Port Infrastructure Development Program

FY26 PIDP NOFO Final

1
FY 2026 Notice of Funding Opportunity
Port Infrastructure Development Program (PIDP)
Amendment No. 4
Maritime Administration (MARAD)
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)
A. BASIC INFORMATION .................................................................................................................... 3
1. CHANGES FROM THE AMENDMENT TO THE FY 2025 NOFO .............................................. 4
B. ELIGIBILITY ..................................................................................................................................... 4
1. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS ................................................................................................................ 4
2. ELIGIBLE PROJECTS..................................................................................................................... 5
3. APPLICATION LIMIT ..................................................................................................................... 7
4. COST SHARING .............................................................................................................................. 7
5. PRE-AWARD AUTHORITY ............................................................................................................ 8
6. LOCATION DESIGNATIONS AND DEFINITIONS ...................................................................... 8
7. PROJECT COMPONENTS .............................................................................................................. 9
8. REDUCED AWARDS .................................................................................................................... 10
C. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................... 10
1. PROGRAM HISTORY AND AUTHORIZATION ........................................................................ 10
2. PROGRAM GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ..................................................................................... 11
3. AWARD SIZE ................................................................................................................................. 11
4. RESTRICTIONS ON FUNDING ................................................................................................... 11
5. AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS ......................................................................................................... 12
6. PERFORMANCE MEASURES ..................................................................................................... 12
7. PREVIOUS AWARDS .................................................................................................................... 12
D. APPLICATION CONTENT AND FORMAT ................................................................................ 12
1. STANDARD FORM 424 ................................................................................................................ 13
2. FY 2026 PIDP COVER PAGE ........................................................................................................ 13
3. PROJECT NARRATIVE ................................................................................................................ 15
a) NARRATIVE SECTION I: PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...................................................... 15
b) NARRATIVE SECTION II: PROJECT LOCATION .......................................................... 16
c) NARRATIVE SECTION III: GRANT FUNDS, SOURCES, AND USE OF FUNDS ........ 17
d) NARRATIVE SECTION IV: MERIT CRITERIA ................................................................ 18

---

2
e) NARRATIVE SECTION V: ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS ..................................... 18
f) NARRATIVE SECTION VII: STATUTORY DETERMINATIONS ................................... 19
E. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND DEADLINE .................................................................. 22
1. ADDRESS TO REQUEST APPLICATION PACKAGE ............................................................... 22
2. UNIQUE ENTITY IDENTIFIER AND SYSTEM FOR AWARD MANAGEMENT ................... 22
3. SUBMISSION DATES AND TIMES ............................................................................................. 23
4. INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVIEW ........................................................................................... 23
5. COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 508 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT OF 1973 .................. 23
F. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION ................................................................................. 23
1. CRITERIA ...................................................................................................................................... 24
2. REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS ....................................................................................... 37
G. AWARD NOTICES ........................................................................................................................... 38
1. HOW PROJECT SELECTIONS ARE ANNOUNCED .................................................................. 38
2. PRE-AWARD COSTS .................................................................................................................... 38
3. REIMBURSABLE PROGRAM ..................................................................................................... 39
H. POST-AWARD REQUIREMENTS AND ADMINISTRATION .................................................. 39
1. ADMINISTRATIVE AND NATIONAL POLICY REQUIREMENTS ......................................... 39
2. REPORTING .................................................................................................................................. 41
I. FEDERAL AWARD AGENCY CONTACT(S) ............................................................................... 43
J. OTHER INFORMATION ................................................................................................................ 43
1. PROTECTION OF CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION ........................................... 43
2. PUBLICATION AND SHARING OF APPLICATION INFORMATION ..................................... 43

---

3
A. BASIC INFORMATION
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Pub. L. 117-58, November 15, 2021) (IIJA)
appropriated $450 million and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026 (Pub. L. 119-75,
February 3, 2026) (FY 2026 Appropriations Act) appropriated $38,628,000 to be awarded as
discretionary grants by the U.S. Department of Transportation Maritime Administration
(MARAD) for the FY 2026 Port Infrastructure Development Program (PIDP.) The program is
codified at 46 U.S.C. § 54301.
SUMMARY OVERVIEW OF KEY INFORMATION: Port Infrastructure Development Program
(PIDP) Discretionary Grant Opportunity
Topic Description
Federal Agency Maritime Administration (MARAD)
Name
Funding Opportunity FY 2026 Port Infrastructure Development Program
Title
Announcement Type Notice of Funding Opportunity
Funding Opportunity MA-PID-26-001
Number
Assistance Listing 20.823 Port Infrastructure Development Program
Number
Funding Details $488,628,000 in FY 2026 PIDP funds
Key Dates Applications due: June 26, 2026 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 Eligible Applicants are:
 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, 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.

---

4
Eligible Projects Projects 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 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;
 Resiliency in response to environmental factors; or
 Infrastructure that supports seafood and seafood-related businesses.
(NOTE: Section B.6. provides additional information.)
Questions Email PIDPgrants@dot.gov
Agency Contact PIDPgrants@dot.gov or call Aubrey Parsons at 202–366–8047
Information
1. CHANGES FROM THE AMENDMENT TO THE FY 2025 NOFO
This amendment to the FY 2026 PIDP NOFO originally published on December 23, 2025 makes
the following changes:
 Includes an additional $38,628,000 in funding appropriated by the FY 2026
Appropriations Act,
 Updates rating rubrics for the statutory merit criteria,
 Includes a new priority for projects located in Qualified Opportunity Zones (26 U.S.C.
§ 1400Z-1), projects that incorporate innovative technology, and projects that support
national multimodal freight goals,
 Removes Workforce Development as a selection consideration, and
 Projects to provide shore power at a port are no longer automatically treated as satisfying
the determination that the project improves the safety, efficiency, or reliability of the
movement of goods. Applicants must describe in the narrative how such projects satisfy
that statutory determination.
B. ELIGIBILITY
To be selected for a PIDP grant, an applicant must be an Eligible Applicant and the project must
be an Eligible Project.
1. ELIGIBLE APPLICANTS
An eligible applicant for a FY 2026 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,

---

5
 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 2026 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 must be provided as an attachment to the application.
The lead applicant submitting the application is presumed to 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, the application must express such intention and a letter of support from the intended
subrecipient must be included as an attachment to the application. Lead applicants intending to
make subawards under their proposed FY 2026 PIDP project should refer to 2 CFR 200.331-333
on how to make subrecipient determinations and what requirements apply to pass-through
entities, including ensuring subrecipient compliance with all PIDP requirements. 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.
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. ELIGIBLE PROJECTS
Eligible projects for FY 2026 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. Pursuant to 46 U.S.C. § 54301(a)(3)(A), 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;
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;
IV. environmental and emissions mitigation measures, including projects for—

