challenges will be held on September 24, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. ET. This webinar will walk through the details of the Challenges and allow time for questions and answers with technical leads from the Partner and Collaborator organizations.  Participation in the informational webinar is not required for either challenge. 

Award Summary: Winners of the EEFs: Environmental and Agronomic Challenge will receive scientific evaluation and recognition from EPA, USDA, and other partners and participants; advancement to a greenhouse trial; and, pending greenhouse trial results and available funds, advancement to field trials.  No monetary prize will be awarded.  Winners of Stage 1 will also be invited to a showcasing event. 

Winners of the Next Gen Fertilizer Innovations Challenge will receive a minimum $10,000 award per winner from a total prize purse of $40,000 and be invited to the showcasing event, where winners of both Challenges will share ideas and spark innovation. 

Due Dates: Proposals for the EEFs: Environmental and Agronomic Challenge are due on October 30, 2020 by 11:59 p.m. ET.  Proposals for the Next Gen Fertilizer Innovations Challenge are due on November 30, 2020 by 11:59 p.m. ET. 

Eligibility: All Individuals or teams participating in the challenge by submitting a solution. 

Sources and Additional Information: 

EPA Solicits Proposals for Research Center on Vulnerabilities to Environmental Stressors
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Research and Development has issued a $1.9 million request for applications (RFA) for a Center for Early Lifestage Vulnerabilities to Environmental Stressors (Center).  The RFA was released through the Science to Achieve Results (STAR) grants program, EPA’s primary mechanism for funding extramural research.  

EPA intends that the Center will advance transdisciplinary research to address linkages between early life-stage development and exposure to chemicals and environmental stressors such as poverty, lack of access to adequate services, and rapid environmental changes (e.g., natural disasters).  Emphasis is placed on mental and physical health outcomes including, but not limited to, “attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), reduced IQ, obesity, lessened self-regulatory capacities, anxiety, depression, attention problems, lower memory function, or structural changes to the brain.”  

EPA has long supported research on environmental risks to children’s health, including through partnerships with the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences.  These efforts have yielded important insights into the relationship between single-chemical exposure and certain health outcomes.  Through this RFA, EPA is seeking to build upon that progress by pursuing “systems-based, multi-stressor and possibly, multi-outcome approaches.”  To that end, the RFA encourages proposals that focus on the development and demonstration of new quantitative methods and approaches for establishing exposure-outcome connections through the integration of epidemiological, toxicological, public health, environmental science, and other data.  

Award Size and Performance Period: EPA intends to provide $1.9 million to support one award under this RFA for a total performance period of four years.   

Eligibility: This solicitation is open to institutions of higher education and non-profit organizations, including hospitals.  Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) may not apply, though FFRDC employees are able to participate in “planning, conducting, and analyzing the research directed by the applicant.”  For-profit entities are ineligible to apply.  There is no limit on the number of proposals submitted per institution.

Important Dates:  
  • An informational webinar for will be hosted on September 15, 2020. 
  • Applications are due November 12, 2020.  

Sources and Additional Information: 

NSF Releases Two Lead Agency Opportunities in Collaboration with International Partners
On August 31, the National Science Foundation (NSF) announced, via two Dear Colleague Letters (DCL), new opportunities to support international collaboration.  Specifically, the two DCLs will enable collaborative projects in specific research areas with the UK and with France to undergo a single review under lead agency agreements.  Both lead agency opportunities allow for reciprocal acceptance of merit review through unsolicited mechanisms with the goal of reducing barriers for working internationally.  NSF supports several lead agency agreements across the organization with various international partners.
 
The first DCL between the NSF Directorate for Biological Sciences (NSF/BIO) and the UK Research Innovation (UKRI) Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council’s (BBSRC) announces the lead agency opportunity in Biological Informatics, Microbes and the Host Immune System, Quantum Biology and Synthetic Cells.  Proposals must be aligned to priorities in the identified NSF BIO divisions and BBSRC’s Responsive Mode priorities and provide a clear rationale for the need for a US-UK collaboration in these areas, including the unique expertise and synergy that the collaborating groups will bring to the project.  Prior to submission, teams must decide where the largest proportion of research lies (NSF BIO or UKRI BBSRC) and then contact the appropriate program officer at the lead agency to discuss and then confirm that that agency will act as the lead agency.
 
The second DCL is between the NSF Division of Physics in the Directorate for Mathematical and Physical Sciences and Division of Molecular and Cellular Biosciences in BIO (NSF/PHY and NSF/MCB) and the French Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) to support collaborations at the Physics – Molecular and Cellular Biosciences Interface, again through the lead agency opportunity.  Proposals under this DCL must address the priorities of each of the participating entities and provide a clear rationale for the need for a US-France collaboration, including the unique expertise and synergy that the collaborating groups will bring to the project.  Per the DCL, “projects providing innovative methodological or conceptual approaches to a biological question and with a strong theoretical physics component are strongly encouraged.”
 
Award Information:  Proposers should note that these new lead agency opportunities do not represent new funding and will be in competition with other proposals submitted to the priority areas and agency programs identified in the DCLs.  Please see each DCL for more detailed information.
 
Deadlines:
  • For the UKRI/BBSRC-NSF/BIO Lead Agency Opportunity, Intentions to Submit are due October 21, 2020 and feedback is expected three weeks after the submission deadline.  Full proposals for UKRI/BBSRC are due January 2021 while full proposals to NSF/BIO are accepted anytime.
  • For the ANR – NSF/PHY/MCB Lead Agency Opportunity, proposals will be reviewed by ANR.  The deadline to submit letters of intent (or submission of the registration file) to ANR is December 1, 2020 (Paris time) and the full proposals are due to ANR by April 2021.
Sources and Additional Information:
Copyright © 2020 Lewis-Burke Associates LLC, All rights reserved.
Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp