HomeMy WebLinkAboutPR 24228: PARTICIPATION IN THE US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, PORT INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE SHRIMP BOAT PIER City of 7-
of t rtltu
www.PortArthurTx.gov
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
Date: March 14, 2025
To: The Honorable Mayor and City Council
Through: Ronald Burton CPM, City Manager
From: Calvin Matthews,P.E.,Water Utilities Director
RE: PR No. 24228—Authorize City Manager to Participate in the U.S. Department of
Transportation,Port Infrastructure Development Program Grant Application for
the Shrimp Boat Pier
Introduction:
This Agenda Item intends to seek the Council's approval to apply to the Port Infrastructure
Development Program Grants Program for the Shrimp Boat Pier.
Background:
The City is eligible to apply for grant funds from the U.S. Department of Transportation, U.S.
Maritime Administration Port Infrastructure Program (MARAD) Grants Program funding
opportunity(Exhibit A).
The Utilities Department has identified a grant program that can provide money to repair the
City's Shrimp Boat Pier. Ardurra will complete the technical part of the application,submit and
manage the grant once awarded provided the City Manager is authorized to participate in the
grant.
Budget Impact:
The project is expected to have a cost of$8 million, the grant is 80% Federally funded and the
City's share would be 20% ($1.6 million) if awarded. There is no budgetary impact to submit
the application.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council approve PR No. 24228, authorizing the City Manager
to apply for the Port Infrastructure Development Program Grant prepared by Ardurra, as
discussed and/or outlined above.
"Remember,we are here to serve the Citizens of Port Arthur"
P.O.Box 1089 X Port Arthur,Texas 77641-1089 X 409.983.8101 X FAX 409.982.6743
PR No. 24228
3/14/2025 CM
Page 1 of 3
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER
TO APPLY FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION, PORT INFRASTRUCTURE
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE SHRIMP BOAT
PIER. FUNDING APPROPRIATION IS REQUIRED ONCE
THIS APPLICATION IS SELECTED FOR AWARD. THERE
IS NO BUDGETARY IMPACT TO APPLY. THE GRANT IS
80% FEDERALLY FUNDED, WITH A 20% RECIPIENT
MATCH.
WHEREAS,the City of Port Arthur is always pursuing funding opportunities that address
the safety and integrity of City facilities, and critical infrastructure for its citizens; and,
WHEREAS, the City is eligible to apply for grant funds from the U.S. Department of
Transportation, U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) Port Infrastructure Program Grants
Program funding opportunity(Exhibit A) for the Shrimp Boat Pier; and,
WHEREAS,the Utilities Department has identified the grant opportunity and Ardurra will
complete the technical part of the application,submit and manage the grant once awarded provided
the City Manager is authorized to participate in the grant; and,
WHEREAS, the U.S. Department of Transportation, U.S. Maritime Administration
(MARAD)Port Infrastructure Program Grants Program allocates 80%percent of the total eligible
activity costs under the federal share and requires recipients to contribute a 20% share; and,
WHEREAS, the total project cost is estimated at $8 million the City share will be $1.6
million; and,
WHEREAS, it is in the City's best interest to participate in the U.S. Department of
Transportation, U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) Port Infrastructure Program Grants
Program.
PR No. 24228
3/14/2025 CM
Page 2 of 3
NOW THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF PORT ARTHUR,TEXAS:
THAT,the facts and opinions in the preamble are true and correct; and,
THAT, the City Manager is hereby authorized to submit a grant application for the U.S.
Department of Transportation, U.S. Maritime Administration (MARAD) Port Infrastructure
Program Grants Program; and,
THAT a copy of the caption of this resolution is spread upon the minutes of the City
Council.
READ, ADOPTED, AND APPROVED THIS day of ,2025 at
a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Port Arthur, Texas, by the following vote:
AYES: Mayor
Councilmembers:
NOES:
Thurman Bill Bartie
Mayor
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Sherri Bellard Roxann Pais Cotroneo
City Secretary City Attorney
PR No. 24228
3/14/2025 CM
Page 3 of 3
APPROVED FOR ADMINISTRATION:
1
OVIIIFF
\ /////'
Ronald Burton, CP►' Calvin Matthews, P.E.
City Manager Director of Water Utilities
APPROVED AS FOR AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS:
/);
1 J) ic(�c , , `
i n E illi B
Lyn a(Lyn) Boswell, MA, ICMA-CM Cl Clifton ams, Jr.,J . C
Director of Finance Purchasing Manager
1
FY 2025 Notice of Funding Opportunity
Port Infrastructure Development Program
Maritime Administration
US Department of Transportation(DOT)
A. BASIC INFORMATION 3
1. CHANGES FROM THE FY 2024 NOFO 4
B. ELIGIBILITY 4
1. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS 4
2. APPLICATION LIMIT 5
3. COST SHARING 5
4. PRE-AWARD AUTHORITY 6
5. LOCATION DESIGNATIONS AND DEFINITIONS 6
6. ELIGIBLE PROJECTS 7
7. PROJECT COMPONENTS 9
8. REDUCED AWARDS 9
C. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 10
1. PROGRAM HISTORY AND AUTHORIZATION 10
2. PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 10
3. AWARD SIZE 11
4. RESTRICTIONS ON FUNDING 11
5. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS 12
6. PERFORMANCE MEASURES 12
D. APPLICATION CONTENT AND FORMAT 12
1. STANDARD FORM 424 13
2. FY 2025 PIDP COVER PAGE 13
3. PROJECT NARRATIVE 15
a) NARRATIVE SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION 15
b) NARRATIVE SECTION II: PROJECT LOCATION 15
c) NARRATIVE SECTION III: GRANT FUNDS,SOURCES,AND USE OF FUNDS 16
d) NARRATIVE SECTION IV: MERIT CRITERIA 17
e) NARRATIVE SECTION V: SELECTION CONSIDERATIONS 18
1) NARRATIVE SECTION VI:PROJECT READINESS 18
s
2
g) NARRATIVE SECTION VII: STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS 18
E. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND DEADLINE 21
1. ADDRESS TO REQUEST APPLICATION PACKAGE 21
2. UNIQUE ENTITY IDENTIFIER(UEI)AND SYSTEM FOR AWARD MANAGEMENT
(SAM) 71
3. SUBMISSION DATES AND TIMES 21
4. INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW 22
5. COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 508 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973 22
F. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION 22
1. CRITERIA 22
2. REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS 37
G. AWARD NOTICES 39
1. HOW PROJECT SELECTIONS ARE ANNOUNCED 39
2. ANNOUNCEMENT DATES 39
3. PRE-AWARD COSTS 39
4. REIMBURSABLE PROGRAM 39
H. POST-AWARD REQUIREMENTS AND ADMINISTRATION 40
1. ADMINISTRATIVE AND NATIONAL POLICY REQUIREMENTS 40
2. REPORTING 42
I. FEDERAL AWARD AGENCY CONTACT(S) 44
J. OTHER INFORMATION 44
1. PROTECTION OF CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION 44
2. PUBLICATION AND SHARING OF APPLICATION INFORMATION 44
1
A. BASIC INFORMATION
SUMMARY OVERVIEW OF KEY INFORMATION: Port Infrastructure Development Program
(PIDP)Discretionary Grant Opportunity
Topic Description
Federal Agency Maritime Administration(MARAD)
Name
Funding Opportunity FY 2025 Port Infrastructure Development Program
Title
Announcement Type This is the initial announcement for the FY 2025 round of PIDP grants.
Funding Opportunity MA-PID-25-001
Number
Assistance Listing 20.823 Port Infrastructure Development Program
Number
Funding Details It is anticipated that roughly$450 million in funding will be available for the FY
2025 funding opportunity,unless additional funding becomes available for the
program under the FY 2025 Appropriations Act.
Key Dates Applications due: April 30,2025 at 11:59:59 p.m. E.D.T.
Executive Summary PIDP assists in funding eligible projects for the purpose of improving the safety,
efficiency, or reliability of the movement of goods through ports and intermodal
connections to ports.
Eligible Applicants are:
• A State;
• A political subdivision of a State, or a local government;
• A public agency or publicly chartered authority established by 1 or more
States;
• A special purpose district with a transportation function;
• An Indian Tribe, or a consortium of Indian Tribes;
• A multistate or multijurisdictional group of entities described above;
• A lead entity described above jointly with a private entity or group of
private entities, including the owners or operators of a facility, or
collection of facilities at a port.
Eligible Project Projects within the boundary of a port, or outside the boundary of a port and directly
Types related to port operations or to an intermodal connection to a port that improve the
safety, efficiency, or reliability of:
• The loading and unloading of goods at a port;
• The movement of goods into, out of, around,or within a port;
• Operational improvements at a port;
• Environmental and emissions mitigation measures; or
4
• Infrastructure that supports seafood and seafood-related businesses.
(NOTE: Section B.6. provides additional information.)
Questions Email PIDPgrantsna,dot.gov
Agency Contact PIDPgrants(cb,dot.gov or call Aubrey Parsons at 202-366-8047
Information
1. CHANGES FROM THE FY 2024 NOFO
This FY 2025 PIDP NOFO makes the following changes from the FY 2024 PIDP NOFO:
• Updates rating rubrics for the statutory merit criteria.
• Clarifies guidance related to the factors reviewers will consider in project readiness
evaluations.
• Updates the organization of the NOFO and use of references to comply with the recent
changes to 2 CFR Part 200 Appendix I.
B. ELIGIBILITY
1. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS
An eligible applicant for a FY 2025 PIDP grant is:
• a State, a political subdivision of a State or a local government,
• a public agency or publicly chartered authority established by one or more States,
• a special purpose district with a transportation function,
• an Indian Tribe(as defined in section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education
Assistance Act(25 U.S.C. 5304),without regard to capitalization,) or a consortium of
Indian Tribes,
• a multistate or multijurisdictional group of entities described above, or
• a lead entity described above jointly with a private entity or group of private entities,
including the owners or operators of a facility, or collection of facilities, at a port.
Federal agencies and individuals are not eligible applicants for the FY 2025 PIDP.
If submitting a joint application, applicants must identify in the application the eligible lead
applicant as the primary point of contact. The lead applicant,who will be the primary recipient of
the award and responsible for financial administration and monitoring of the project, must be an
eligible lead entity described above(i.e., not a private entity). Joint applications should include a
description of the roles and responsibilities of each applicant. If a joint applicant is providing
some or all of the required non-Federal matching funds,a letter of funds commitment from that
applicant should be provided as an attachment to the application.
MARAD expects that the lead applicant submitting the application will administer and deliver
the project. If the lead applicant intends to act as a pass-through entity for disbursing funds to a
subrecipient(including a private-entity joint applicant, if applicable)who will deliver all or a
portion of the project, that intention should be made clear in the application and a letter of
support from the intended subrecipient should be included as an attachment to the application.
5
Lead applicants intending to make subawards under their proposed FY 2025 PIDP project should
refer to 2 CFR 200.331-333 on how to make subrecipient determinations and what requirements
apply to pass-through entities. Applicants should be aware that all contracts executed under the
PIDP award that create procurement relationships must follow the procurement standards at 2
CFR 200.317-327, including requirements regarding competition.
In order to be eligible for award, eligible applicants must provide a written statement that they
have the authority to plan,construct,own, operate, and maintain the grant-funded project. In the
case of joint applications,at least one of the eligible applicants must demonstrate this authority.
Refer to Section C.4. of this notice for restrictions on funding.
2. APPLICATION LIMIT
Each eligible applicant may submit no more than one application. If an applicant submits
multiple applications, only the last one received by MARAD will be considered.
3. COST SHARING
Cost sharing means the portion of the project's cost that is not paid by Federal funds. Cost share
funds are typically stated as a percentage of the total project cost. Per 46 U.S.C. 54301(a)(8), the
Federal share of the total costs of an eligible PIDP project must not exceed 80 percent; however,
the Secretary may increase the Federal share of costs above 80 percent for:
(1)a grant for a project that is located in a rural area; or
(2)a grant awarded to a small project at a small port under 46 U.S.C. 54301(b).
Applicants should use the following equation when determining the cost share for their project:
(PIDP Grant Request + Other Federal Funds)
= Federal Cost Share
Total Project Cost
For the PIDP, Total Project Cost means the sum of future eligible Federal and non-Federal costs
that have not yet been incurred.