---

6
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.
In accordance with 46 U.S.C. § 54301(a)(5)(A), if applying to use a PIDP grant to acquire digital
infrastructure or a software component, applicants for large projects must comply with the
requirements for ensuring cybersecurity, as further referenced in section D.3.a of this notice.
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, 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 2026 PIDP funding.
Under the FY 2026 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
eligible under 46 U.S.C. chapter 537, unless the Secretary determines such vessel is necessary
for a project under 46 U.S.C. § 54301(a)(3)(A)(ii)(IV) 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 2026 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.
Projects to fund workforce training not related to electrification technology are ineligible.
This program will not fund the purchase or installation of fully automated cargo handling
equipment remotely operated or monitored, with or without the exercise of human intervention
or control, if the Secretary determines that such equipment would result in a net loss of jobs
within the port or port terminal. Applicants that propose projects that include the acquisition of

---

7
eligible cargo handling equipment must indicate in their application whether the equipment is
fully automated. If fully automated equipment is proposed to be acquired, the applicant must
provide information demonstrating that the project will not directly result in a net loss of jobs.
3. APPLICATION LIMIT
Each eligible applicant may submit no more than one application. Unrelated project components
should not be combined in one application to meet this limit. If an applicant submits multiple
applications, only the last one received by MARAD will be considered.
4. 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. The
Secretary, however, 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:
(cid:4666)𝑃𝐼𝐷𝑃 𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑅𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑒𝑠𝑡 (cid:3397)𝑂𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟 𝐹𝑒𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝐹𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑠(cid:4667)
(cid:3404) 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 requirement of a different
Federal program may not be counted as the non-Federal cost share for both the FY 2026 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.

---

8
All non-Federal cost-share funds are subject to the same Federal requirements as awarded PIDP
funds.
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.
5. 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 2026
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.1
6. LOCATION DESIGNATIONS AND DEFINITIONS
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).
Development phase activities: Includes planning, feasibility analysis, revenue forecasting,
environmental review, permitting, and preliminary engineering and design work.
Great Lakes port: A port on the Great Lakes and their connecting and tributary waters as defined
under 33 CFR 83.03(o).
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: The term “port” includes— (i) any port on the navigable waters of the United States; and
(ii) any harbor, marine terminal, or other shore side facility used principally for the movement of
goods on inland waters (including the Great Lakes).
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
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.

---

9
by natural or man-made hazards, such as sea level change, flooding, earthquakes, hurricanes,
tsunami inundation or other extreme weather events.
Rural area: An area located outside of a Census-designated urban area that had a population
greater than 50,000 in the 2020 Census.2
Small Port: A 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 provided by an
independent audit. 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).
Strategic Seaport: A military port or commercial port that is subject to a port planning order or
Basic Ordering Agreement (or both) that is projected to be used for the deployment of forces and
shipment of ammunition or sustainment supplies in support of military operations.
Urban area: An area located within (or on the boundary of) a Census-designated urban area that
had a population greater than 50,000 in the 2020 Census.
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.
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.
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.

---

10
Unrelated project components should not be combined in one application to meet the application
limit. Therefore, all project components--even those with independent utility--that are presented
together in a single application must demonstrate a logical 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 describe the relationship between all
components presented in the application, particularly if those components are not physically
connected.
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.
9. PREVIOUS PIDP RECIPIENTS
Previous recipients of a PIDP grant may apply for funding to support additional phases of their
project. The application should demonstrate the extent to which the previously funded project
has met estimated project schedules and budget, as well as the ability to realize the benefits
expected for the project.
10. UNSUCCESSFUL FY 2025 APPLICANTS
MARAD encourages unsuccessful FY 2025 PIDP applicants to apply for FY 2026 funding.
Applicants should, however, review their application to ensure that it complies with any new
program requirements and criteria outlined in this NOFO.
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. IIJA appropriated $450 million to the PIDP
for FY 2026 to make discretionary grants for eligible PIDP projects. On February 3, 2026, the
FY 2026 Appropriations Act appropriated an additional $103,330,000 for the FY 2026 PIDP
grant program. Of that amount, $38,628,000 is available to be awarded as discretionary grants.
Therefore, a total of $488,628,000 in funding is available to be awarded as discretionary grants
for the FY 2026 PIDP grant program. MARAD intends to retain up to two percent of the amount
appropriated for PIDP funding this fiscal year for grant administration and oversight as permitted

---

11
under 46 U.S.C. 54301(a)(11)(A). Unobligated prior year PIDP funds may also be made
available and awarded under this solicitation to eligible projects.
This NOFO solicits applications for projects to be funded under the FY 2026 PIDP. It includes
the funding appropriated by IIJA and the FY 2026 Appropriations Act. Applicants should note
that the two funding streams (IIJA funding and FY 2026 Appropriations Act funding) have
slightly different funding restrictions.
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.
3. AWARD SIZE
For funding awarded under IIJA, there is no minimum award size. For all projects funded under
the FY 2026 Appropriations Act, the minimum PIDP award size is $1 million. Therefore,
funding requests below the FY 2026 Appropriations Act minimum will only be considered for
funding from the IIJA; they will not be eligible to compete for the full amount of funding
available. 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
$122,157,000
Per State No more than 25% of available funding, which is
$122,157,000
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 46 U.S.C. § 50309, 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

---

12
sponsored by the People’s Republic of China, or a controlled commercial entity; or a similar
system provided by Chinese state-affiliated entities.3
MARAD may retain up to two percent of available funding for oversight and administration of
grants.
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 2026 PIDP funding.
Fiscal Year Funding Obligation Deadline Funding Expenditure Deadline
FY 2026 September 30, 2030 5 years after funds obligation for
each individual award
MARAD seeks to obligate FY 2026 PIDP grant funds by September 30, 2030.
 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,
2035, 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 at: https://www.maritime.dot.gov/grants-
finances/federal-grant-assistance/performance-measures.
7. PREVIOUS AWARDS
Previous program awards can be found on the PIDP website.
D. APPLICATION CONTENT AND FORMAT
The Project Narrative should be formatted as a single-spaced document, using a standard 12-
point font, such as Times New Roman, with 1-inch margins, with a narrative text in one column.
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
3 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.

---

13
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,” “Memorandum 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).
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 2026 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 the
project’s major components. 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 or Great Lakes Yes or No.
port?

---

14
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.6 of the NOFO
to answer this question.
Project Zip Code Identify the zip code that corresponds to the
coordinates identified above.
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 BUILD FY
DOT or a separate agency) in 2026 for the 2026, $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, award (such as “INFRA FY 2023”).
FASTLANE/INFRA, Mega, USMHP, or
PIDP funding?
PIDP Grant Amount Requested Enter the total amount of PIDP grant funds
requested. This number must be the same as the
amount entered on line 18a of the SF-424.
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.
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

---

15
amount of funds that will be used. Note that
TIFIA and RRIF generally share the PIDP
program's Federal compliance requirements and
are complementary programs.
Private Corporation Involvement Does the project involve a private entity or
entities that will receive a direct and predictable
financial benefit if the project is selected for an
award? This includes, but is not limited to,
private owners or operators of infrastructure
facilities being improved and private freight
shippers or carriers directly benefitting from
completion of the proposed project.
Private Corporation Names If this project directly involves or benefits a
private corporation, please list the
corporation(s) separated by a comma.
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 incidental to the proposed
improvement, the applicant should confirm that the dredging is not for

