Restoration Projects for the Richardson Hill Road Landfill | Apply Online

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is the "Restoration Projects for the Richardson Hill Road Landfill" funding opportunity?

It was a discretionary grant competition administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (DOI-FWS). The opportunity is titled "Restoration Projects for the Richardson Hill Road Landfill" and is associated with Funding Opportunity Number F16AS00011 and CFDA 15.658.

What problem or impact was this funding intended to address?

The funding supported environmental and natural resource restoration work tied to injuries caused by contaminants associated with the Richardson Hill Road Landfill site. The intent was to compensate for harmed natural resources and for lost human uses of those resources.

What was the main purpose of the projects funded under this opportunity?

The core purpose was to fund projects in the Upper Delaware or Susquehanna watershed that would restore, replace, or acquire the equivalent of natural resources that were harmed and/or address lost human uses of those resources.

Where did projects need to be located to be considered eligible?

Projects needed to be located in the Upper Delaware watershed or the Susquehanna watershed, as specified in the opportunity description.

What kinds of activities were considered within the scope of eligible work?

The scope centered on compensatory-type restoration actions. Examples described in the opportunity include on-the-ground restoration or enhancement of habitat and aquatic systems, replacement of injured resources with equivalent resources elsewhere in the watershed, or acquisition of equivalent resources (such as through purchases or easements) when direct restoration is not feasible or would not fully compensate for losses.

What does "compensatory-type restoration" mean in the context of this opportunity?

It refers to actions that make up for damaged natural resources or diminished services caused by the contamination impacts, rather than routine operations or unrelated conservation efforts. The focus is on compensation for injury and lost services tied to the Richardson Hill Road Landfill site.

Could projects focus on recreational or public-use benefits, not just ecological restoration?

Yes. The opportunity explicitly referenced lost human uses, including impacts such as reduced recreational fishing. That indicates projects could focus on rebuilding public benefits and access connected to natural resources, so long as they align with the goal of compensating for site-related injuries and losses and occur within the specified watersheds.

What types of outcomes or improvements were specifically suggested as fitting the intent?

Based on the description, projects improving fish populations, aquatic habitat quality, stream connectivity, angling opportunities, or access to waterways could fit the intent, provided they address the types of losses caused by contamination from the landfill site and are located in the Upper Delaware or Susquehanna watershed.

Were projects required to directly restore the exact damaged resource at the exact damaged location?

Not necessarily. The opportunity described options including replacement of injured resources with equivalent resources elsewhere in the watershed and acquisition of equivalent resources when direct restoration is not feasible or would not fully compensate for losses.

What does "acquisition of equivalent resources" mean here?

It refers to obtaining resources that provide equivalent natural resource value or services to what was harmed, such as through purchases or easements, particularly when direct restoration is not feasible or would not fully compensate for losses.

Who was eligible to apply?

Eligibility was described as "unrestricted," meaning the opportunity was open to any type of entity, subject to any additional clarifications that would have been provided in the full announcement.

What kind of federal award instrument was used?

Awards were made through a cooperative agreement.

What is the significance of a cooperative agreement for applicants and awardees?

A cooperative agreement typically means the federal agency expects to have substantial involvement in the project beyond standard grant oversight. The description noted involvement could include coordination on technical approaches, review of deliverables, and alignment with restoration objectives connected to the site-related injury determination.

How much funding was available per award?

The award ceiling was $270,000.

How many awards were expected to be made?

The opportunity indicated an expectation of about three awards, suggesting multiple smaller projects rather than a single large effort.

When was this opportunity posted and when did it close?

The opportunity was posted on October 27, 2015, and had a closing date of December 1, 2015. The posted information indicated no change between the original and current closing dates.

Which federal agency administered this competition?

It was administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (DOI-FWS).

What is the Funding Opportunity Number for this program?

The Funding Opportunity Number is F16AS00011.

What CFDA number is associated with this opportunity?

The opportunity is identified under CFDA 15.658.

Was the program designed for large, long-term funding or smaller, targeted projects?

Based on the award ceiling ($270,000) and an expectation of about three awards, it was described as a relatively small, project-focused competition intended to direct a limited pool of restoration funding to targeted projects within the two watersheds.