Non-Federal sources include State funds originating from programs funded by State revenue,
local funds originating from State or local revenue-funded programs, or private funds. If repaid
from non-Federal sources, Federal credit assistance is considered non-Federal share. The
application must demonstrate, such as through a commitment letter or other documentation
included in the PIDP application, the sources of the non-Federal funds. Unless otherwise
authorized by statute, funds used to satisfy the non-Federal cost-share requirements of a different
Federal program may not be counted as the non-Federal cost share for both the FY 2025 PIDP
grant award and another Federal grant program.
MARAD will not consider previously incurred costs or previously expended or encumbered
funds towards the non-Federal cost-share requirement, except for awards made under 46 U.S.C.
54301(b) (small projects at small ports). For awards made under 46 U.S.C. 54301(b), MARAD
may consider certain eligible pre-construction costs towards the non-Federal cost-share
requirement if incurred after the date of application submittal but before announcement of
project selection, if the costs are clearly indicated in the budget included in the application and
comply with all applicable Federal requirements. All non-Federal cost-share funds are subject to
the same Federal requirements as awarded funds.
6
In addition to these cost share requirements, cost share will be evaluated according to the
"Leveraging Federal Funding" criterion.
For each project that receives a PIDP grant award, the terms of the award will require the
recipient to complete the project using at least the amount of non-Federal funding that was
specified in the application. If the actual costs of the project are greater than the costs estimated
in the application, the recipient will be responsible for addressing the funding shortfall by
providing additional funds. If the actual costs of the project are less than the costs estimated in
the application, MARAD will generally reduce the Federal contribution to ensure the recipient
maintains the level of non-Federal funding stated in the application.
4. PRE-AWARD AUTHORITY
Consistent with the provisions in 46 U.S.C. 54301(a)(10)(B)and 2 CFR 200.458, unless"pre-
award costs"are authorized by MARAD in writing after MARAD's announcement of FY 2025
PIDP awards or a Small Project at a Small Port applicant has included pre-award costs in the
application budget, consistent with Section B.3 above, any costs incurred prior to MARAD's
obligation of funds for a project are ineligible for reimbursement and are ineligible to count as
match for cost share requirements.'
5. LOCATION DESIGNATIONS AND DEFINITIONS
Great Lakes port: A port on the Great Lakes and their connecting and tributary waters as defined
under 33 CFR 83.03(o).
Coastal seaport: A port on navigable waters of the United States or territories that is subject to
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers regulatory jurisdiction for oceanic and coastal waters under
33 CFR. 329.12 or that is otherwise capable of receiving oceangoing vessels with a draft of at
least 20 feet(other than a Great Lakes port).
Inland river port: A harbor, marine terminal, or other shore side facility used principally for the
movement of goods that is not at a coastal seaport or Great Lakes port.
Rural area: An area located outside of a 2020 U.S. Census-designated urban area with a
population of 50,000 or more persons.2
Urban area: An area located within(or on the boundary of)a 2020 U.S. Census-designated urban
area with a population of 50,000 or more persons.
Climate Change: Changes in average weather conditions that persist over multiple decades or
longer due to natural or anthropogenic activities, especially from greenhouse gas emissions.
Climate change encompasses both increases and decreases in temperature, as well as shifts in
precipitation, changing risk of certain types of severe weather events,and changes to other
features of the climate system.
1 Pre-award costs are only costs incurred directly pursuant to the negotiation and anticipation of the PIDP award
where such costs are necessary for efficient and timely performance of the scope of work,as determined by
MARAD.
2 Please use the DOT Rural Eligibility map for PIDP at https://www.transportation.gov/rural/eligibility to determine
rural eligibility.This map identifies the areas in the 2020 U.S.Census that have a population of less than 50,000 and,
therefore,are rural areas for the purposes of PIDP.
7
Development phase activities: Includes planning, feasibility analysis,revenue forecasting,
environmental review,permitting, and preliminary engineering and design work.
Environmental justice: The fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of
race, color, national origin, or income,with respect to the development, implementation, and
enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.
Equity: The consistent and systematic fair,just, and impartial treatment of all individuals,
including individuals who belong to underserved communities that have been denied such
treatment.
Large project: A project at a port other than a Small Port, regardless of the amount of PIDP
funding sought in the application; or a project at a Small Port for which the amount of PIDP
funding sought in the application is greater than$11.25 million.
Port resilience: The ability to anticipate,prepare for, adapt to, withstand, respond to, and recover
from operational disruptions and sustain critical operations at ports, including disruptions caused
by natural or climate-related hazards(such as extreme temperatures, extreme rainfall, sea level
change, Great Lakes and river water level changes, flooding, earthquakes, landslides, extreme
storms [hurricanes, cyclones,typhoons, northeasters, etc.], storm surge,tsunami inundation,
tornadoes,high wind events,wildfire,volcanic activity,or other extreme weather events)or
human-made disruptions such as dredging and sediment management, terrorism, cyberattacks,
disruptions to Position,Navigation, and Timing(PNT)data via the Global Positioning System
(GPS)whether intentional or unintentional,public health emergencies, or shortages/bottlenecks
at key elements of the supply chain.
Small Port: A coastal seaport, Great Lakes, or inland river port to and from which the average
annual tonnage of cargo for the immediately preceding three calendar years from the time an
application is submitted is less than 8,000,000 short tons, as determined by using U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers data or data by an independent audit if the Secretary determines that it is
acceptable to use such data instead of using U.S. Army Corps of Engineers data. When using
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers data to determine whether the applicant qualifies as a Small Port,
MARAD will use data that is specific to the eligible applicant. If an eligible applicant provides
data by an independent audit, MARAD will use such data if it is a reasonable substitute for U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers data.
Small Project at a Small Port: A project at a Small Port seeking less than or equal to $11.25
million in funding under 46 U.S.C. 54301(b).
6. ELIGIBLE PROJECTS
Eligible projects for FY 2025 PIDP grants shall be located either within the boundary of a port,
or outside the boundary of a port and directly related to port operations or to an intermodal
connection to a port. Grants may be made for capital projects that will be used to improve the
safety, efficiency, or reliability of:
I. the loading and unloading of goods at the port, such as for marine terminal
equipment;
8
II. the movement of goods into, out of, around, or within a port, such as for highway or
rail infrastructure, intermodal facilities, freight intelligent transportation systems, and
digital infrastructure systems;
III. operational improvements, including projects to improve port resilience;
N. environmental and emissions mitigation measures, including projects for—
a. port electrification or electrification master planning;
b. harbor craft or equipment replacements or retrofits;
c. development of port or terminal microgrids;
d. provision of idling reduction infrastructure;
e. purchase of cargo handling equipment and related infrastructure;
f. worker training to support electrification technology;
g. installation of port bunkering facilities from ocean-going vessels for fuels;
h. electric vehicle charging or hydrogen refueling infrastructure for drayage
and medium or heavy-duty trucks and locomotives that service the port
and related grid upgrades; or
i. other related port activities, including charging infrastructure, electric
rubber-tired gantry cranes,and anti-idling technologies; or
V. port and port-related infrastructure that supports seafood and seafood-related
businesses, including the loading and unloading of commercially harvested fish and
fish products, seafood processing, cold storage, and other related infrastructure.
Activities eligible for funding under PIDP planning grants include those related to development
phase activities—such as planning, feasibility analysis, revenue forecasting, environmental
review,permitting,preliminary engineering and design work,development of master plans,
electrification master planning, and planning to address a port's ability to withstand probable
occurrence or recurrence of an emergency or major disaster—of eligible PIDP capital projects
that will not result in construction with FY 2025 PIDP funding.
Under the FY 2025 PIDP, if an application includes right-of-way acquisition,the project will be
considered a capital project.
This program will not fund construction,reconstruction,reconditioning, or purchase of a vessel,
unless the Secretary determines such vessel is necessary for a project and is not already receiving
assistance under 46 U.S.C. chapter 537. In addition,this program will not fund any project
within a small shipyard(as defined in 46 U.S.C. 54101).
Improvements to Federally owned facilities are ineligible under the FY 2025 PIDP,unless they
are projects investing in port facilities that are located on Tribal land and for which title or
maintenance responsibility is vested in the Federal Government.
This program will not fund the purchase or installation of fully automated cargo handling
equipment, or the installation of terminal infrastructure that is designed for fully automated cargo
handling equipment, if the Secretary determines that such equipment would result in a net loss of
good jobs or reduction in the quality of jobs within the port or port terminal. In general, fully
Fir
automated cargo handling systems transfer materials without the need, or a significantly reduced
need, for human assistance. Such systems may be remotely operated or monitored,with or
without the exercise of human intervention or control. Applicants that propose projects that
include the acquisition of eligible cargo handling equipment or terminal infrastructure for cargo
handling equipment must indicate in their application whether or not the equipment is fully
automated(or whether the terminal infrastructure is designed for fully automated equipment). If
fully automated equipment is proposed to be acquired or terminal infrastructure for such
equipment is proposed to be created,the applicant must provide information describing the job
changes that will result from the project, including supporting evidence demonstrating that the
project will not directly result in a net loss of good jobs or degradation of job quality.
7. PROJECT COMPONENTS
An application must describe only one project, but that project may contain more than one
component and may describe components that may be carried out by parties other than the
applicant. MARAD expects, and will impose requirements on, fund recipients to ensure that all
components included in an application will be delivered as part of the PIDP project, regardless of
whether a component includes Federal funding. The status of each component should be clearly
described(for example, in the project schedule and budget).MARAD may award funds for a
component, instead of the larger project, if that component: (1) independently meets minimum
award amounts described in Section C and all eligibility requirements described in Section B; (2)
independently aligns with the selection criteria identified in Section F; and(3)meets National
Environmental Policy Act(NEPA)requirements with respect to independent utility. Independent
utility means that the component will represent a transportation improvement that is usable even
if no other improvement is made in the area and will be ready for intended use upon completion
of that component's construction. All project components that are presented together in a single
application must demonstrate a relationship or connection among them or MARAD may fund
only one or more of the connected components and reduce the PIDP award.
MARAD strongly encourages applicants to identify in their applications the project components
that have independent utility and separately detail costs and requested PIDP funding for those
components. If the application identifies one or more project components with independent
utility,the application should clearly identify how each component addresses the selection
criteria and produces benefits on its own, in addition to describing how the full proposal of
which the component is a part addresses the selection criteria described in Section F.
Applicants should be aware that, depending upon the relationship between project components
and applicable Federal law, DOT funding of some project components may make other project
components subject to Federal requirements.
8. REDUCED AWARDS
If selected for award,MARAD may decrease the PIDP funding amount from the applicant's
request if some elements of the project are ineligible or to comply with statutory set asides such
as those related to geographic preference or small projects at small ports.
10
C. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
1. PROGRAM HISTORY AND AUTHORIZATION
The PIDP statute, codified at 46 U.S.C. 54301, establishes the port and intermodal improvement
program to improve the safety, efficiency, or reliability of the movement of goods through ports
and intermodal connections to ports. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act(Pub. L. 117-
58,November 15, 2021) ("Bipartisan Infrastructure Law"or`BIL")appropriated $450 million to
the PIDP for FY 2025 to make discretionary grants for eligible PIDP projects. In addition to the
FY 2025 BIL PIDP funds,FY 2025 Appropriations Act funding, if appropriated, and unobligated
prior year PIDP funds may be made available and awarded under this solicitation to eligible
projects.
2. PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The goal of PIDP is to assist in funding eligible projects for the purpose of improving the safety,
efficiency, or reliability of the movement of goods through ports and intermodal connections to
ports and that advance the Departmental priorities of safety, equity, Justice40, climate and
sustainability, workforce development,job quality, and wealth creation,as described in the
Department's Strategic Plan3 and executive orders. Projects selected under this Notice are
intended to further the program's goals and objectives.
The Department seeks to fund projects under the PIDP that reduce greenhouse gas emissions in
the transportation sector; incorporate evidence-based climate resilience measures and features;
avoid adverse environmental impacts to air or water quality, wetlands, and endangered species;
and address the disproportionate negative environmental impacts of transportation on
disadvantaged communities, consistent with Executive Order 14008, Tackling the Climate Crisis
at Home and Abroad.
In addition,the Department seeks to award projects under the PIDP that proactively evaluate
whether a project will create proportional impacts to all populations in a project area and
increase equitable access to project benefits, consistent with Executive Order 14091, Further
Advancing Racial Equity and Support for Underserved Communities Through the Federal
Government.