---

16
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.
In addition, applicants for large projects applying to use PIDP funds to acquire
digital infrastructure or a software component must do one of the following in this
section of their project narrative:
1) Certify that the facility for which the applicant is applying for a grant has an
approved facility security plan pursuant to section 46 U.S.C. § 70103(c) that
addresses the cybersecurity risks of such proposed digital infrastructure or
software components; or
2) If the approved facility security plan of a facility for which the applicant is
applying for a grant does not address such cybersecurity risks, provide a brief
description in this section of the project narrative of how the applicant will
address the cybersecurity risks of such digital infrastructure or software
component. Each applicant selected for PIDP funding will be required to
ensure that such security plan is updated to address the cybersecurity risks in
the next update required under section 70103(c)) as a condition of funding.
Applicants for small projects at small ports are not subject to the abovementioned
cybersecurity requirements.
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.6);
 a project at a coastal seaport or Great Lakes port (as defined in Section
B.6);
 a small project at a small port (as defined in Section B.6) seeking
funding under 46 U.S.C. § 54301(b;); and
 located in a Qualified Opportunity Zone. The Department provides
more information and an interactive map to show Qualified
Opportunity Zones. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) designates
Qualified Opportunity Zones and maintains a list on the IRS website.
MARAD may consider prioritizing the selection of projects located in
designated Qualified Opportunity Zones.

---

17
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 that 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 2026 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 must include:
 Total Project Costs for the FY 2026 PIDP project (see Section B.3 for
definition of Total Project Cost);
 FY 2026 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
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:

---

18
[Component [Component
1] 2] Total
PIDP Funds: [$XXX] [$XXX] [$XXX]
Other Federal Funds: [$XXX] [$XXX] [$XXX]
Non-Federal Funds: [$XXX] [$XXX] [$XXX]
Total: [$XXX] [$XXX] [$XXX]
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 CFR 200.458 if its
application is selected for award. 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.
e) NARRATIVE SECTION V: ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS
This section of the application should demonstrate how the project aligns with the
additional considerations of Supporting National Multimodal Freight Goals, Project
Readiness, and Innovative Technology.
Supporting National Multimodal Freight Goals describes how the project
generates benefits and produces outcomes that support and align with national
multimodal freight policy goals. This portion of the narrative should provide
information on the categories of goods and commodities that will be impacted by the
project, the customers or industries who ship through the Port, and any other

---

19
information that shows how the project supports the national goals for the multimodal
freight system. The approach MARAD will take in evaluating projects for alignment
with this Additional Consideration is described in detail in Section F.1.
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 NEPA Process & Permitting Risk. Technical
Capacity and NEPA Process & Permitting Risk are described in detail in Section F.1.
Innovative Technology considers whether and how the applicant takes advantage of
the many developments in science that are transforming the way we address the
practical challenges of infrastructure development and maritime operations. A well-
written application will demonstrate how the project incorporates novel approaches to
the development and improvement of maritime infrastructure and operations. For
PIDP, innovation may include the deployment of advanced technologies to enhance
safety or operational efficiency; the application of innovative methods in design,
construction, or maintenance that reduce costs or accelerate project delivery; and the
integration of solutions that strengthen port resilience. Examples of innovative
technologies include: smart cargo handling systems, intelligent berth and yard
management, advanced asset inspection and management technologies, or resilient
infrastructure designs. Applicants are expected to clearly describe and substantiate
how their project goes beyond traditional maritime practices and delivers measurable
benefits, supported by evidence or concrete examples. The approach MARAD will
take in evaluating projects for alignment with this Additional Consideration is
described in detail in Section F.1.
f) 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.

---

20
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.
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.

---

21
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).
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 documentation that the matching
funds will be available and/or committed
prior to obligation of funds, regardless of
the source of funding.

---

22
5. The project will be completed without Please provide expected obligation date
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
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 AND SYSTEM FOR AWARD MANAGEMENT
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

---

23
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 2026 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 June 26, 2026.
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.
i. 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@grants.gov.
ii. 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.
iii. 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

---

24
1. CRITERIA
Responsiveness Review
There are several statutory criteria that must be met for an application to be eligible for
application review and selection for an award. MARAD reserves the right to submit 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
application review. The intake review process verifies basic applicant and project eligibility, and
the application 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));
 Certification or description of cybersecurity risks for large projects proposing digital
infrastructure or a software component (46 U.S.C. § 54301(a)(5)(A)(ii));
 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. § 54301(a)(6)(A)(i));
 The project is cost effective (46 U.S.C. § 54301(a)(6)(A)(ii));
 The applicant has the authority to carry out the project (46 U.S.C.
§ 54301(a)(6)(A)(iii));
 Sufficiency of funding to meet the matching requirements (46 U.S.C.
§ 54301(a)(6)(A)(iv));
 The project will be completed without unreasonable delay 46 U.S.C.
§ 54301(a)(6)(A)(v); and
 The project cannot be completed easily and efficiently without Federal funding
(46 U.S.C. § 54301(a)(6)(A)(vi)).
If any of the factors listed above are in question, MARAD will continue the application review
process until the concern is resolved. If non-responsiveness is confirmed, the application review
will conclude, and the responsiveness issue will be memorialized in the review documentation. If
a responsiveness question is successfully resolved, the application will 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.

---

25
Planning grant applications will be evaluated against the same merit criteria as capital grants.
The information provided in planning grant applications, however, need not include the same
level of data-driven material submitted for capital grants. 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, 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 rubrics below, reviewers will assign a rating of “high,” “medium,” “low,” or “non-
responsive” for each element (that is, safety, efficiency, and reliability). Reviewers will then
combine those ratings to arrive at a single overall project rating. 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 (not an
OR does not benefits, but ancillary or
project satisfactorily safety may not incidental
negatively address this be a primary consideration)
affects safety criterion or project purpose AND the project
relates to safety or the project’s has clear, direct,
benefits that are safety benefits data-driven (for
external to the do not meet the capital projects)
port description of a and significant
“High” rating: benefits that

Protects target a

individuals documented
inside the port safety problem
from safety risks by doing one or

Incorporates more of the

safety following:
improvements - Incorporates
that are part of a specific safety
documented risk improvements
reduction plan that a part of a
documented risk

---

26

Reduces reduction plan

fatalities and/or and that have
serious injuries port-wide impact
related to port - Protects
operations 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 (not an
criterion OR information that efficiency ancillary or
project does not benefits even incidental
negatively satisfactorily though consideration)
affects address this efficiency may AND the project
efficiency criterion or not be a primary has clear, direct,
relates to project purpose data-driven (for
efficiency or the project’s capital projects)
benefits that are efficiency efficiency
external to the benefits do not benefits by
port meet the accomplishing
standard of a one or more of
“High” rating: the following:

Results in an - Results in a

improvement documented
likely to increase increase in cargo
cargo throughput throughput by

Makes meeting an

improvements existing, well-
that enhance the defined need for
speed of cargo additional
operations throughput
capacity

Generates

changes in port
operations that
increase the
types of cargo
that can be
moved through
the port with
documentation

