Fiscal Year 2009: No Current Data Available Fiscal Year 2010: Our funding is matched 1:1 by local governmental entities and goes primarily towards two types of projects.
Those projects are stream and/or meadow restorations, and erosion control projects.
Our purpose is to increase the quality of the water that runs into Lake Tahoe from surface roads and developed areas of the Lake Tahoe Basin Watershed.
Stream/meadow restorations help to increase the quality of the water that comes through the watershed by way of ephemeral and permanent creeks and waterways.
Erosion control projects seek to reduce the source of the pollutants, correct the hydrology of the area, and treat the runoff for pollutants of concern.
We also fund effectiveness monitoring and some BMP research to a lesser degree.
Fiscal Year 2011: No Current Data Available
Established in 1862, the Department of Agriculture serves all Americans through anti-hunger efforts, stewardship of nearly 200 million acres of national forest and rangelands, and through product safety and conservation efforts. The USDA opens markets for American farmers and ranchers and provides food for needy people around the world.
Fiscal Year 2009: Over the last 3 years, our program has seen many phases of many projects be planned and implemented. These projects usually take several years of environmental planning and design work before they are implemented. The following is a partial list of the jurisdictions and their respective projects that have been funded in part by the Erosion Control Grants program: Placer County has planned or implemented projects in Kings Beach (EC and clean water pipe bypass), Tahoe Estates EC, Brockway EC, Lake Forest (EC and stream restoration), West Sunnyside EC, and Tahoe Pines EC. The Lake Forest Stream Restoration brings back to the meadow a stream that has been in an underground pipe for over 35 years. El Dorado County has planned or implemented projects in Montgomery Estates (EC), Apalachee (EC), Sawmill (EC), and Christmas Valley (EC). Washoe County has done planning and implementation in two phases of the Crystal Bay area. The City of South Lake has done project planning and implementation for several phases of the Sierra Tract, several phases Al Tahoe (EC), and two phases of the particularly difficult Bijou area(EC). Douglas County has been working on phases of the Lake Village project. Fiscal Year 2010: No Current Data Available Fiscal Year 2011: No Current Data Available
Uses and Use Restrictions
Only after water quality and soil conservation thresholds have been achieved, funds may be used to address other environmental threshold categories.
Payments shall be used only to carry out a project or proposed project that is part of the environmental improvement program adopted by the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency in 1998.
Funds require a 1:1 match by the states of California and Nevada.
Eligible applicants: Local (inluces State-designated Indian Tribes, excludes institutions of higher education and hospitals).
Beneficiary Eligibility: Governing bodies of each of the political subdivisions (including public utilities) located in the Lake Tahoe Basin.
No Credentials or documentation are required. This program is excluded from coverage under OMB Circular No. A-87.
Aplication and Award Process
Submittal of an annual list of priority projects, along with written proposals for each of the identified priority projects.
The USFS has chosen to adopt the State guidelines for these proposals, since they meet all the needs for project narratives for federal grant considerations, with one additional requirement.
That additional requirement is clear identification of sources and amounts of proposed match funding.
Implementation of construction projects under awarded grants are not allowed until a signed project decision under NEPA has been made, allowing the use of federal grant funds for implementation.
Local Office monitors grant awards to assure compliance of this restriction.
Planning, design, and monitoring grants do not require an environmental impact assessment.
An environmental impact assessment is required for this program.
This program is excluded from coverage under E.O.
OMB Circular No. A-102 applies to this program. This program is excluded from coverage under OMB Circular No. A-110. Project narratives submitted through the pre-application process are reviewed by an interagency technical advisory committee convened by the Federal grants program managers. Projects are then identified for selection for award, along with instructions for any needed revisions to the project narratives. At that time, eligible applicants submit revised narratives along with standard application forms and assurances to the Local Office, as furnished by the Federal agency.
Award letter sent to grantee, with identification of grant requirements, in letter from Local Office.
Contact the headquarters or regional office, as appropriate, for application deadlines.
Lake Tahoe Restoration Act, Public Law 106-506, as amended by Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2004, Public Law 108-108. New legislation has been introduced in Congress for LTRA reauthorization and revision, and is expected to be passed by November of 2010. Proposed revisions would not change overall objectives or funding opportunities for this program.
Range of Approval/Disapproval Time
From 90 to 120 days.
From 60 to 90 days. Extensions can be made for individual grants as long as end dates do not exceed five years post award date.
Formula and Matching Requirements
Statutory formulas are not applicable to this program.
Matching Requirements: Percent: 50.%. Matching requirements are specified in Public Law 106-506, as amended, Public Law 108-108, Section 337. Match must be provided on a 1:1 basis from the states of California and Nevada.
MOE requirements are not applicable to this program.
Length and Time Phasing of Assistance
Grants are awarded for a period not to exceed 5 years. Invoices may be submitted no more frequently than monthly. See the following for information on how assistance is awarded/released: Payments made based on authorization and negotiation of provisions with cooperator.
Post Assistance Requirements
Bi-annual accomplishment reports are required by Local Office.
No cash reports are required.
No progress reports are required.
Financial expenditures reporting is required.
Performance monitoring is not applicable.
In accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular No. A-133 (Revised, June 27, 2003), "Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations," nonfederal entities that expend financial assistance of $500,000 or more in Federal awards will have a single or a program-specific audit conducted for that year. Nonfederal entities that expend less than $500,000 a year in Federal awards are exempt from Federal audit requirements for that year, except as noted in Circular No. A-133.
Financial and programmatic records must be retained for three years from the date of submission and approval of final financial reports.
12-5232-0-1-302 - 1214X5232.
(Project Grants (Discretionary)) FY 09 $10,000,000; FY 10 est $10,000,000; FY 11 est $10,000,000
Range and Average of Financial Assistance
In FY 08, $229,575 to $2,600,000. Average award: $1,237,878.
Regulations, Guidelines, and Literature
Regional or Local Office
See Regional Agency Offices. Barb Shanley or Genevieve Villemarie, Forest Service, 35 College Drive, South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150, Telephone: (530) 543-2657 or 2783, Fax: (530) 543-2693, email: firstname.lastname@example.org or email@example.com.
Barbara Shanley, 35 College Drive, South Lake Tahoe, California 96150 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Phone: (530) 543-2657.
Criteria for Selecting Proposals
Grants must address planning, construction, or monitoring of projects identified in the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency environmental improvement program. For this, primary criteria projects are selected based on direction provided in the LTRA to provide to the maximum extent practicable that each political subdivision receives some funding and to allocate funding based on the relative need for and merits of projects.