The Department also seeks to award projects that address environmental justice,particularly for
communities that have experienced decades of underinvestment and are most impacted by
climate change,pollution, and environmental hazards, consistent with Executive Order 14008,
Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad.
PIDP advances President Biden's Justice40 Initiative, which set the goal that 40 percent of the
overall benefits of certain climate, clean energy, and other covered Federal investments flow to
3 See U.S.Department of Transportation Strategic Plan FY 2022-2026 at
https://www.transportation.gov/dotstrategic-plan.
11
disadvantaged communities that are marginalized by underinvestment and overburdened by
pollution.
In addition, the Department intends to use the PIDP to support the creation of good-paying jobs
with the free and fair choice to join a union and the incorporation of strong labor standards and
training and placement programs, especially registered apprenticeships, in project planning
stages, consistent with Executive Order 14025, Worker Organizing and Empowerment, and
Executive Order 14052, Implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The
Department also intends to use the PIDP to support wealth creation, consistent with the
Department's Equity Action Plan,through the inclusion of local inclusive economic development
and entrepreneurship such as the utilization of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises or 8(a) firms.
3. AWARD SIZE
There is no minimum award size for funding under the BIL. Except as limited by the amount of
available funding and statutory restrictions on funding identified in Section C.3.,there is no
maximum award size.
4. RESTRICTIONS ON FUNDING
MARAD must comply with the following funding restrictions:
Funding Restriction Amount
Small Projects at Small Ports At least 25% of available funding, which is $112.5
million
Per State No more than 25%of available funding which $112.5
million
Planning Projects No more than 10%of funding reserved for Small
Projects at Small Ports and no more than 10%of
funding available to large projects
Small Projects at Small Ports No more than$11.25 million per award
Maximum Award size
As proscribed in Section 825 of the FY 2024 NDAA,no funds may be awarded to an entity that
utilizes or provides in part or in whole: the national transportation logistics public information
platform (commonly referred to as `LOGINK')provided by the People's Republic of China, or
departments, ministries, centers, agencies, or instrumentalities of the Government of the People's
Republic of China; any national transportation logistics information platform provided by or
sponsored by the People's Republic of China, or a controlled commercial entity; or a similar
system provided by Chinese state-affiliated entities.4
MARAD may retain up to 2%of available funding for oversight and administration of grants.
°For more information on LOGINK,including information about potential vulnerabilities to maritime port
equipment and networks,see the advisory on Worldwide Foreign Adversarial Technological,Physical, and Cyber
Influence on the Maritime Security Communications Industry portal: https://www.maritime.dot.gov/msci-advisories.
12
Federal funds awarded under this program may not be used to support or oppose union
organizing,whether directly or as an offset for other funds.
5. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS
The table below outlines the obligation and expenditure deadlines for FY 2025 PIDP funding.
Fiscal Year Funding Obligation Deadline Funding Expenditure Deadline
FY 2025 September 30, 2029 5 years after funds obligation for
each individual award
MARAD seeks to obligate FY 2025 PIDP grant funds by September 30,2029.
• Obligation occurs when a selected applicant and MARAD enter into a written grant
agreement after the applicant has satisfied applicable local, State, and Federal
requirements, including transportation planning and environmental review requirements,
such as those under NEPA.
Per 46 U.S.C. 54301(a)(11)(B)(ii),MARAD also expects grant recipients to expend funds within
five years of obligation of their award funds,which should be no later than September 30, 2034,
depending on when each grant is executed.
• Expenditure occurs when a recipient is reimbursed for eligible project costs.
6. PERFORMANCE MEASURES
PIDP program performance measures can be found on the P1DP website
(https://www.maritime.dot.gov/PIDPgrants).
7. PREVIOUS AWARDS
Previous program awards can be found on the PIDP website.
D. APPLICATION CONTENT AND FORMAT
MARAD expects the Project Narrative be prepared with standard formatting preferences (a
single-spaced document,using a standard 12-point font such as Times New Roman,with 1-inch
margins, and the narrative text in one column only). Documents should be submitted in PDF,
unless otherwise specified(e.g.,Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) calculations should be submitted
in an unlocked Excel spreadsheet). The Project Narrative may not exceed 30 pages in length,
excluding cover pages and table of contents. The only substantive portions that may exceed the
30-page limit are documents supporting assertions or conclusions made in the 30-page Project
Narrative and documentation related to the required determinations. Except for the BCA,
evaluators are not required to review supporting documents as part of the selection criteria
review described in Section F. Supporting documentation should be dated, and MARAD
recommends using appropriately descriptive file names(e.g., "Project Narrative,""Maps,"
"Memoranda of Understanding," "Letters of Support,""Engineering Drawings," etc.)for all
attachments. If supporting documents are submitted, applicants should clearly identify within the
Project Narrative the relevant supporting document(s).
13
1. STANDARD FORM 424
The application must include the Standard Form(SF)424 (Application for Federal
Assistance). Applicants are encouraged to also complete the SF-424C (Budget
Information—Construction Programs). These forms may be found on Grants.gov and are
also available at www.maritime.dot.gov/PIDPgrants.
2. FY 2025 PIDP COVER PAGE
Each application should include a cover page with information about the project included
in the following chart:
Field Name Guidance
Name of lead applicant
Is the applicant applying as a lead applicant If yes, identify by name each of the joint
with any joint applicants? applicants.
Does the applicant or joint applicant own the Yes or No.
property where the grant-funded
improvements will occur?
Is the applicant seeking funding under the Yes or No.
small project at a small port set-aside?
Project name Provide a concise(five-to seven-word)name of
the project. For example: "Wharf and Uplands
Improvement Project"
Project description Provide a brief(no more than 100 words)
description of the project that focuses on what
the project consists of. For example: "This
project will fund construction of a new wharf at
the X Terminal, renovate the uplands adjacent
to the wharf, construct a 100,000 SF-
refrigerated warehouse, and install
approximately 20,000 LF of track to connect
the new facilities to the port's rail switch yard."
Is this a planning project? Yes or No.
Is this a project at a coastal,Great Lakes, or Specify coastal,Great Lakes, or inland river
inland river port? port.
Is this project located in a noncontiguous Yes or No. If yes,name the State or U.S.
State or U.S.territory? territory.
Geographic Coordinates(in Latitude and Provide the coordinates of the approximate
Longitude format) geographic center of the project. The latitude
and longitude of the project should be reported
as decimal degrees with a minimum of 5
decimal places.
Is this project in an urban or rural area? Use the guidance in Section B.5 of the NOFO
to answer this question.
Project Zip Code Identify the zip code that corresponds to the
coordinates identified above.
14
Is the project located in a Historically Answer yes only if the project is wholly or
Disadvantaged Community? partially in a Historically Disadvantaged
Community. Provide information in support of
the claim. For example, the Census Tract
number and description. (If the project is
located in multiple zones, the project will be
designated as a HDC if the majority of the
Project's costs will be spent in the area that
qualifies as a HDC.)
Has the same project been previously If so, identify the program and year of the prior
submitted for PIDP funding? submission (such as "PIDP FY 2023"). _
Is the applicant applying for other Federal If so, identify the program, amount of funding
discretionary grant programs (managed by requested and scope (such as DOT RAISE FY
DOT or a separate agency) in 2025 for the 2025, $25 million, components 1 and 2 of this
same work or related scopes of work? PIDP project).
Has the applicant previously received DOT If so, identify the program,amount of funding
funding for the same work or related scope received and scope (such as U.S. Marine
of work? Highway Program FY 2022, $2 million,phase 1
of this PIDP project), and status of the NEPA
review for the previously funded project.
Has the applicant previously received If so, identify the program and year of the prior
TIGER,BUILD,RAISE, FASTLANE, award (such as"INFRA FY 2023").
INFRA, USMHP, or PIDP funding?
PIDP Grant Amount Requested Enter the total amount of PIDP grant funds
requested.
Total Project Cost Total Project Cost will be equal to the Total
Future Eligible Project Cost, including the PIDP
grant amount requested. (Only for small
projects at small ports can this cost include
previously incurred expenses). This number
must be the same as the amount entered on line
18g of the SF-424.
Total Federal Funding Enter the amount of Federal funding from ALL
sources that will be used for this project and list
each source of Federal funding. This number
must be the same as the amount entered on line
18a of the SF-424.
Total Non-Federal Funding Enter the amount of funds committed to the
project from non-Federal sources.
Will the applicant be seeking approval to Yes or No.
expend funds prior to grant agreement
execution?
Will RRIF or TIFIA funds be used as part of Indicate whether RRIF or TIFIA funding will
the project financing? be used for the project. If so, indicate the
amount of funds that will be used.
15
Does the applicant use LOGINK or a similar Yes or No. See Section C.4 of this NOFO.
logistics platform provided or sponsored by
the People's Republic of China or Chinese
state-affiliated entities?
3. PROJECT NARRATIVE
a) NARRATIVE SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This section of the Project Narrative should include:
• A detailed statement of work and describe the proposed PIDP project that
is to be planned or constructed, focusing on the technical and engineering
aspects of the project as well as the current design status of the project;
• A description of the transportation challenges that the project is intended
to address and how the project will address those challenges;
• The project's history, including a description of any previously completed
components, to place the project into a broader context of other relevant
infrastructure investments being pursued by the project sponsor(the
applicant should make clear which related investments are outside the
scope of the proposed PIDP project);
• A written statement that the eligible applicant has the authority to plan,
construct, own, operate, and maintain the grant-funded project;
• If the lead applicant intends to act as a pass-through entity for disbursing
funds to a subrecipient(including a private-entity joint applicant, if
applicable)who will deliver all or a portion of the project, a description of
that intention and the work the subrecipient will carry out should be
included in this section and a letter of support from the intended
subrecipient(as applicable) should be included as an attachment; and
• If the proposed project includes dredging, the applicant should confirm
that the dredging is not for channel improvements or harbor deepening
that are part of a Federally maintained navigation channel.
• Additionally, if submitting a joint application,applicants should also:
o Identify the lead recipient of the award who will be responsible for
financial administration of the project; and
o Include a description of the roles and responsibilities of each
applicant.
b) NARRATIVE SECTION II: PROJECT LOCATION
This section of the application should describe the project location,provide a map
or maps that clearly indicate the project's location in the local area and the State
or territory,provide photographs of the project location, and(if available)
renderings of the proposed project. The project's connections to existing
transportation infrastructure should also be clearly described or illustrated.
This section should also clearly identify whether the project is:
• located in a rural or urban area(as defined in Section B.5.);
16
• a project at a coastal, Great Lakes, or inland river port(as defined in
Section B.5.);
• a small project at a small port(as defined in Section B.S.) seeking
funding under 46 U.S.C. 54301(b); and
• located in a HDC (as defined in Section B.5.), including the relevant
census tract(s).
The location description should also include demographic information describing
any minority, low income, or limited English proficient communities in the
vicinity of,and potentially impacted by,the proposed project.
c) NARRATIVE SECTION III: GRANT FUNDS, SOURCES,AND USE OF
FUNDS
This section should present the budget for the PIDP project(i.e., the project scope
that includes PIDP funding and matching funding), including information about
the degree of design completion(e.g., 30 percent design)upon which the budget
is based. Except for a project seeking funding under 46 U.S.C. 54301(b),the
budget should not include any previously incurred expenses that are incurred prior
to MARAD's announcement of project selection.
Project budgets should show how different funding sources will share in each
activity and present those data in dollars and percentages. The budget should
identify other Federal funds, if any,that the applicant is applying for,has been
awarded, or intends to use. Funding sources should be grouped into three
categories: non-Federal, current FY 2025 PIDP funding request, and other
Federal,with specific amounts from each funding source. The budget details
should sufficiently demonstrate that the project satisfies the statutory non-Federal
cost-sharing requirements described in Section B.3.
At a minimum, the project budget should include:
• Total Project Costs for the FY 2025 PIDP project(see Section B.3. for
definition of Total Project Cost);
• FY 2025 PIDP grant funding request;
• Specific source, amount, type(grant, loan, etc.), and match requirements
of other Federal funds to be used for eligible project costs;
• Specific sources and amounts of non-Federal funds, if included,to be used
for eligible project costs; and
• If the project is located in two or more census tracts or is located only
partially within an urbanized area, the budget needs to separate the costs
between the various census tracts or areas designated as urban and rural.