---

27
of likely
increases in new
cargo volumes

Makes

improvements
that enhance the
speed of cargo
operations
Reliability Application did Application Project has one Reliability is a
not address the contains or more of the primary project
Reliability reliability following purpose (not an
criterion OR information that reliability ancillary or
project does not benefits even incidental
negatively satisfactorily though consideration)
affects reliability address this reliability may AND the project
criterion or not be a primary has clear, direct,
relates to purpose or the data-driven (for
reliability project’s capital projects)
improvements reliability reliability
that are external benefits do not benefits by
to the port meet the accomplishing
standard of a one or more of
“High” rating: the following:

Results in - Results in

enhancements enhancements
that are likely to that generate
improve the well-
dependability of documented
cargo operations improvements in

Remedies port the

infrastructure dependability of
deficiencies that cargo operations
have an adverse - Remedies port
impact on port infrastructure
operations deficiencies that
are identified in
a capital
investment plan
and that have a
demonstrated
impact on cargo
operations
To determine a single overall project rating, reviewers will combine the ratings for each element
using the following process:

---

28
(1) Convert each element rating to a numerical value according to the following table.
Descriptive Element Rating Numerical Value
Non-responsive 0
Low 1
Medium 3
High 5
(2) Calculate a single overall project rating using the following formula.
Overall rating = Rating + Rating + Rating
Safety Efficiency Reliability
(3) Convert the overall project numerical rating to a descriptive rating according to the following
table.
Project Numerical Rating Descriptive Rating
0 or 1 Non-responsive
2 – 5 Low
6 – 11 Medium
12 – 15 High
(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.6) seeking PIDP
funding, except for those projects located in noncontiguous States and U.S. territories. 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-policy/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.

---

29
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.
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 space or capacity, proximity to
railroads and highways, proximity to key centers of production and consumption, abundant 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

---

30
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, examples of projects, or project components, contributing to
economies of scale include, but are not limited to: land expansion, construction of new or
expanded warehouses, and construction of longer or wider berths or channels. Barriers to entry
consist of geographic barriers, such as the applicant’s port having natural constraints to its
capacity, or economic barriers such as an incumbent or adjacent port having an absolute cost
advantage due to its location, size, or capabilities.
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.
A project improves the physical transportation of goods if, for example, it includes the
construction of a new or renovated terminal, a new or renovated rail spur or a highway
connection, additional gates, or the consolidation of shipments and the optimization of cargo
loading and unloading. It should also address how the project will reduce or eliminate potential
points of failure related to the transportation of goods and commodities. The applicant should
also discuss how the project will improve the physical process of transporting commodities by
overcoming or reducing negative externalities, such as pollution, noise, odor, or congestion.
Applicants should also include information that will help reviewers understand the competitive
disadvantage of the port and, as appropriate, and how the project will improve the port’s
competitive position. Competitive disadvantage refers to existing geographic, institutional, or
operational 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 typically include unfavorable geography, such as extreme weather,
port remoteness, shallow harbors, rigid adjacent or surrounding terrain, or poor soil. Institutional
limitations, such as specific local laws and regulations pertaining to zoning or land usage could
impose a competitive disadvantage on a port by limiting land expansion. Another competitive
disadvantage of a port is inherent deficiencies in the port’s operational capabilities, due to, for
example, insufficient docking space, or inadequate storage space due to the port’s restrictive
geographic characteristics. 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, and other institutional linkages within
local, regional, and national economies.
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

---

31
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.4 of this notice for how MARAD will
make this calculation. MARAD will sort project applications based on their calculated non-
Federal leverage percentage into one of five groups or quintiles. Applications requesting a
waiver of the non-Federal cost share requirement will be placed in the lowest quintile. 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. Resilience, as defined in 46 U.S.C.
§ 54301, means the ability of the port to anticipate, prepare for, adapt to, withstand, respond to,
and recover from operational disruptions and sustain critical operations, including disruptions
caused by natural or manmade hazards. Therefore, MARAD will assess whether a project
improves a port’s resilience and to what extent that improvement strengthens the port’s role in
sustaining vital local, regional, and/or national supply chain systems.
Examples of natural hazards include: sea level rise, flooding, earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunami
inundation, or other extreme weather events. Examples of manmade hazards include: 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.
In considering a project’s role in improving a port’s resilience to natural or manmade hazards,
reviewers will consider how well the project incorporates resilience measures or features to
withstand natural or manmade hazards.

---

32
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 is determined that the determined that the
project will advance likely to advance the project satisfies either project will advance
the port’s resilience port’s resilience to of the following: (1) the port’s resilience
to natural and either natural or the project advances to both natural AND
manmade hazards manmade hazards. the port’s resilience manmade hazards
OR Reviewers to both natural AND and the narrative
determined that the manmade hazards but quantifies the
project will not the impacts aren’t project’s impact on
improve either of quantified; or, (2)the resilience for each.
those factors. project advances
resilience to either
natural OR manmade
hazards and the
narrative quantifies
how resilience is
improved.
(5) Supporting National Multimodal Freight Goals
The Department of Transportation seeks to support port projects that align with the national
multimodal freight policy goal of ensuring the freight system serves as a foundation for the
United States to compete in the global economy. DOT seeks to invest in port infrastructure that:
(1) enhances the export competitiveness of the United States, with an emphasis on agriculture
exports; (2) supports the supply chains of key industries of national interest, including critical
minerals, steel, the defense industrial base, or pharmaceutical manufacturing; (3) advances
America’s domestic energy industry; (4) supports the reshoring of advanced manufacturing; and
(5) revitalizes the maritime industrial base including shipbuilding, component supply chains,
ship repair, and marine transportation services. Applicants should provide information on the
export/import mix of cargo that will benefit from their project, and describe the
commodities/goods that will be impacted by the project and the industries that rely on them.
Reviewers will assign a rating of “high,” “medium,” “low,” or “non-responsive” as described in
the rubric below.
Non-responsive Low Medium High
Application does not The project provides The project has The project
address this criterion only non-significant or material contributions contributes

---

33
or project will indirect contributions to one or more of the significantly to one of
negatively impact to one or more of the goals above, but the the goals above, such
this criterion. goals above. contributions are as:
minimal.  Demonstrably
results in the
growth and
expansion of
American
exports
 Directly and
clearly
benefits the
supply chain
of an industry
of national
interest
 Advances
domestic
energy
production
and
distribution
 Directly and
clearly
reduces costs
for a
reshoring
manufacturer
 Contributes to
the
revitalization
of the
maritime
industrial base
(6) Project Readiness
Each application will receive a Project Readiness rating based on the ratings it receives for
Technical Capacity and NEPA Process and Permitting Risk. The Project Readiness rating will be
based on the poorest risk rating earned in either Technical Capacity or NEPA Process and
Permitting Risk. For example, if an application is evaluated as high risk for Technical Capacity
and medium risk for NEPA Process and Permitting 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

---

34
paragraphs describe how MARAD will evaluate Technical Capacity and NEPA Process and
Permitting Risk.
(a) 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.
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.f, with all funds expended five
years after obligation; and,
 all real property and right-of-way acquisition will be completed in a timely manner in
accordance with 49 CFR 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.
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, procurement delays, technical

---

35
challenges in design or construction, or potential increases in project costs. 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.
(b) NEPA Process and Permitting 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 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.
The applicant should indicate the anticipated NEPA class of action for the project and describe
any environmental analysis in progress or completed. This includes Categorical Exclusion,
Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact, or Environmental Impact
Statement/Record of Decision. The final determination of NEPA class of action will be made by
MARAD after announcement of project selections. The application should also include a
discussion on the status of any required environmental approvals or permits in addition to the
status of the NEPA process. The applicant should review the Department of Transportation’s
Order 5610.1D, Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts (available at DOT’s
Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts | US Department of Transportation), to
include Subpart C which contains additional procedures for MARAD, prior to submission.
The successful applicant will be responsible for the completion of MARAD’s NEPA
documentation, in collaboration with MARAD’s NEPA Coordinator, prior to execution of the
grant agreement. Applicants are encouraged to engage with MARAD as part of the application
development process to ensure they fully understand MARAD’s NEPA process.
The applicant should indicate any previously completed or ongoing consultations involving the
project under Section 106 of the NHPA, 54 U.S.C. § 306108. This includes any communication

---

36
with State Historic Preservation Offices (SHPOs), Tribal Historic Preservation Offices (THPOs),
and other interested parties. Successful applicants will be responsible for completion of
MARAD’s Section 106 documentation prior to NEPA completion and execution of the grant
agreement. The application should also include any known or anticipated stakeholder or public
contentious issues related to the project.
The schedule provided in the application should include a timeline for completion of the NEPA
process and the acquisition of the required environmental approvals and permits (such as U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers permits and consultations under Section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1531).
Reviewers will evaluate whether the applicant has demonstrated receipt (or reasonably
anticipated receipt) of necessary environmental approvals or permits. They will also assess the
applicant’s understanding of the NEPA process as well as the applicant’s ability to comply with
environmental consultations, approvals, and permits. As with risks related to technical capacity,
risks do not disqualify projects from an award, but competitive applications include achievable
risk mitigation strategies.
NEPA Process and Permitting Risk ratings will be one of the following: “low risk,” “moderate
risk,” or “high risk.”
(7) Innovative Technology
MARAD encourages applicants to use innovative technology in project design and to improve
the movement of goods through its port. As reflected in the rubric below, reviewers will assign
applications a “high,” “medium,” “low,” or “non-responsive” rating based on how well the
project aligns with this consideration.
Rating Rating Standard
High The project involves the use of one or more innovative technologies that
are directly related to maritime infrastructure challenges or maritime
operations. The innovative technologies are well described in the narrative.
In addition, the technologies will result in significant, measurable increases
in the movement of goods.
Medium Application demonstrates that the project involves the use of one or more
innovative technologies that are directly related to maritime infrastructure
challenges or maritime operations and will likely result in increases in the
movement of goods.
Low Application contains insufficient information to assess innovation benefits
or describes innovations that are minimal in scope, unrelated to maritime
infrastructure challenges or maritime operations, or unlikely to produce
gains in the movement of goods.
Non-responsive Application did not address the criterion.

---

37
2. REVIEW AND SELECTION PROCESS
a. Review Process
The FY 2026 PIDP grant application evaluation process consists of an Intake Review Phase, an
Application 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.
During the Application 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; and Leveraging Federal Funding.
Projects that receive a “High” rating in Safety, Efficiency, or Reliability Improvements 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 the initial review, projects that did not receive a “Highly Recommended” designation will
be presented to the Senior Review Team (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; and Leverage.
During the second-tier analysis, projects will be reviewed for their alignment with the following
criteria: Supporting Economic Vitality; Project Readiness; Innovative Technology, Port
Resilience; Supporting National Multimodal Freight Goals; 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 Secretary. 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 Secretary.
Using the discretionary authority provided in statute, the Secretary selects projects from the List
of Projects for Consideration for award consistent with the merit criteria and additional
considerations described in Section F.1. In making PIDP grants, the Secretary 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); or
 projects located in a designated Qualified Opportunity Zone (26 U.S.C. § 1400Z-1); or,
 projects that align with Executive Order 14269 (Restoring America’s Maritime
Dominance) and America’s Maritime Action Plan.

---

38
The PIDP statute also requires the Secretary to consider geographic diversity in making
selections. Per statute, “not more than 25 percent of the amounts made available for grants under
this subsection for a fiscal year may be used to make grants for projects in any 1 State.”
Compliance with DOT Order 2100.7, Ensuring Reliance Upon Sound Economic Analysis in
DOT’s Policies, Programs and Activities
The Department intends to apply principles from DOT Order 2100.7, Ensuring Reliance Upon
Sound Economic Analysis in DOT’s Policies, Programs and Activities when evaluating
applications and making award selections. To the maximum extent permitted by law, MARAD
will prioritize projects that are in alignment with the principles outlined in DOT Order 2100.7.
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
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 CFR 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 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. PRE-AWARD COSTS
Unless “pre-award costs” are authorized by MARAD in writing after MARAD’s announcement

---

39
of FY 2026 PIDP award selections pursuant to 46 U.S.C. § 54301(a)(10)(B) or 2 CFR 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.4
 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.
3. REIMBURSABLE PROGRAM
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. In general, PIDP grant funds are
administered on a reimbursement basis. Grant recipients will generally be required to pay project
costs upfront using their own funds, and then request reimbursement from MARAD for those
costs. PIDP funds will reimburse recipients only after a grant agreement has been executed,
allowable expenses are incurred, and valid requests for reimbursement are submitted and
approved by MARAD.
H. POST-AWARD REQUIREMENTS AND ADMINISTRATION
1. ADMINISTRATIVE AND NATIONAL POLICY REQUIREMENTS
i. Administrative Requirements
Please visit Federal Grant Assistance | MARAD for the General Terms and Conditions for the
FY 2025 PIDP awards. The FY 2026 Terms and Conditions will be similar 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 CFR part 200, as adopted by
DOT at 2 CFR part 1201. Federal 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.
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
4 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
complying with these requirements, recipients 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.
For projects that are eligible under the PIDP but are not eligible under DOT’s other programs or
projects that are eligible under multiple DOT programs, MARAD will determine the appropriate
requirements to ensure the project is delivered consistent with program and Department goals. In
particular, Executive Order 14005 directs the Executive Branch Departments and agencies to
maximize the use of goods, products, and materials produced in, and services offered in, the
United States through the terms and conditions of Federal financial assistance awards. If selected
for an award, grant recipients must be prepared to demonstrate how they will maximize the use
of domestic goods, products, and materials in constructing their project.
Amounts awarded as a grant under this notice from IIJA funding that are not expended by the
grant recipient shall remain available to MARAD until September 30, 2036, for use for grants
under this program. Funds awarded under the FY 2026 Appropriations Act remain available until
expended for grants under this program.
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 CFR part 21), including any
amendments thereto, 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 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 may 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 National
Security Memorandum (NSM-22) on Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience, 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.