In addition to the information enumerated above, this section should provide
complete information on how all project funds may be used. For example, if a
particular source of funds is available only after a condition is satisfied,the
application should identify that condition and describe the applicant's control over
whether it is satisfied. Similarly, if a particular source of funds is available for
17
expenditure only during a fixed time period, the application should describe that
restriction. Complete information about project funds will ensure that MARAD's
expectations for award execution align with any funding restrictions unrelated to
MARAD, even if an award differs from the applicant's request. If a funding
source is uncertain, the applicant should state that it is uncertain and describe the
source of the uncertainty.
Applicants are encouraged to include the budget table below, filled out with
project details:
[Component [Component
11 21 Total
PIDP Funds: [$XXX] [$XXX] [$XXX]
Other Federal Funds: [$XXX] [$XXX] [$XXX]
Non-Federal Funds: [$XXX] [$XXX] [$XXX]
Total: [$XXX] [$XXX[ [$XXXI
If there is only a single component,remove"Component 2"column. If there are more than 2
components, add columns.
The budget should clearly identify any project expenses anticipated between the time
of MARAD's announcement of project selections and obligation that the applicant
intends to request approval from MARAD to expend pursuant to 46 U.S.C.
54301(a)(10)(B)to count toward the non-Federal cost share or 2 C.F.R. 200.458 if its
application is selected for award.14 These pre-obligation costs must still comply with
all Federal requirements, including NEPA. The discussion should also reference (and
summarize) supporting documentation of funding commitments for non-Federal
funds to be used for eligible project costs. This supporting documentation must be
submitted as an appendix and clearly marked. In preparing this section, applicants
should also refer to the"Leveraging Federal Funding"merit criterion.
d) NARRATIVE SECTION IV: MERIT CRITERIA
This section of the application should demonstrate how the project aligns with the
statutory merit criteria described in Section F.1. of this notice. PIDP statutory merit
criteria are: Achieving Safety, Efficiency,or Reliability Improvements; Supporting
Economic Vitality at the Regional or National Level; Leveraging Federal Funding;
and Port Resilience. To assist project evaluators, MARAD encourages applicants to
describe the project merit criteria in the order in which they are described in Section
F.1, address each criterion separately, identify the elements of the proposed project
that align with items listed under each criterion under the merit rating rubric, and
support estimated benefit claims with data, details, and/or qualitative descriptions.
Insufficient information to assess any criterion will negatively impact the project
rating. Guidance describing how MARAD will evaluate projects against the Merit
Criteria is listed in Section F of this notice. Applicants should review that section
before preparing their application.
18
e) NARRATIVE SECTION V: SELECTION CONSIDERATIONS
This section should address all the applicable selection considerations related to the
Departmental priorities identified in Section F.1. below.
f) NARRATIVE SECTION VI: PROJECT READINESS
Project readiness describes an applicant's preparedness to move a proposed project
forward once it receives a PIDP grant. This portion of the narrative should include a
detailed project schedule and information that,when considered with the project
budget information, is sufficient for MARAD to evaluate whether the project is
reasonably expected to begin the capital or planning project in a timely manner after
satisfying applicable administrative requirements, including transportation planning
and environmental review requirements, such as those under NEPA, and meet both
the preferred obligation and expenditure deadlines. Project readiness consists of two
factors: technical capacity and environmental risk. Technical capacity and
environmental risk are described in detail in Section F.1.
g) NARRATIVE SECTION VII: STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS
To select a project for award, MARAD must determine that the project—as a whole,
as well as each independent component of the project—satisfies several statutory
requirements enumerated in 46 U.S.C. 54301(a)(6)(A) and restated in the table below.
The application must include sufficient information for MARAD to make these
determinations for both the project as a whole and for each independent component of
the project. Applicants should use this section of the application to summarize how
their project and, if present, each independent project component, meets each of the
following requirements. Applicants are not required to reproduce the table below in
their application but following this format will help evaluators identify the relevant
information that supports each project determination. Supporting information
provided in appendices may be referenced.
Statutory Determination Guidance
1. The project improves the safety, efficiency, Please summarize how the project will
or reliability of the movement of goods improve the safety, efficiency,or reliability
through a port or intermodal connection to the of the movement of goods through a port or
port. intermodal connection to a port.
Detail specific elements of the project and
their forecasted impact on port performance
indicators (such as improvements in vessel
dwell times, truck turn times, capacity,
throughput, accident reductions, etc.).
If the project has multiple independent
components, please provide sufficient
information to describe the impact of
each component on the overall project.
wr
19
2. The project is cost effective. Please highlight the results of the BCA, as
well as the analyses of independent project
components, if applicable.
The Department will base its determination
on the ratio of project benefits to project
costs as assessed according to the Economic
Vitality criterion.
Note: This determination is not applicable
to small projects at small ports or large
projects located in noncontiguous States or
U.S. territories.
3.The eligible applicant has the authority to Please provide citations of authority or
carry out the project. other supporting documentation necessary
to establish an applicant's authority to carry
out the project. The citations should be of
sufficient detail to demonstrate that the
applicant is an eligible applicant and to
show how the applicant is related to the
work on the property where the grant funds
will be spent.
Examples of information that could assist
with making this determination include: the
citation of specific sections or chapters of
state or local statutory language that
demonstrate relevant authority; the
inclusion of a narrative outlining the
authority of the eligible entity applying for
grant funding; information about who owns
the property where the improvements will
take place or who operates the facilities
that will be improved by the project; or a
description of the relationship between the
applicant and the owner of the property that
links the project to the authority to carry
out the project(e.g.,through a lease
agreement).
per-
20
4. The eligible applicant has sufficient funding Please indicate funding source(s)and
available to meet the matching requirements. amounts that will account for all project
costs, broken down by independent project
component, if applicable. Demonstrate that
the funding is stable, dependable, and
dedicated to this specific project by
referencing a letter of commitment,a local
government resolution, memorandum of
understanding, or similar documentation.
Include proof that the matching funds will
be available and/or committed prior to
obligation of funds,regardless of the source
of funding.
5.The project will be completed without Please provide expected obligation date15
unreasonable delay. and construction start date, referencing
project budget and schedule as needed. If
the project has multiple independent
components, or will be obligated and
constructed in multiple phases,please
provide sufficient information to show that
each component meets this requirement.
MARAD will base its determination on the
project risk rating assessed as part of the
evaluation of the Project Readiness
criterion.
6. The project cannot be easily and efficiently Describe the potential negative impacts on
completed without Federal funding or financial the proposed project if the PIDP grant(or
assistance available to the project sponsor. other Federal funding) is not awarded. The
applicant must address at least one of the
following in the narrative,although a well-
written narrative will address each of the
potential impacts:
1. How would the project scope be affected
if PIDP(or other Federal) funds were not
received?
2. How would the project schedule be
affected if PIDP (or other Federal) funds
were not received?
3. How would the project cost be affected
if PIDP(or other Federal) funds were not
received?
Impacts to a portfolio of projects will not
satisfy this requirement; please describe
only impacts to this project. Re-stating the
project's importance for national or
21
regional economy, mobility, or safety will
not satisfy this requirement.
E. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND DEADLINE
1. ADDRESS TO REQUEST APPLICATION PACKAGE
All application materials may be found on Grants.gov and the PIDP website.
2. UNIQUE ENTITY IDENTIFIER (UEI) AND SYSTEM FOR AWARD
MANAGEMENT (SAM)
Each applicant must: (1)be registered in SAM.Gov before submitting its application; (2)provide
a valid unique entity identifier(UEI) in its application; and(3)continue to maintain an active
SAM registration with current information at all times during which it has an active Federal
award or an application or plan under consideration by a Federal awarding agency.
Please note that the SAM registration process takes several weeks to complete, if not longer.
MARAD may not make a FY 2025 PIDP grant award to an applicant until the applicant has
complied with all applicable UEI and SAM requirements. If an applicant has not fully complied
with the requirements by the time MARAD is ready to make a PIDP grant award, MARAD may
determine that the applicant is not qualified to receive a PIDP grant award and use that
determination as a basis for making a PIDP grant award to another applicant.
3. SUBMISSION DATES AND TIMES
Applications must be submitted to Grants.gov by 11:59:59 p.m. E.D.T. on April 30,2025.
Grants.gov attaches a time stamp to each application at the time that submission is complete.
Applications with a time stamp after the deadline will not be considered. MARAD does not
accept applications via mailed paper, fax machine, email, or other means. Please note that the
Grants.gov registration process usually takes 2-4 weeks to complete.
i. Submission Instructions.
Each applicant must:
• Create a Grants.gov username and password
• The E-Business Point of Contact(POC)at the applicant's organization must respond to
the registration email from Grants.gov and login at Grants.gov to authorize the applicant
as the Authorized Organization Representative(AOR). Please note that there can be more
than one AOR for an organization Failure to register for SAM or comply with Grants.gov
applicant requirements in a timely manner will not be considered for exceptions to the
submission requirements and deadline.
ii. Submission Issues
MARAD is not able to assist with technical issues related to Grants.gov registration or
application submission. For information and instructions, please see Grants.gov. If applicants
experience difficulties at any point during the registration or application submission process,
please call the Customer Service Support Hotline at 1-800-518-4726 or email
support(a,,grants.gov.
22
iii. Consideration of Applications
Only applicants who comply with all submission deadlines described in this notice and
electronically submit valid, on-time applications through Grants.gov will be eligible for
evaluation and possible selection for award.
iv. Late Applications
Any applications that Grants.gov time stamps after 11:59:59 PM E.D.T. on the deadline will not
be accepted. Applicants are strongly encouraged to make submissions days, if not weeks, in
advance of the deadline. Applicants facing technical issues are advised to contact the Grants.gov
helpdesk well in advance of the deadline.
4. INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW
This program is not subject to EO 12372, Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs.
5. COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 508 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT
OF 1973
MARAD encourages applicants to submit documents that are compliant with Section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (see Section 508 guidelines).
F. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION
1. CRITERIA
Responsiveness Review
There are several statutory criteria that must be met in order for an application to be eligible for
technical review and selection for an award. MARAD reserves the right to perform follow-up
inquiries to applicants to resolve questions regarding any of the criteria described below.
MARAD will assess these criteria at two stages in the application review process; intake and
technical review. The intake review process verifies basic applicant and project eligibility, and
the technical review process will assess the remainder of the criteria.
A determination of non-responsiveness related to any of the following factors will be a basis for
elimination from further consideration for award of a grant:
• Applicant eligibility(46 U.S.C. 54301(a)(2));
• Project eligibility(46 U.S.C. 54301(a)(3)and(4));
• The project improves the safety, efficiency, or reliability of the movement of goods
through a port or intermodal connection to a port(46 U.S.C. 54310(a)(6)(A)(i));
• The project is cost effective(46 U.S.C. 54310(a)(6)(A)(ii));
• The applicant has the authority to carry out the project(46 U.S.C. 54310(a)(6)(A)(iii));
• Sufficiency of funding to meet the matching requirements (46 U.S.C.
54310(a)(6)(A)(iv));
• The project will be completed without unreasonable delay 46 U.S.C. 54310(a)(6)(A)(v);
and
n
23
• The project cannot be completed easily and efficiently without Federal funding(46
U.S.C. 54310(a)(6)(A)(vi)).
If any of the factors listed above are in question, MARAD will continue the technical review
process until the concern has been resolved. If non-responsiveness is confirmed,the application
review will be concluded and the responsiveness issue will be memorialized in the review
documentation. If a responsiveness question is successfully resolved, the application will be
continue to be considered during the review process described below and in Section F.2 of this
notice.
Merit Criteria
MARAD will review merit criteria for all applications. Reviewers will assess a project's
alignment with the program's statutory merit criteria: Achieving Safety, Efficiency, or
Reliability Improvements; Supporting Economic Vitality; Leveraging Federal Funding; and Port
Resilience. For each criterion, reviewers will evaluate whether the benefits of the project are
clear, direct, data-driven, and reasonable. Based on that assessment,reviewers will assign a
rating for each criterion, as explained in greater detail in criterion-specific sections below. See
Section F.2. for more information on the Review and Selection Process.
Planning grant applications will be evaluated against the same merit criteria as capital grants;
however,the information does not need to be as driven by data as capital projects, since data is
often an outcome of the project to be planned. MARAD will also consider how the plan, once
implemented,will ultimately further the merit criteria.