---

41
Domestic Preference
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
section 70914(a) of the Build America, Buy America Act, Pub. L. 117-58, div. G, tit. IX, subtitle
A, 135 Stat. 429, 1298 (2021). The Department expects all applicants to comply with this
requirement.
Compliance with Federal Law and Policies
Except where prohibited by court order, the applicant assures and certifies, with respect to any
application and awarded Project under this NOFO, that it will comply with all applicable Federal
laws, regulations, executive orders, policies, guidelines, and requirements as they relate to the
application, acceptance, and use of Federal funds.
Federal Anti-Discrimination
 Except where prohibited by court order, pursuant to Section 3(b)(iv)(a) of Executive
Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity, as a
condition of grant award, each Recipient must agree that its compliance in all respects
with all applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws is material to the government’s
payment decisions for purposes of section 3729(b)(4) of title 31, United States Code.
 Except where prohibited by court order, pursuant to Section 3(b)(iv)(B) of Executive
Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity, as a
condition of grant award, each Recipient must certify that it does not operate any
programs promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives that violate any
applicable Federal anti-discrimination laws.
To the extent a court order bars the implementation or enforcement of one or more of these
conditions with respect to a particular applicant or recipient, the Department will not implement
or enforce the relevant condition(s) against that applicant or recipient for as long as the order
remains in place.
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

---

42
Each applicant selected for PIDP grant funding must collect and report to MARAD information
on the project’s performance based on performance indicators MARAD identifies related to
program goals and other information as requested by MARAD. Performance indicators should
include measurable goals or targets that MARAD will use internally to determine whether the
project meets program goals, and grant funds achieve the intended long-term outcomes of the
PIDP. To the extent possible, performance indicators used in the reporting should align with the
measures included in the application and should relate to at least one of the selection criteria
defined in the Criteria section. Performance reporting continues for several years after project
construction is completed, and MARAD does not provide PIDP grant funding specifically for
performance reporting. PIDP grant performance measures are posted on the program website.
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. As a part of the evaluation, as a condition of award, grant recipients must agree
to: (1) make records available to the evaluation contractor; (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 the effectiveness of their projects and strategies. 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 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
available in FAPIIS about civil, criminal, or administrative proceedings described in paragraph 2

---

43
of Appendix XII of 2 CFR 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 https://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 CFR 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.1, MARAD may make application narratives publicly available or share
application information within the Department or with other Federal agencies if the Department
determines that sharing is relevant to the respective program’s objectives.

---

44
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Issued in Washington D.C. on March 25, 2026
By Order of the Maritime Administrator

---

Attachments form, SF-424 and SF-424c Instructions Updated

GRANTS.GOV ATTACHMENT & FIELD LEVEL INSTRUCTIONS
Important Information:
 Applications are due June 26, 2026 at 11:59:59pm Eastern
 You must download the Grants.Gov application package and submit the “Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424)” with the
“Attachments” form with your application. The instructions for those forms are detailed below.
 The following attachments should also be included with your package: a project narrative (with cover page), your benefit-cost analysis
package (consisting of an unprotected Excel file and BCA narrative), and any other relevant supporting information. (Note: the BCA
requirement does not apply to small projects at small ports). See the NOFO for additional information on supporting documentation.
 Applicants are encouraged to submit a SF-424C form with their application (instructions can be found below). Please note that the
SF-424C webform does not allow decimal entries in line 17, which may affect how you enter percentages for local cost share. Enter
the closest whole number possible on the SF-424C to approximate your cost shares. However, ensure that your SF-424 form (without
the "C") accurately reflects the exact Federal and non-Federal cost shares and amounts. PIDP technical reviewers will primarily
evaluate the numbers on the SF-424 and the detailed budget breakdown provided in your application narrative, rather than the
approximations on the SF-424C.
 Grants.gov technical support is available:
o Online: http://www.grants.gov/web/grants/support.html
o By phone (M-F, 7am-9pm ET: 1-800-518-4726, excluding Federal holidays)
o By email: support@grants.gov
Attachments Form and Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) V4.0 Instructions
Item Entry
1-15 1. Attachments: (Required) This is where you will attach your full application narrative, etc., as indicated in the
Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) for the Port Infrastructure Development Grant Program (PIDP).
The PIDP 2026 NOFO is located at: https://www.maritime.dot.gov/PIDPgrants
Please attach your application files as indicated in the “D. Application Content and Format” section of the NOFO.
File names for your attachments must be clear and descriptive. For example, “narrative” for the full application
narrative file and “BCA” for cost benefit. Please limit file names to 50 or fewer characters.
Please upload attachments in the following order: narrative (PDF), benefit-cost analysis/economic vitality (PDF),
supporting documents for benefit-cost analysis/economic vitality criterion (Word or Excel versions of the PDF
and all elaborating details or documentation), all other supporting documents.
Please use only the following UTF-8 characters when naming your attachments: A-Z, a-z, 0-9, underscore,
hyphen, space, period, parenthesis, curly braces, square brackets, ampersand, tilde, exclamation point, comma,
semi colon, apostrophe, at sign, number sign, dollar sign, percent sign, plus sign, and equal sign. Attachments
that do not follow this rule may cause the entire application to be rejected or cause issues during processing.
Attachments can be either Word files (.doc or .docx), portable documents (.pdf), Excel files (.xls
or .xlsx), or maps/pictures (.jpg/.jpeg/.gif, etc). Do not submit scanned copies of printed files
unless they are supporting documentation (e.g., Federal Wage Certificates and Letters of
Support).
YOUR APPLICATION IS NOT COMPLETE UNLESS ALL APPLICATION FILES (as per the NOFO and Grants.Gov)
ARE ATTACHED.
1

---

Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) 4040-0004 Instructions
Item Entry
Type of Submission: (Required) Select one type of submission in accordance with agency instructions.
1.
 Application
 Changed/Corrected Application – Check if this submission is to change or correct a previously submitted
application (unless requested by the agency, applicants may not use this form to submit changes after the closing
date)
Type of Application: (Required) Select one type of application in accordance with agency instructions.
2.
 New – All applicants for this round of PIDP Grant funds are considered “New” and should select
“New”
3. Date Received: Leave this field blank. This date is completed by Grants.Gov upon submission.
4. Applicant Identifier: Enter the entity identifier assigned by the Federal agency, if any, or the applicant’s control number if
applicable.
5a. Federal Entity Identifier: Enter the number assigned to your organization by the federal agency, if any.
5b. Federal Award Identifier: NO PIDP ID IS REQUIRED FOR 2026 For new applications leave blank. For a
continuation or revision to an existing award, enter the previously assigned federal award identifier number. If a
changed/corrected application, enter the federal identifier in accordance with agency instructions.
6. Date Received by State: Leave this field blank. This is not applicable to PDIP Grant applications.
7. State Application Identifier: Leave this field blank. This is not applicable to PIDP Grant applications.
8. Applicant Information: Enter the following in accordance with agency instructions:
a. Legal Name: (Required) Enter the legal name of the applicant that will undertake the assistance activity. The
lead applicant needs to be registered with the System for Award Management (SAM). Information on registering
with SAM may be obtained by visiting SAM.gov.
b. Employer/Taxpayer Number (EIN/TIN): (Required) Enter the employer or taxpayer identification number (EIN
or TIN) as assigned by the Internal Revenue Service.
c. UEI: (Required) Enter the organization’s UEI received from SAM. The UEI is a unique 12 character organization
identifier. Information on registering with System for Award Management (SAM.gov) may be obtained by visiting
the Grants.gov website.
d. Address: Enter address: Street 1 (Required); city (Required); County/Parish, State (Required), Country
(Required), 9-digit zip/postal code (Required).
e. Organizational Unit: Enter the name of the primary organizational unit, department or division that will
undertake the assistance activity.
f. Name and contact information of person to be contacted on matters involving this application: Enter the
first and last names (Required), prefix, middle name, suffix, and title. Enter organizational affiliation if affiliated
with an organization other than that in 7.a. Enter the contact’s telephone number and email address (Required)
and fax number.
2

---

Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) 4040-0004
Item Entry
9. Type of Applicant: (Required) Select up to three applicant types in accordance with agency instructions.
A. State Government
B. County Government
C. City or Township Government
D. Special District Government
E. Regional Organization
F. U.S. Territory or Possession
G. Independent School District
H. Public/State Controlled Institution of Higher Education
I. Indian/Native American Tribal Government (Federally Recognized)
J. Indian/Native American Tribal Government (Other than Federally Recognized)
K. Indian/Native American Tribally Designated Organization
L. Public/Indian Housing Authority
M. Nonprofit
N. Private Institution of Higher Education
O. Individual
P. For-Profit Organization (Other than Small Business)
Q. Small Business
R. Hispanic-serving Institution
S. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs)
T. Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities (TCCUs)
U. Alaska Native and Native Hawaiian Serving Institutions
V. Non-US Entity
W. Other (specify)
10. Name Of Federal Agency: (Required) Enter the name of the federal agency, or agencies, from which assistance is being
requested with this application.
11. Assistance Listing Number Assistance Number/Title: Enter the Assistance Listing number number and title of the
program under which assistance is requested, as found in the program announcement, if applicable.
12. Funding Opportunity Number/Title: (Required) Enter the Funding Opportunity Number and title of the opportunity
under which assistance is requested, as found in the program announcement.
13. Competition Identification Number/Title: Enter the competition identification number and title of the competition under
which assistance is requested, if applicable.
Areas Affected By Project: Use this field to list project locations (town, city, etc.). Note if the applicant is
14.
located in a rural or Urban Area (UA) as designated by the U.S. Census.
15. Descriptive Title of Applicant’s Project: (Required) Enter a brief descriptive title of the project. Using the same title as
provided in the narrative is recommended. If appropriate, attach a map showing project
location.
3

---

Application for Federal Assistance (SF-424) 4040-0004
Item Entry
16. Congressional Districts:
16a. (Required) Enter the applicant’s congressional district.
16b. Enter all district(s) affected by the project. Enter in the following format: two-character state abbreviation
–three-character district number, e.g., CA-05 for California 5th district, CA-12 for California 12 district, NC-03 for North
Carolina’s 03 district. If all congressional districts in a state are affected, enter “all” for the district number, e.g., MD-all for
all congressional districts in Maryland. If effects are nationwide, i.e., all districts within all states are affected, enter US-all.
If the program/project is outside the US, enter 00-000. This optional data element is intended for use only by programs for
which the area(s) affected are likely to be different than place(s) of performance reported on the SF-424
Project/Performance Site Location(s) Form. Attach an additional list of program/project congressional districts if needed.
17. Proposed Project Start and End Dates: (Required) Enter the proposed start date and end date of the project.
18. Estimated Funding: (Required) Enter the amount requested, or to be contributed during the first funding/budget period
by each contributor. Value of in-kind contributions should be included on appropriate lines, as applicable.
19. Is Application Subject to Review by State Under Executive Order 12372 Process? (Not Required) Applicants should
contact the State Single Point of Contact (SPOC) for Federal Executive Order 12372 to determine whether the application
is subject to the State intergovernmental review process. Select the appropriate box. If “a.” is selected, enter the date the
application was submitted to the State.
20. Is the Applicant Delinquent on any Federal Debt? (Required) Select the appropriate box. This question applies to the
applicant organization, not the person who signs as the authorized representative. Categories of federal debt include, but
may not be limited to, delinquent audit disallowances, loans, and taxes. If yes, include an explanation in an attachment.
21. Authorized Representative: To be signed and dated by the authorized representative of the applicant organization.
Enter the first and last names (Required), prefix, middle name, and suffix. Enter title, telephone number, and email
(Required), and fax number. A copy of the governing body’s authorization for you to sign this application as the official
representative must be on file in the applicant’s office. (Certain federal agencies may require that this authorization be
submitted as part of the application.)
4

---

Grants.gov Form Instructions
Form Identifiers Information
Agency Owner Grants.gov
Form Name Budget Information for Construction Programs (SF-424C) V2.0
OMB Number 4040-0008
OMB Expiration Date 06/30/2028
Form Field Instructions
Field Field Name Required Information
Item or
Optional
1. Administration Optional a. Total Cost of Administrative and legal expenses.
and legal This may include administrative expenses,
expenses attorney's fees, court costs, and/or other related
expenses, directly associated with the allowable
activity. Costs incurred related, but not limited to,
criminal and civil proceedings, claims, appeals, and
other infringements are unallowable. For more
information regarding allowability, please see
grantor agency regulations (e.g., 2 CFR 200.435; 45
CFR 75.435).
b. Costs Not Allowable for Participation in
Administration and Legal Expenses.
c. Total Allowable Costs (Columns a-b). Calculated
automatically if submitted via Grants.gov.
2. Land, Optional a. Total Cost of Land, structures, rights- of-way,
structures, appraisals, etc.
rights-of-way, b. Costs Not Allowable for Participation in Land,
appraisals, structures, rights-of-way, appraisals, etc.
etc. c. Total Allowable Costs (Columns a-b). Calculated
automatically if submitted via Grants.gov
3. Relocation Optional a. Total Cost of Relocation expenses and payments
expenses and b. Costs Not Allowable for Participation in Relocation
payments expenses and payments
c. Total Allowable Costs (Columns a-b). Calculated
automatically if submitted via Grants.gov
OMB Number: 4040-0008 1
OMB Expiration Date: 06/30/2028

---

4. Architectural Optional a. Total Cost of Architectural and engineering
and fees. Architect-engineer services includes
engineering professional services of an architectural or
fees engineering nature, as defined by State law,
if applicable, that are required to be
performed or approved by a person
licensed, registered, or certified to provide
those services; and, professional services of
an architectural or engineering nature
performed by contract that are associated
with research, planning, development,
design, construction, alteration, or repair of
real property." For more information, please
see grantor agency regulations (e.g., 48 CFR
2.101).
b. Costs Not Allowable for Participation in
Architectural and engineering fees.
c. Total Allowable Costs (Columns a-b). Calculated
automatically if submitted via Grants.gov.
OMB Number: 4040-0008 2
OMB Expiration Date: 06/30/2028