(1)Achieving Safety, Efficiency, or Reliability Improvements
MARAD will evaluate the extent to which the project will improve the safety, efficiency, or
reliability of the movement of goods through a port using the rubric below. Applications should
detail current safety, efficiency, or reliability issues and describe how specific elements of the
project will improve applicable port performance measures (such as reduced vessel dwell times,
improved truck turn times, increased capacity or throughput,reduced vehicle crashes, lives
saved, reduced workplace injuries, fuel efficiency, energy efficiency, greenhouse gas emissions
reductions etc.). If the project has multiple independent components,the applicant should include
sufficient information to describe the impact of each component on the overall project.
Using the rubric below, reviewers will assign a rating of"high,""medium," "low,"or"non-
responsive"for each element(that is, safety, efficiency, and reliability). Projects with higher
ratings will be more competitive.
Non-Responsive Low Medium High
Safety Application did Application Project has one Safety is a
not address the contains safety or more of the primary project
Safety criterion information that following safety purpose AND
OR does not benefits,but the project has
24
project satisfactorily safety may not clear, direct,
negatively address this be a primary data-driven(for
affects safety criterion or project purpose capital projects)
relates to safety or the project's and significant
benefits that are safety benefits benefits that
external to the do not meet the target a
port description of a documented
"High"rating: safety problem
-Protects by doing one or
workers from more of the
safety risks following:
- Incorporates - Incorporates
safety specific safety
improvements improvements
that are part of a that a part of a
documented risk documented risk
reduction plan reduction
-Reduces mitigation
fatalities and/or strategy and that
serious injuries have port-wide
related to port impact
operations - Protects
individuals
inside the port
from safety risks
-Reduces
fatalities and/or
serious injuries
related to port
operations
Efficiency Application did Application Project has one Efficiency is a
not address the contains or more of the primary project
Efficiency efficiency following purpose AND
criterion OR information that efficiency the project has
project does not benefits even clear, direct,
negatively satisfactorily though data-driven(for
affects address this efficiency may capital projects)
efficiency criterion or not be a primary efficiency
relates to project purpose benefits by
efficiency or the project's accomplishing
benefits that are efficiency one or more of
external to the benefits do not the following:
port meet the -Results in a
standard of a documented
"High"rating: increase in cargo
throughput by
25
-Results in an meeting an
improvement existing,well-
likely to increase defined need for
cargo throughput additional
-Makes throughput
improvements capacity
that enhance the -Generates
speed of cargo changes in port
operations operations that
increase the
types of cargo
that can be
moved through
the port with
documentation
of likely
increases in new
cargo volumes
Reliability Application did Application Project has one Reliability is a
not address the contains or more of the primary project
Reliability reliability following purpose AND
criterion OR information that reliability the project has
project does not benefits even clear, direct,
negatively satisfactorily though data-driven(for
affects reliability address this reliability may capital projects)
criterion or not be a primary reliability
relates to purpose or the benefits by
reliability project's accomplishing
improvements reliability one or more of
that are external benefits do not the following:
to the port meet the -Results in
standard of a enhancements
"High"rating: that generate
-Results in well-
enhancements documented
that are likely to improvements in
improve the the
dependability of dependability of
cargo operations cargo operations
-Remedies -Remedies
infrastructure infrastructure
deficiencies that deficiencies that
have an adverse are identified in
impact on port a capital
operations investment plan
and that have a
26
demonstrated
impact on cargo
operations
(2) Supporting Economic Vitality at the Regional or National Level
(a)Large Projects
MARAD will consider the net benefits of large projects (as defined in Section B.5.) seeking
PIDP funding, except for those projects located in noncontiguous States and U.S. territories.p gu o es. To
the extent possible, MARAD will rely on quantitative, data-supported analyses to assess how
well a project addresses this criterion, including an assessment of the project's estimated Benefit
Cost Ratio (BCR) and net benefits based on the applicant supplied Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA)
described below.
For large projects, this criterion measures the benefits generated by the project against the costs
of the project. Among otherwise comparable applications, MARAD will prioritize projects that
maximize net benefits.
This section describes the recommended approach for the completion and submission of a BCA
narrative and calculation file. Applicants should also review DOT's detailed guidance on how to
conduct a BCA, which is available on the DOT website at
https://www.transportation.gov/mission,/office-secretary/office-policv/transportation-
policy/benefit-cost-analysis-guidance.
In this section,the applicant should summarize the conclusions of the BCA, including estimates
of the project's Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR)and net benefits.
The purpose of the BCA is to enable DOT to evaluate the project's cost-effectiveness by
comparing its expected benefits to its expected costs, relative to a no-build scenario. Applicants
should provide a BCA narrative description of their analysis as well as the calculation or analysis
files used for their BCA(such as unlocked spreadsheet files). The BCA narrative should
carefully document the assumptions and methodology used to produce the analysis, including a
description of the baseline, the sources of data used to project the outcomes of the project, and
the values of key input parameters. The spreadsheets and technical memos should present the
calculations in sufficient detail and transparency to allow the analysis to be reproduced by DOT
evaluators. Any benefits claimed for the project,both quantified and unquantified, should be
clearly tied to the expected outcomes of the project. While benefits should be quantified
wherever possible, applicants may also describe other categories of benefits in the application
narrative.
To address this criterion in the project narrative, applicants should summarize the conclusions of
the BCA, including estimates of the project's BCR and net benefits. In addition to the BCA, the
applicant may also wish to describe economic impacts and other data-supported outcomes that
may not have been included in the BCA, such as how the project supports American industry and
will result in high-quality job creation by supporting good-paying jobs with a free and fair choice
to join a union in project construction and in on-going operations and maintenance, and
27
incorporate strong labor standards, such as through the use of project labor agreements,
registered apprenticeship programs, and other joint labor-management training programs.
Based on MARAD's assessment, MARAD will assign an economic analysis rating of high,
medium-high, medium, medium-low,or low according to the following table:
Rating Description
High The project's benefits will exceed its costs, with a BCR
of at least 2.0
Medium-High The project's benefits will exceed its costs
Medium The project's benefits are likely to exceed its costs
Medium-Low The project's costs are likely to exceed its benefits
Low The project's costs will exceed its benefits
Projects with a higher rating as described above will be more competitive than ones with lower
ratings.
(b) Small Projects at Small Ports
Applications for funding for small projects at small ports are not required to include a BCA.
Instead,the economic vitality analysis for small projects at small ports will apply to applications
seeking funding under 46 U.S.C. 54301(b). Under this criterion,MARAD will evaluate
applications for small projects at small ports for how well they address the project's impact on:
(1)the economic advantage of the port, (2)the contribution to freight transportation at, around,
and through the port, and(3)overcoming the competitive disadvantage of the port.
The economic advantage of a port relates to existing logistical, geographic,transportation, or
business advantages at a port that will be enhanced or improved because of the project. It
includes factors such as superior logistics,the availability of large spaces or capacity,proximity
to railroads and highways,ample truck parking, light traffic congestion, and economic
incentives. Information related to a project's impact on economic advantage should include
evidence of improvements the project will generate as reflected in commitments,plans, or other
documentation. It should also include analysis and documentation related to how the project will
enhance the elements of economic advantage, such as by creating economies of scale,
overcoming barriers to entry, or creating more efficient physical access for labor, resources, and
customers to and around the port. Regarding economies of scale,the applicant should indicate
whether the average cost of operation will decrease (or at least remain the same) following the
increase in scale. Examples of projects, or project components, in support of an increase in a
port's economies of scale include, but are not limited to: land expansion,new or larger
warehouses, and longer or wider berths. Barriers to entry consist of economic and geographic
barriers, such as an incumbent or adjacent(s)port having an absolute cost advantage due to port
location, a large minimum scale of operation, or low switching costs; or the applicant's port
having natural constraints to its capacity.
The narrative's discussion of the project's contribution to freight transportation should address
how the project will improve the physical process of transporting goods and commodities. It
28
should also address how the project will reduce or eliminate potential points of failure related to
the transportation of goods.
Applicants should also include information that will help reviewers understand the competitive
disadvantage of the port and, as appropriate, how the project will improve the port's competitive
position. Competitive disadvantage refers to existing market, transportation connectivity, or
infrastructure conditions that impede, disrupt,or minimize the relative competitive position of a
port in logistics or business and how the proposed project will address those issues. Elements of
competitive disadvantage include severe climate,unfavorable port location, technological
limitations, or limited operational capability. Applicants should explain how PIDP funding will
help reduce, remove,or correct those elements.
Overall, applicants should include data and/or well-reasoned analyses when providing inputs on
the economic vitality of a proposed project. Economic vitality supports the development of
transportation systems that stimulate, support, and enhance the movement of goods to ensure a
prosperous community and economy. When preparing the Project Narrative, applicants should
consider that the concept of economic vitality includes recognizing a full range of multimodal
and intermodal freight needs,public-private partnerships, sustainability, and institutional
linkages within the community.
Reviewers will assign a rating of"high,""medium,""low," or"non-responsive"as described in
the rubric below. Projects with higher ratings will be more competitive.
Non-Responsive Low Medium High
Application did not Reviewers determined Reviewers Reviewers
address economic that the project will determined that the determined that the
advantage, address one of the project will address project will address
contribution to following: improve two of the following all of the following
freight economic advantage; factors: improve factors: improve
transportation, or contribute positively economic advantage; economic advantage;
competitive to freight contribute positively contribute positively
disadvantage OR transportation; or to freight to freight
Reviewers improve the transportation; or transportation; and
determined that the competitive advantage improve the improve the
project will not of the port competitive competitive
improve any of the advantage of the port advantage of the port
factors
(3)Leveraging Federal Funding to Attract Non-Federal Sources of Infrastructure
Investment
To maximize the impact of PIDP awards, MARAD seeks to leverage PIDP funding with non-
Federal contributions. To evaluate this criterion,MARAD will assign a leverage rating to each
project. See Section D.3.c. The rating will be based on the calculated non-Federal share of the
project's future eligible project costs. Refer to Section B.3 of this notice for how MARAD will
make this calculation. MARAD will sort project applications based on their calculated non-
29
Federal leverage percentage into one of five groups or quintiles. A project in a higher quintile
will be more competitive than a comparable project in a lower quintile.
(4) Port Resilience
As provided in 46 U.S.C. 54301(a)(6)(B)(iii),the Secretary shall give substantial weight to
changes to a port's resilience as a result of the project. Therefore,MARAD will assess whether
(and how well)a project improves a port's resilience, including its role in a vibrant local,
regional,or national supply chain system.
In considering a project's role in improving a port's resilience to natural or climate-related
hazards,reviewers will consider how well the project incorporates evidence-based climate
resilience and adaptation measures or features. Projects will score more highly on this element of
the criterion if the narrative demonstrates that the project: uses best-available climate data sets,
information resources, and decision-support tools (including DOT and other federal resources5)
to assess the climate-related vulnerability and risk of the project; develops and deploys solutions
that reduce climate change risks; is included in a Resilience Improvement Plan or similar plan;
incorporates nature-based solutions/natural infrastructure; advances objectives in the National
Climate Resilience Framework;6 follows the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard,
consistent with current law; and includes plans to monitor performance of climate resilience and
adaptation measures.
Reviewers will assign a rating of"high,""medium,""low,"or"non-responsive"as described in
the rubric below. Projects with higher ratings will be more competitive.
Non-responsive Low Medium High
Application did not Reviewers determined Reviewers Reviewers
address how the that the project will determined that the determined that the
project will advance advance either the project will advance project will advance
the port's ability to port's ability to either the port's both the port's ability
withstand natural withstand natural and ability to withstand to withstand natural
and climate-related climate-related natural and climate- and climate-related
hazards and human- hazards or human- related hazards or hazards and human-
caused emergencies caused emergencies. human-caused caused emergencies
OR Reviewers emergencies; and,the and that the project
determined that the project incorporates results in positive,
project will not evidence-based quantifiable impacts
climate resilience and
5 The Department has developed a Climate Action Plan,available at
https://www.transportation.gov/sustainability/climate/dot-climate-action-plan-resilience,that describes efforts to be
taken by DOT to bolster adaptation and increase resilience.The DOT Climate Action Plan may serve as a useful
resource for applicants in developing the port resilience section of the application,but the preference is for
applicants to utilize State,local,or regional resilience assessment and mitigation resources where possible and
describe any alignment with the DOT Climate Action Plan.
6 The National Climate Resilience Framework is available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2023/09/National-Climate-Resi lience-Framework-F IN AL.pdf
30
improve either of adaptation features or on the supply chain;
those factors. includes a plan to and, the
monitor performance project incorporates
of climate resilience evidence-based
and adaptation climate resilience and
measures. adaptation features
and includes a plan to
monitor performance
of climate resilience
and adaptation
measures.
Selection Considerations
After completing the merit review, among projects of similar merit, MARAD may prioritize
projects that align well with the following Departmental priorities. Applicants may refer to the
DOT Strategic Plan' and the DOT Navigator8 for additional information and guidance relating to
Selection Considerations. The DOT Navigator is a tool to assist applicants in applying for DOT
funding and includes checklists for Climate Change and Workforce priorities to assist applicants
in responding to those criteria.
(1) Climate Change and Sustainability
Reviewers will assign a rating of"high,""medium," "low,"or"non-responsive" based on their
assessment of how well the PIDP application incorporates climate change and sustainability
factors in both planning activities and project elements. Applications that are highly rated on this
criterion will be those that use data-driven and evidence-based methods to demonstrate that the
project will significantly reduce GHG emissions in the transportation sector.
A project aligns well with the project planning element of this criterion if: the narrative describes
what specific climate change activities have been completed for the project; the project is part of
a State Carbon Reduction Strategy, State Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Deployment Plan, or
other State, Local,or Tribal GHG reduction plan; the narrative demonstrates how the project
aligns with the U.S.National Blueprint for Transportation Decarbonization;9 the project will
strengthen domestic supply chains for clean energy industries such as offshore wind;1°or, if it
includes a plan to monitor the impact of the project on GHG emissions.
The DOT Strategic Plan is available at:https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022-
04/US DOT FY2022-26 Strategic Plan.pdf
8 The DOT Navigator is available at:https://www.transportation.gov/dot-navigator.
9 https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/climate-and-sustainability/us-national-blueprint-transportation-
decarbonization
10 USDOT is a member of the Federal-State Offshore Wind Implementation Partnership(described at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/06/23/fact-sheet-biden-administration-
launches-new-federal-state-offshore-wind-partnership-to-grow-american-made-clean-energy/,at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/02/22/fact-sheet-biden-harris-admini stration-
announces-actions-to-expand-offshore-wind-nationally-and-harness-more-reliable-affordable-clean-energy/,and at
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/09/21/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-
31
Projects that typically reduce GHG emissions in the transportation sector include elements that:
increase the use of energy efficient modes of transportation like rail or maritime; support
transitioning to clean vehicles, cargo handling equipment, harbor craft, and fuels, including
electrification, charging infrastructure, and grid upgrades; use project materials and construction
methods that have lower embodied GHG emissions; or incorporate carbon-reducing uses of
unused areas of a port such as by installing solar arrays or facilitating transmission of electricity
from renewables. Projects that also incorporate climate change and sustainability could include
elements that advance worker training to support electrification technology and/or support port
electrification master planning, as well as elements that support GHG emission reductions
beyond the transportation sector, such as providing supportive infrastructure for clean energy
industries. Projects that typically increase GHG emissions, such as roadway expansions or
increases in hardscape infrastructure, will not score highly on this criterion. A project will rate
more highly on this criterion if an applicant demonstrates that the project: would significantly
reduce transportation GHG emissions, as shown through analysis with DOT tools" or similar
resources; is part of a State Carbon Reduction Strategy, State Electric Vehicle Infrastructure
Deployment Plan, or other State, local, or Tribal GHG reduction plan; aligns with the U.S.
National Blueprint for Transportation Decarbonization;12 strengthens domestic supply chains for
clean energy industries such as offshore wind; or includes a plan to monitor the impact of the
project on GHG emissions. The applicant should indicate if it maintains a publicly available
emissions inventory of greenhouse gases and/or other air pollutants completed after 2019, or,
whether it intends to develop one.
To receive a high rating, a project must demonstrate how, in both planning activities and project
elements,the project furthers the administration goals of climate change and sustainability. In
addition, a project benefit must be the reduction of GHG emissions and particulates in the
transportation sector. Applications that demonstrate how the project furthers the administration
goals of climate change and sustainability in both planning activities and project elements,but
doesn't necessarily result in GHG emissions reductions, will receive a medium rating.
Applications that incorporate climate change or sustainability in only planning activities or only
project elements will receive a low rating. Applications that fail to substantively address this
criterion in either planning activities or project elements will receive a non-responsive rating. In
addition,projects that will have a negative effect on climate change or sustainability will receive
a non-responsive rating.
(2) Equity and Justice40
advances-offshore-wind-transmission-strengthens-regional-supply-chain-buildout-and-drives-innovation/)as well as
the Floating Offshore Wind Shot(described at https://www.energv.gov/eere/wind/floating-offshore-wind-shot).
These initiatives may serve as useful references for applicants in identifying any areas of application alignment with
federal and state efforts to advance offshore wind—one example of a clean energy industry with port infrastructure
needs.USDOT will coordinate with agencies involved in these initiatives to ensure alignment with federal and state
offshore wind efforts.
https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/climate-and-sustainability/greenhouse-gas-analysis-resources-and-tools
12 https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/climate-and-sustainability/us-national-blueprint-transportation-
decarbonization
32
MARAD reviewers will assess how an applicant's planning activities and project components
support advancements in equity and Justice40 considerations. In evaluating whether a project
advances the equity policy priority, reviewers will consider how it: addresses disproportional
impacts on underserved communities; addresses the unique challenges rural and Tribal
communities face related to economic development; and incorporates and supports integrated
land use, economic development, and transportation infrastructure to improve the movement of
goods.
Equity considerations. Projects will be rated higher on this criterion if the application narrative
clearly demonstrates that: (1)the project will create positive outcomes that will reduce, mitigate,
or reverse how communities adjacent to the port are experiencing disadvantage(such as by
reducing pollution, connecting Americans to good-paying jobs, and/or improving quality of life).
Applicants are strongly encouraged to use the USDOT Equitable Transportation Community
(ETC) Explorer13 to understand how their project area is experiencing disadvantage; (2)the
applicant implements programs and policies that ensure the benefits of project investments for,
while mitigating the economic displacement of, economically-susceptible residents and
businesses; and(3)the applicant has implemented a plan to engage the public, including
disadvantaged communities during all phases of the project,including planning, design,
construction, and implementation.
Justice40 considerations. Priority consideration will be given to projects that support the goals
of the Justice40 initiative.14 In support of Executive Order 14008, applicants are encouraged to
use the White House definition of Historically Disadvantaged Communities as part of USDOT's
implementation of the Justice40 Initiative. Consistent with the Interim Implementation Guidance
and its Addendum for the Justice40 Initiative, Historically Disadvantaged Communities include
(a) certain qualifying census tracts identified as disadvantaged by the Climate and Economic
Justice Screening Tool (CEJST)15 due to categories of environmental, climate, and
socioeconomic burdens, and(b)any Federally Recognized Tribes or Tribal entities, whether or
not they have land. CJEST is a tool created by the White House Council on Environmental
Quality(CEQ)that aims to help Federal agencies identify disadvantaged communities as part of
the Justice40 Initiative to accomplish the goal that 40%of overall benefits from certain federal
investments reach disadvantaged communities. Applicants should use the CEJST as the primary
tool to identify disadvantaged communities(also referred to as Justice40 communities).
Applicants are strongly encouraged to also use the USDOT Equitable Transportation Community
(ETC) Explorer16 to understand how their community or project area is experiencing
disadvantage related to lack of transportation investments or opportunities and are encouraged to
use this information in their application to demonstrate how their project will reduce, reverse, or
mitigate the burdens of disadvantage.17
>a https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/equity/justice40/etc-explorer
14 https://www.transportation.gov/equity-Justice40
15 https://screeningtool.geoplatform.gov/
16 https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/0920984aa80a4362b8778d779b090723/page/Homepage/
17 See also https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/equity/justice40/etc-explorer
33
In evaluating whether a project advances the Justice40 priority, reviewers will consider how the
project: considers the benefits and potential burdens a project may create; who would experience
the benefits and potential burdens and how both will measured
be over time(with a specific
focus on how the benefits and potential burdens will impact underserved or disadvantaged
communities). For example, the narrative might indicate how the project: reduces exposure to
hazardous materials and waste, harmful emissions, and noise impacts on disadvantaged and
overburdened communities; increases the availability of, and access to, clean transportation
options, including EVs and charging stations; integrates climate justice into project-related
environmental review processes; or supports innovative programs, policies, and projects to
reduce the environmental impacts associated with freight movements.
A project will receive a"high" rating if the narrative uses data to demonstrate that the project
will advance both equity and Justice40 considerations. To receive a"medium"rating, an
application must use data to demonstrate that the project advances either equity or Justice40. If
the narrative demonstrates qualitatively that the project will advance both equity and Justice40,
the project will receive a"medium"rating. A project will achieve a"low"rating if the narrative
demonstrates qualitatively that only one of the two considerations is addressed. A project would
receive a"non-responsive"rating if none of the considerations are addressed or if reviewers
conclude that the project would have a negative impact on equity and Justice40.
(3)Workforce Development,Job Quality, and Wealth Creation
MARAD will consider the extent to which projects support the creation of good-paying jobs with
the free and fair choice to join a union and the incorporation of strong labor standards and
training and placement programs, especially registered apprenticeships. Projects will rate more
highly on this criterion if the application narrative demonstrates that the project will: (1)create
good-paying, safe jobs with the free and fair choice to join a union, including through the use of
project labor agreements;18 (2)promotes investments in high-quality workforce development
programs with supportive services to help train,place, and retain people in good-paying jobs or
registered apprenticeships. These programs should have a focus on women,people of color, and
others that are underrepresented in infrastructure jobs (people with disabilities,people with
convictions, etc.); (3) adopts local and economic hiring preferences for the project workforce or
includes other changes to hiring policies and workplace cultures to promote the entry and
retention of underrepresented populations; or(4)promotes local inclusive economic
development and entrepreneurship such as the utilization of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises,
Minority-owned Businesses, Women-owned Businesses, or 8(a) firms.
Reviewers will assign applications a"high,""medium," "low,"or"non-responsive"rating based
on how well the project addresses this topic. An application that demonstrates that a project
includes a strong commitment to advancing workforce development,job quality, and inclusive
economic development and entrepreneurship will receive a high rating. A medium rating will be
assigned to a project if the application demonstrates that it will advance at least two of those
considerations. Applications that advance only one of those considerations will be assigned a low
18 These agreements may include pre-hire collective bargaining agreements between unions and contractors that
govern terms and conditions of employment for all workers on a construction project.
34
rating. Applications that do not address this criterion or that reviewers determine will negatively
impact this criterion will be assigned a non-responsive rating.
(4) Project Readiness
Each application will receive a Project Readiness rating based on the ratings it receives for
Technical Capacity and Environmental Risk. The Project Readiness rating will be based on the
poorest risk rating earned in either Technical Capacity or Environmental Risk. For example, if an
application is evaluated as high risk for Technical Capacity and medium risk for Environmental
Risk, its Project Readiness rating will be high risk since a rating of high risk is less desirable than
a rating of medium risk. The following paragraphs describe how MARAD will evaluate
Technical Capacity and Environmental Risk.
(1)Technical Capacity
The applicant should provide information demonstrating its technical capacity to implement the
project based on experience and understanding of Federal requirements. The application may
include a description of the applicant's history of delivering similar projects. The application
should also demonstrate a project's feasibility or constructability and schedule, and how the
project will comply with applicable Federal requirements. The narrative should also include
information about how and when cost data in the budget was compiled, including information on
how it was sourced(such as a cost database,market survey,or fixed-price bid). The discussion
should also include information about the recency and degree of design completion used to
compile the cost information. An applicant's failure to include this information could adversely
affect its technical capacity rating.
The applicant should indicate whether the project is part of an ongoing planning effort, such as at
the local,regional, or State level. Information on whether the project is included in a local or
State freight plan,part of a facility or organization strategic plan, or included in other planning
efforts should be included. Applicants should provide links or other documentation supporting
the project's inclusion in these planning efforts.
Project Schedule.The applicant should include a detailed project schedule that identifies all
major project milestones. For capital project applications, examples of such milestones include
State and local planning approvals; start and completion of NEPA, and other Federal
environmental reviews and approvals including permitting; design completion; real property and
right of way acquisition; approval of plans, specifications, and estimates; procurement; project
partnership and implementation agreements, including agreements with non-governmental
entities involved in or impacted by the project; and construction. For planning projects, examples
of milestones may include start dates, schedule for public engagement, and completion dates.