---

Field Field Name Required Information
Item or
Optional
5 Other Optional a. Total Costs of Other Architectural and
. architectural engineering fees. This means those other
and professional services of an architectural or
engineering engineering nature, or incidental services,
fees that members of the architectural and
engineering professions (and individuals in
their employ) may logically or justifiably
perform, including studies, investigations,
surveying and mapping, tests, evaluations,
consultations, comprehensive planning,
program management, conceptual designs,
plans and specifications, value engineering,
construction phase services, soils
engineering, drawing reviews, preparation
of operating and maintenance manuals,
and other related services. For more
information, please see grantor agency
regulations (e.g., 48 CFR 2.101).
b. Costs Not Allowable for Participation in
Other Architectural and engineering fees.
c. Total Allowable Costs (Columns a-b).
Calculated automatically if submitted via
Grants.gov.
6 Project Optional a. Total Cost of Project inspection fees,
. inspection fees including municipal inspection fees, and other
required professional or inspection fees.
b. Costs Not Allowable for Participation in
Project Inspection fees.
c. Total Allowable Costs (Columns a-b).
Calculated automatically if submitted via
Grants.gov.
7 Site work Optional a. Total Cost of Site work
. b. Costs Not Allowable for Participation in Site
work
c. Total Allowable Costs (Columns a-b).
Calculated automatically if submitted via
Grants.gov
OMB Number: 4040-0008 3
OMB Expiration Date: 06/30/2028

---

8 Demolition and Optional a. Total Cost of Demolition and removal
. removal b. Costs Not Allowable for Participation in
Demolition and removal
c. Total Allowable Costs (Columns a-b).
Calculated automatically if submitted via
Grants.gov
9 Construction Required a. Total Cost of Construction and Major
. Renovation. Construction means the creation
of a building, structure, or facility, including
the installation of equipment, site
preparation, landscaping, associated roads
parking, environmental mitigation, and
utilities, which provides space not previously
available. It includes freestanding structures,
additional wings or floors, enclosed
courtyards or entryways, and any other
means to provide usable space that did not
previously exist (excluding temporary
facilities). Major Renovation (A&R) is
considered a structural change (e.g., to the
foundation, roof, floor, or exterior or load-
bearing walls of a facility, or an extension to
an existing facility) to achieve the following:
increase the floor area; and/or change
function and purpose of an existing building,
structure, or facility. Some grantor agencies
use a dollar amount to distinguish between
minor and major A&R, i.e., a major
renovation threshold, for the entire project
period per parcel. Please seek grantor agency
guidance if you need more information.
b. Costs Not Allowable for Participation in
Construction and Major Renovation.
c. Total Allowable Costs (Columns a-b).
Calculated automatically if submitted via
Grants.gov.
OMB Number: 4040-0008 4
OMB Expiration Date: 06/30/2028

---

10. Equipment Optional a. Total Cost of Equipment. "Equipment" means
tangible personal property (including
information technology systems) having a
useful life of more than one year and a per-
unit acquisition cost that equals or exceeds
the lesser of: (a) the capitalization level
established by the organization for the
financial statement purposes, or (b) $5,000.
(Note: Acquisition cost means the net invoice
unit price of an item of equipment, including
the cost of any modifications, attachments,
accessories, or auxiliary apparatus necessary
to make it usable for the purpose for which it
is acquired. Ancillary charges, such as taxes,
duty, protective in- transit insurance, freight,
and installation, shall be included in, or
excluded from, acquisition cost in accordance
with the non-Federal entity's regular written
accounting practices.) For more information,
please see grantor agency regulations (e.g., 2
CFR§§200.2, 200.313, and 200.439; 45 CFR
§§75.2, 75.320, and 75.439).
b. Costs Not Allowable for Participation in
Equipment.
c. Total Allowable Costs (Columns a-b).
Calculated automatically if submitted via
Grants.gov.
OMB Number: 4040-0008 5
OMB Expiration Date: 06/30/2028

---

Field Field Name Required Information
Item or
Optional
11. Miscellaneous Optional a. Total Cost of Miscellaneous
b. Costs Not Allowable for Participation in
Miscellaneous
c. Total Allowable Costs (Columns a-b).
Calculated automatically if submitted
via Grants.gov
12. SUBTOTAL Required a. Sum of lines 1-11 for Total Costs
(sum of lines 1- b. Sum of lines 1-11 for Costs Not
Allowable for Participation
11)
c. Sum of lines 1-11 for Total Allowable
Costs (Columns a-b) Calculated
automatically if submitted via
Grants.gov
13. Contingencies Optional a. Total Cost of Contingencies. Contingency
is that part of a budget estimate of future
costs (typically of large construction
projects or other items as approved by
the grantor agency) which is associated
with possible events or conditions arising
from causes the precise outcome of
which is indeterminable at the time of
estimate, and that experience shows will
likely result, in aggregate, in additional
costs for the approved activity or project.
Some grantor agencies may limit
contingencies to a specific percentage of
the construction costs before bids are
received and must be reduced after the
contract has been awarded. For more
information, please see the grantor
agency requirements (e.g., 2 CFR
§§200.403 - 200.405, and 200.433; 45
CFR §§75.403 - 75.405, and 75.433)
and/or seek guidance from the grantor
agency.
b. Costs Not Allowable for Participation in
Contingencies.
c. Total Allowable Costs (Columns a-b).
Calculated automatically if submitted
via Grants.gov.
OMB Number: 4040-0008 6
OMB Expiration Date: 06/30/2028

---

14. SUBTOTAL Required a. Sum of lines 12-13 for Total Cost
b. Sum of lines 12-13 for Costs Not
Allowable for Participation
c. Sum of lines 12-13. Calculated
automatically if submitted via
Grants.gov
15. Project Optional a. Total Cost of Project (program)
program income. Program income
income includes but is not limited to,
income from fees for services
performed, the use or rental of
real or personal property
acquired under federally-funded
projects, the sale of commodities
or items fabricated under an
award, license fees and royalties
on patents and copyrights, and
interest on loans made with
award funds. For more
information, please see the
grantor agency requirements
(e.g., 2 CFR §§200.2 and 200.307;
45 CFR §§ 75.2 and 75.307).
b. Costs Not Allowable for
Participation in Project (program)
income.
c. Total Allowable Costs (Columns a-b).
Calculated automatically if submitted
via Grants.gov.
16. TOTAL Required a. Total Cost of Total Project Costs
PROJECT b. Total of Costs Not Allowable for
COSTS Participation
(subtract #15 c. Total Allowable Costs Calculated
from #14) automatically if submitted via
Grants.gov
OMB Number: 4040-0008 7
OMB Expiration Date: 06/30/2028

---

Field Field Name Required Information
Item or
Optional
17. Federal Required Enter eligible costs from line 16c. Multiply x
assistance Federal percentage share %.
requested,
calculate as
follows:
(Consult
Federal
agency for
Percentage
share.)
OMB Number: 4040-0008 8
OMB Expiration Date: 06/30/2028