The project schedule should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate that:
• all necessary pre-award activities will be complete at least six months in advance of
the obligation deadline to allow sufficient time for unexpected delays and to meet the
expected obligation deadline;
• the capital project can begin construction upon obligation of grant funds and that
those funds will be spent expeditiously once construction starts, in order for MARAD
to make the determination described in Section D.3.g.,with all funds expended five
years after obligation;
35
• all real property and right-of-way acquisition will be completed in a timely manner in
accordance with 49 C.F.R. part 24 and other applicable legal requirements, even if
acquired outside the scope of the PIDP project, or a statement that no right-of-way
acquisition is necessary; and
• the applicant will or has meaningfully sought community input through public
involvement,particularly disadvantaged communities or other communities with
environmental justice concerns that may be affected by the project where applicable.
Risk Mitigation.Applicants should include a discussion of project risks and related mitigation
strategies. The discussion should focus on, but need not be exclusively related to, risks related to
project readiness. For example, the applicant should identify project risks, such as approval or
permit delays,procurement delays,technical challenges in design or construction, environmental
uncertainties,potential increases in project costs,or lack of required approvals that affect the
likelihood of successful project start and completion. The narrative should include a discussion
that identifies how the project parties will mitigate or otherwise be able to handle the identified
risks. For example, if an applicant anticipates pursuing a waiver of relevant domestic preference
laws, the applicant should describe steps that have been or will be taken to maximize the use of
domestic goods,products, and materials in constructing its project.
The Technical Capacity Assessment will evaluate the applicant's capacity to successfully deliver
the project in compliance with applicable Federal requirements. MARAD will consider
significant risks to successful completion of a project, including risks associated with the
complexity of the project, the proposed project schedule, and the applicant's overall capacity to
manage project delivery. If applicable, reviewers will also consider the applicant's previous
experience working with Federal agencies on grant-funded projects. Risks do not disqualify
projects from award, but competitive applications clearly and directly describe achievable risk
mitigation strategies. A project with mitigated risks is more competitive than a comparable
project with unaddressed risks.
Technical Capacity ratings will be one of the following: "low risk," "moderate risk,"or"high
risk."An applicant's lack of previous experience with Federally funded grants will not disqualify
a project from consideration.
(2)Environmental Risk
The application should include sufficient information for MARAD to evaluate whether a project
is reasonably expected to begin construction in a timely manner, consistent with all applicable
local, State, and Federal requirements. To assist MARAD's project environmental risk review,
the applicant should provide the information requested on the anticipated NEPA class of action
and status, required approvals and permits,public involvement, and right-of-way acquisition
plans (if applicable), each of which is described in greater detail in the following sections. To
minimize redundant information in the application, MARAD encourages applicants to cross-
reference from the Project Readiness section of the narrative to relevant information in other
sections of the application.
Information about the NEPA status of the project. The applicant should indicate the
anticipated NEPA level of review for the project and describe any environmental analysis in
progress or completed. This includes Categorical Exclusion,Environmental Assessment/Finding
36
of No Significant Impact, or Environmental Impact Statement/Record of Decision. The applicant
should review the Maritime Administration Manual of Orders (MAO) 600-1 (available at
https://www.maritime.dot.gov/sites/marad.dot.gov/files/docs/environment-security-safety/office-
environment/596/mao600-001-0.pdf)prior to submission.
The applicant should be aware that any project that includes in-water work, extensive ground
disturbance, and/or potential significant impacts to environmental resources will not be eligible
for a Categorical Exclusion and the applicant should endeavor to include the appropriate class of
action for the project.
The applicant should provide a discussion of any environmental reviews that have been initiated
or previously completed, where the project is in that process, and indicate the anticipated date
NEPA would be initiated and an anticipated completion date. If the last agency action with
respect to NEPA documents occurred more than three years before the application date,the
applicant should describe why the project has been delayed and include a proposed approach for
verifying and, if necessary, updating this material in accordance with applicable NEPA
requirements.
The applicant should be aware that the final determination of NEPA class of action will be made
by MARAD after announcement of project selections. The successful applicant will be
responsible for the completion of MARAD's NEPA documentation, in collaboration with
MARAD's NEPA Coordinator in the Office of Environmental Compliance, prior to execution of
the grant agreement.
The applicant should reflect the most conservative NEPA class of action in both the schedule and
budget of the application. If applicable, applicants should include a description of any pre-
submittal discussions with the appropriate MARAD NEPA Coordinator regarding the project's
compliance with NEPA and other applicable Federal environmental reviews and approvals.
Applicants are encouraged to engage with MARAD's Office of Environmental Compliance as
part of the application development process to ensure they fully understand MARAD's NEPA
process.
Information about the National Historic Preservation Act(NHPA) status of the project.
The applicant should indicate any previously completed or ongoing consultations involving the
project and any adjacent areas under Section 106 of the NHPA, 54 U.S.C. 306108. This includes
any communication with State Historic Preservation Offices(SHPOs), Tribal Historic
Preservation Offices (THPOs), and other interested parties. If applicable,the applicant should
discuss the status of consultations and the anticipated date of completion. Successful applicants
will be responsible for completion of MARAD's Section 106 documentation prior to NEPA
completion and execution of the grant agreement.
Environmental Permits and Reviews. The application should demonstrate an awareness of all
environmental permits and approvals that will be required for the project to proceed to
construction consistent with the timeline specified in the project schedule and necessary to meet
the obligation deadline, and a schedule showing receipt or the anticipated receipt of these
anticipated approvals. Examples include but are not limited to: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
37
permits,consultations under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1531, and other
Federal, State, and local requirements. The successful applicant, in collaboration with MARAD,
will be responsible for the completion of consultations under Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act prior to completing NEPA.
Additionally, the application should reference environmental studies or other documents,
preferably through a website link,that describe in detail known project impacts and possible
mitigation for those impacts, and, if applicable, right-of-way acquisition plans, with detailed
schedule and compensation plan. The application should also include a description of public
engagement about the project that has occurred or is anticipated to be conducted as part of the
project and/or NEPA process,proactively inclusive of Historically Disadvantaged Communities,
including details on compliance with environmental justice requirements and the degree to which
public comments and commitments have been integrated into project development and design.
The application should also include any known or anticipated stakeholder or general public
contentious issues related to the project.
Information on environmental reviews, approvals, and permits by other agencies. An
application should indicate whether the proposed project requires reviews or approval actions by
other agencies,provide detailed information about the status of those reviews or approvals,and
should demonstrate compliance with any other applicable Federal, State,or local requirements,
and when such approvals are expected. Applicants should provide a website link or other
reference to copies of any reviews, approvals, and permits prepared.
A description of whether the project is dependent on, or affected by, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers investment and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers planned activities as it relates to the
project, if applicable, should be included.
Reviewers will independently assess the level of review of the project required by NEPA and
evaluate whether the applicant has demonstrated receipt(or reasonably anticipated receipt) of
other necessary environmental permits. Reviewers will also assess the applicant's understanding
of the required environmental obligations and scope, as well as the applicant's ability to comply
with other environmental reviews, consultations,and approvals(such as the Endangered Species
Act and the NHPA). As with risks related to technical capacity, environmental risks do not
disqualify projects from award,but competitive applications include achievable risk mitigation
strategies.
Environmental Risk ratings will be one of the following: "low risk," "moderate risk,"or"high
risk."
2. REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS
a. Review Process
The FY 2025 PIDP grant application evaluation process consists of an Intake Review Phase, a
Technical Review Phase, and a Senior Review Phase.
During the Intake Review Phase, the Intake Team will sort applications into groupings for
assignment to evaluators and conduct a threshold eligibility screening based on criteria outlined
in this NOFO.
38
During the Technical Review Phase, MARAD staff will analyze applications and provide
ratings, consistent with the descriptions in this notice. Initially, all applications will be reviewed
for their alignment with the following merit criteria: Achieving Safety, Efficiency, or Reliability
Improvements; Port Resilience; and Leveraging Federal Funding. The applications will also be
reviewed for their alignment with the additional selection considerations of Climate Change and
Sustainability; Equity and Justice40; and Workforce Development, Job Quality, and Wealth
Creation.
Projects that receive a"High"rating in Safety, Efficiency, or Reliability Improvements, no less
than a"Medium" rating in Port Resilience, and whose calculated non-Federal share of the
project's future eligible costs exceeds 20 percent will be designated "Highly Recommended" and
automatically advance for second-tier analysis.
After that initial review, projects that did not receive a"Highly Recommended"designation will
be presented to the SRT. The SRT will decide which of the projects not designated as "Highly
Recommended"will move forward for second-tier analysis. The SRT will primarily base its
decision on how well a project meets the statutory merit criteria of Achieving Safety, Efficiency,
or Reliability Improvements; Port Resilience; and Leverage. The SRT may also consider a
project's rating on: Climate Change and Sustainability; Equity and Justice40; and Workforce
Development, Job Quality, and Wealth Creation. A project that aligns poorly with the selection
considerations of Climate Change, Equity, or Workforce Development may nevertheless be
advanced for additional review.
During the second-tier analysis,projects will be reviewed for their alignment with the following
criteria: Supporting Economic Vitality; Project Readiness; and Statutory Determinations.
Based on the results of the second-tier review,the SRT will assemble a List of Projects for
Consideration for selection by the Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy. A project will
be advanced to the List of Projects for Consideration based on its alignment with the statutory
merit criteria. In addition, a project must meet all applicable determinations to be advanced on
the List of Projects for Consideration. Only those projects that meet all applicable determinations
will be advanced to the Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy for consideration.
Using the discretionary authority provided in statute, the Under Secretary of Transportation for
Policy selects projects from the List of Projects for Consideration for award consistent with the
merit criteria and selection considerations described in Section F.1. In making PIDP grants, the
Under Secretary of Transportation for Policy may give priority to providing funding to strategic
seaports in support of national security requirements pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 54301(a)(6)(C).
b. Follow-up with Applicants
MARAD may ask any applicant to supplement data in its application but is not required to do so.
Lack of supporting information provided with the application negatively affects competitiveness
of the application. Throughout the review and selection process,MARAD may seek additional
information from an applicant related to project eligibility,whether the project can be completed
with a reduced award, or other information needed to complete project analysis. MARAD will
39
use email when seeking additional information from an applicant. MARAD will send the email
to the point(s)of contact listed by the applicant on the SF-424.
3. Risk Review
Prior to obligation of funds, each selected applicant will be subject to a risk assessment as
required by 2 C.F.R. 200.206. Before making a Federal award with a total amount of Federal
share greater than the simplified acquisition threshold, MARAD must review and consider any
information about the applicant that is in the responsibility/qualification records available in
SAM.gov(see 41 U.S.C. 2313). An applicant may review information in SAM.gov and comment
on any information about itself MARAD will consider comments by the applicant, in addition to
the other information in SAM.gov, when completing the review of risk posed by applicants.
G. AWARD NOTICES
1. HOW PROJECT SELECTIONS ARE ANNOUNCED
MARAD will publicly announce selections and notify each successful applicant by email.
MARAD will also post all selections in an excel file on the PIDP website. Notice of selection is
not authorization to begin work or to incur costs for the proposed project. Following the
announcement of selections, PIDP Program Office staff will contact the point of contact listed on
each successful applicant's SF-424 to initiate the process of developing a grant agreement, which
is the official document that obligates PIDP funds.
2. ANNOUNCEMENT DATES
MARAD anticipates that selections will be announced no later than November 14,2025.
3. PRE-AWARD COSTS
Unless"pre-award costs" are authorized by MARAD in writing after MARAD's announcement
of FY 2025 PIDP award selections pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 54301(a)(10)(B)or 2 C.F.R. 200.458 or
a Small Project at a Small Port applicant has included pre-award costs in the application budget,
consistent with Section B.3, any costs incurred prior to MARAD's obligation of funds for a
project are ineligible for reimbursement and are ineligible to count as match for cost share
requirements.'9
• Project costs incurred before project selections are announced cannot be paid for with
funds from this competition.
• Funds must be used only for the specific purposes as outlined in the award letter and/or
authorized by MARAD.
4. REIMBURSABLE PROGRAM
'9 Pre-award costs are only costs incurred directly pursuant to the negotiation and anticipation of the PIDP award
where such costs are necessary for efficient and timely performance of the scope of work,as determined by
MARAD.
40
Recipients of a PIDP award will not receive a lump-sum cash disbursement at the time of
announcement of project selection or obligation of funds. Instead, PIDP grant funds will
reimburse recipients only after a grant agreement has been executed, allowable expenses have
been incurred, and a valid request for reimbursement has been submitted and approved by
MARAD.
H. POST-AWARD REQUIREMENTS AND ADMINISTRATION
1. ADMINISTRATIVE AND NATIONAL POLICY REQUIREMENTS
i. Administrative Requirements
Amounts awarded as a grant under this notice from BIL funding that are not expended by the
grant recipient shall remain available to MARAD until September 30,2035, for use for grants
under this program.
MARAD will determine the period of performance for each award based on the specific project
that was evaluated and selected. MARAD will administer each PIDP grant pursuant to a grant
agreement with the grant recipient. The grant agreement includes two attachments: one labelled
"Exhibits" and one labelled"General Terms and Conditions."These attachments include most of
the administrative and national policy requirements applicable to PIDP grant awards. Please visit
https://www.maritime.dot.gov/grants/federal-grant-assistance/federal-grant-assistance for the
Exhibits and General Terms and Conditions for prior PIDP awards. The FY 2025 PIDP Exhibits
and General Terms and Conditions will be similar to the FY 2024 PIDP documents but will
include relevant updates consistent with this notice.
All awards will be administered pursuant to the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards found in 2 C.F.R. part 200,as adopted by
DOT at 2 C.F.R. part 1201. Federal prevailing wage rate requirements included in subchapter IV
of chapter 31 of title 40,U.S.C., apply to all projects receiving funds under this program, and
apply to all parts of the project,whether funded with PIDP grant funds, other Federal funds, or
non-Federal funds.
As expressed in Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the Future Is Made in All of America by All
of America's Workers (86 FR 7475),the executive branch should maximize, consistent with law,
the use of goods,products, and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States.
Funds made available under this notice are subject to the domestic preference requirements of
the Build America, Buy America Act, Pub.L.No.117-58, div. G,tit. IX, subtitle A, 135 Stat. 429,
1298 (2021). MARAD expects all applicants to comply with those requirements without needing
a project-specific waiver, and no amounts made available through this NOFO may be obligated
for a project unless all iron, steel, manufactured products, and construction materials used in the
project are produced in the United States. Refer to term B.5 of the Exhibits to FY 2024 PIDP
grant agreements20 to see how MARAD intends to implement the Build America, Buy America
Act for FY 2025 PIDP infrastructure projects. If selected for an award, grant recipients will be
20 FY 2023 PIDP Exhibits available here:https://www.maritime.dot.gov/grants-finances/federal-grant-
assistance/marad-fy-2023-pidp-exhibits january-2-2024.
41
required to obtain approval from DOT to waive any of these requirements. To obtain that
approval, grant recipients must be prepared to demonstrate how they will maximize the use of
domestic goods,products, and materials in constructing their project.
In connection with any program or activity conducted with or benefiting from funds awarded
under this notice,recipients of funds must comply with all applicable requirements of Federal
law, including, without limitation, the Constitution of the United States; the conditions of
performance, nondiscrimination requirements, and other assurances made applicable to the
award of funds in accordance with regulations of DOT; and applicable Federal financial
assistance and contracting principles promulgated by the Office of Management and Budget. In
complying with these requirements,recipients, in particular, must ensure that no concession
agreements are denied, or other contracting decisions made on the basis of speech or other
activities protected by the First Amendment. If MARAD determines that a recipient has failed to
comply with applicable Federal requirements,MARAD may terminate the award of funds and
disallow previously incurred costs, requiring the recipient to reimburse any expended award
funds.
ii. Program Requirements
Civil Rights and Title VI
As a condition of a grant award, grant recipients should demonstrate that the recipient has a plan
for compliance with civil rights obligations and nondiscrimination laws, including Title VI of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 and implementing regulations(49 C.F.R. part 21), the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and all other civil rights
requirements and accompanying regulations. This should include a current Title VI program
plan, a plan to address any legacy infrastructure or facilities that are not compliant with ADA
standards, and a completed Community Participation Plan (alternatively called a Public
Participation Plan).MARAD's Office of Civil Rights is available to work with awarded grant
recipients to ensure full compliance with Federal civil rights requirements.
Critical Infrastructure Security,Cybersecurity,and Resilience
It is the policy of the United States to strengthen the security and resilience of its critical
infrastructure against all hazards, including physical and cyber risks, consistent with the National
Security Memorandum on Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience (NSM-22), and the
National Security Memorandum on Improving Cybersecurity for Critical Infrastructure Control
Systems. Each applicant selected for Federal funding must demonstrate,prior to the signing of
the grant agreement, efforts to consider and address physical and cyber security risks relevant to
the transportation mode and type and scale of the project. Projects that have not appropriately
considered and addressed physical and cyber security and resilience in their planning, design,
and project oversight, as determined by the Department and the Department of Homeland
Security, will be required to do so before receiving funds.
Federal Contract Compliance
42
As a condition of grant award all Federally assisted contractors are required to make good faith
efforts to meet the goals of EO 11246, Equal Employment Opportunity(30 FR 12319,and as
amended). Under Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act and its implementing regulations,
affirmative action obligations for certain contractors include an aspirational employment goal of
7 percent workers with disabilities.
The U.S. Department of Labor's Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) is
charged with enforcing Executive Order 11246, Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,
and the Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974. OFCCP has a Mega
Construction Project Program through which it engages with project sponsors as early as the
design phase to help promote compliance with non-discrimination and affirmative action
obligations. OFCCP will identify projects that receive an award under this notice and are
required to participate in OFCCP's Mega Construction Project Program from a wide range of
Federally assisted projects over which OFCCP has jurisdiction and that have a project cost above
$35 million. DOT will require project sponsors with costs above$35 million that receive awards
under this funding opportunity to partner with OFCCP, if selected by OFCCP, as a condition of
their DOT award.
Project Signage and Public Acknowledgements.
Recipients are encouraged for construction and non-construction projects to post project signage
and to include public acknowledgments in published and other collateral materials(e.g.,press
releases, marketing materials,website, etc.) satisfactory in form and substance to DOT, that
identifies the nature of the project and indicates that"the project is funded by the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law", as applicable. In addition, recipients employing project signage are required
to use the official Investing in America emblem in accordance with the Official Investing in
America Emblem Style Guide.21 Costs associated with signage and public acknowledgments
must be reasonable and limited. Signs or public acknowledgments should not be produced,
displayed, or published if doing so results in unreasonable cost, expense, or recipient burden. The
recipient is encouraged to use recycled or recovered materials when procuring signs.
2. REPORTING
i. Progress Reporting on Grant Activities
Each applicant selected for PIDP grant funding must submit quarterly progress reports and
Federal Financial Reports (SF-425)to monitor project progress and ensure accountability and
financial transparency in the PIDP.
ii. Performance Reporting
Each applicant selected for PIDP grant funding must collect and report to MARAD information
on the project's observed performance with respect to the relevant long-term outcomes that are
expected to be achieved through construction of the project. Performance indicators will include
measurable goals or targets for a period determined by MARAD. They will be used to evaluate
21 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-contentluploads/2023/02/Investing-in-America-Brand-Guide.pdf
43
and compare projects and monitor the results that grant funds achieve to the intended long-term
outcomes of the PIDP. To the extent possible,performance indicators used in the reporting will
relate to at least one of the merit criteria defined in Section F and to a benefit estimated in the
BCA, as applicable. MARAD expects that the level of performance will be consistent with
estimates used in the applicant's BCA. Performance reporting continues for three years after
project construction is completed, and MARAD does not provide PIDP grant funding
specifically for performance reporting. For each project selected for award,MARAD,with input
from the grant recipients, will identify the measures to be collected. Those measures and the
reporting requirements will be formalized in the agreement obligating award funds for the
project.
iii. Program Evaluation
As a condition of grant award, PIDP grant recipients may be required to participate in an
evaluation undertaken by DOT or another agency or partner. The evaluation may take different
forms such as an implementation assessment across grant recipients, an impact and/or outcomes
analysis of all or selected sites within or across grant recipients, or a benefit/cost analysis or
assessment of return on investment. DOT may require applicants to collect data elements to aid
the evaluation and/or use information available through other reporting. As a part of the
evaluation, as a condition of award, grant recipients must agree to: (1)make records available to
the evaluation contractor or DOT staff; (2)provide access to program records, and any other
relevant documents to calculate costs and benefits; (3) in the case of an impact analysis,
facilitate the access to relevant information as requested; and(4) follow evaluation procedures
as specified by the evaluation contractor or DOT staff
Recipients and subrecipients are also encouraged to incorporate program evaluation including
associated data collection activities from the outset of their program design and implementation
to meaningfully document and measure their progress towards meeting an agency's priority
goals. Title I of the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018 (Evidence Act),
Pub. L. No. 115-435 (2019)urges Federal awarding agencies and Federal assistance recipients
and subrecipients to use program evaluation as a critical tool to learn, to improve equitable
delivery, and to elevate program service and delivery across the program lifecycle. Evaluation
means"an assessment using systematic data collection and analysis of one or more programs,
policies, and organizations intended to assess their effectiveness and efficiency" (codified at 5
U.S.C.§ 311). For grant recipients, evaluation expenses are allowable costs(either as direct or
indirect),unless prohibited by statute or regulation, and such expenses may include the
personnel and equipment needed for data infrastructure and expertise in data analysis,
performance, and evaluation(2 CFR part 200). Credible program evaluation activities are
implemented with relevance and utility,rigor, independence and objectivity, transparency, and
ethics. (OMB Circular A-11, Part 6 Section 290).
iv. Reporting of Matters Related to Recipient Integrity and Performance
If the total value of a selected applicant's currently active grants, cooperative agreements, and
procurement contracts from all Federal awarding agencies exceeds $10,000,000 for any period of
time during the period of performance of this Federal award,then the applicant during that
period of time must maintain the currency of information reported to the SAM that is made
44
available in FAPIIS about civil, criminal, or administrative proceedings described in paragraph 2
of Appendix XII of 2 C.F.R. part 200.This is a statutory requirement under Section 872 of Public
Law 110-417, as amended(41 U.S.C. 2313).As required by Section 3010 of Public Law 111-
212, all information posted in the designated integrity and performance system on or after April
15, 2011, except past performance reviews required for Federal procurement contracts, will be
publicly available.
I. FEDERAL AWARD AGENCY CONTACT(S)
For further information concerning this notice please contact the PIDP staff via email at:
PIDPgrants(&,,dot.gov, or call Aubrey Parsons at 202-366-8047. A TDD is available for
individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing at 202-366-3993. In addition,DOT will post
answers to questions and requests for clarifications at hops://www.maritime.dot.gov/PIDPgrants.
To ensure applicants receive accurate information about eligibility or the program,the applicant
is encouraged to contact MARAD with questions directly, rather than through intermediaries or
third parties. MARAD may also conduct debriefs on the PIDP grants selection and award
process upon request by unsuccessful applicants.
J. OTHER INFORMATION
1. PROTECTION OF CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION
All information submitted as part of or in support of any application shall use publicly available
data or data that can be made public and methodologies that are accepted by industry practice
and standards, to the extent possible. If the applicant submits information that the applicant
considers to be a trade secret or confidential commercial or financial information,the applicant
must provide that information in a separate document, which the applicant may cross-reference
from the application narrative or other portions of the application. For the separate document
containing confidential information,the applicant must do the following: (1) state on the cover of
that document that it"Contains Confidential Business Information (CBI)"; (2)mark each page
that contains confidential information with "CBI"; (3)highlight or otherwise denote the
confidential content on each page; and(4) at the end of the document, explain why the
information you are submitting is CBI. DOT will protect confidential information complying
with these requirements to the extent required under applicable law. If DOT receives a Freedom
of Information Act(FOIA) request for the information that the applicant has marked in
accordance with this section, DOT will follow the procedures described in its FOIA regulations
at 49 C.F.R.7.29. Only information that is in the separate document, marked in accordance with
this section, and ultimately determined to be confidential under Section 7.29 will be exempt from
disclosure under FOIA.
2. PUBLICATION AND SHARING OF APPLICATION INFORMATION
Following the completion of the selection process and announcement of awards,MARAD
intends to publish a list of all applications received along with the names of the applicant
organizations and funding amounts requested. Except for the information properly marked as
described in Section J.2., MARAD may make application narratives publicly available or share
45
application information within the Department or with other Federal agencies if the Department
determines that sharing is relevant to the respective program's objectives.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
December 20,2024
By Order of the Maritime Administrator
1