POLLUTION
PREVENTION
GRANTS
FY
2004
GRANT
GUIDANCE
Page
Overview
2
I.
Funding
Opportunity
Description
2
II.
Award
Information
5
III.
Eligibility
Information
5
IV.
Application
and
Submission
Information
6
V.
Application
Review
Information
7
VI.
Award
Administration
Information
12
VII.
Agency
Contacts
14
2
OVERVIEW
Sponsoring
Agency
and
Office:
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
Office
of
Prevention,
Pesticides
and
Toxic
Substances,
Office
of
Pollution
Prevention
and
Toxics.
Funding
Opportunity
Title:
Pollution
Prevention
Grants
Program
Announcement
Type:
Initial
Announcement
for
Fiscal
Year
2004.
Catalog
of
Federal
Domestic
Assistance
(
CFDA)
Number:
66.708
Pre­
proposal
and
Proposal
Submission
Dates:
Pre­
proposal
and
proposal
submission
dates
vary
by
regional
office,
please
see
Section
IV.,
part
C.
for
specific
dates.

FULL
TEXT
OF
ANNOUNCEMENT
I.
Funding
Opportunity
Description.
Under
the
authority
of
the
Pollution
Prevention
Act
of
1990,
EPA
plans
to
award
$
5
million
in
pollution
prevention
grants
to
the
States,
Tribes,
and
Intertribal
Consortia
in
FY
2004
for
prevention
activities
during
FY
2005.
These
grant
dollars
are
targeted
at
State
and
Tribal
technical
assistance
programs
that
address
the
reduction
or
elimination
of
pollution
by
businesses
across
all
environmental
media:
air,
land,
and
water.
Since
the
inception
of
the
grant
program,
EPA
has
awarded
approximately
$
80
million.

A.
Introduction.
This
guidance
describes
the
process
by
which
EPA
will
award
the
grants
under
the
Pollution
Prevention
grant
program
(
40
CFR
Part
35,
Subpart
A
and
40
CFR
Part
35,
Subpart
B).
This
document
provides
an
overview
of
the
program,
description
of
the
evaluation
criteria,
grant
management
tools
and
time
lines
for
submissions
and
final
awards.

The
goal
of
this
grant
program
is
to
assist
businesses
and
industries
in
identifying
better
environmental
strategies
and
solutions
for
reducing
waste
at
the
source.
Funds
awarded
under
this
grant
program
can
be
used
to
support
P2
programs
that
address
the
reduction
of
potentially
harmful
pollutants
across
all
environmental
media:
air,
water,
and
land.
Programs
should
reflect
comprehensive
and
coordinated
pollution
prevention
planning
and
implementation
efforts
Tribal,
State
or
Region­
wide.

Special
emphasis
will
be
placed
this
year
upon
grants
which
replicate
prior
successes
to
achieve
regional
and,
preferably,
national
impact.
Regions
will
have
the
flexibility
to
work
out
an
appropriate
mix
of
replication
and
other
projects,
with
their
States.
Prior
successes
include
improving
environmental
performance
through
pollution
prevention
measures.
Past
P2
grant
projects
have
demonstrated
that
facilities
have
ample
opportunities
to
implement
pollution
prevention,
and
that
source
reduction
can
be
a
cost­
effective
way
of
meeting
or
exceeding
Federal
and
State
regulatory
requirements.
Successful
P2
grant
projects
have
included
decreases
in
facility
emissions
and
discharges
which
lead
to
less
stringent
regulatory
and
permitting
requirements,
increases
in
production
rates
that
correlate
to
decreasing
environmental
3
costs,
elevated
investments
in
new
and
better
technologies,
and
savings
that
directly
impact
the
overall
profitability
of
a
business.

B.
Authorization.
Section
6605
of
the
Pollution
Prevention
Act
(
PPA)
of
1990
and
40
CFR
Part
35,
Subpart
B
authorizes
EPA
to
award
grants
to
States,
Tribes
and
Intertribal
Consortia
for
programs
to
promote
the
use
of
source
reduction
techniques
by
businesses.
EPA
has
designated
the
P2
grant
program
to
implement
the
Act.
In
evaluating
applications
for
grants
under
Section
6605,
the
PPA
requires
EPA
to
evaluate
whether
the
proposed
program
would
accomplish
the
following:


make
specific
technical
assistance
available
to
businesses
seeking
information
about
source
reduction
opportunities,
including
funding
for
experts
to
provide
on­
site
technical
advice
to
businesses
seeking
assistance
and
to
assist
in
the
development
of
source
reduction
plans;


target
assistance
to
businesses
for
whom
lack
of
information
is
an
impediment
to
source
reduction;
and

provide
training
in
source
reduction
techniques.

Pollution
Prevention/
source
reduction
is
defined
as
any
practice
which

reduces
the
amount
of
any
hazardous
substance,
pollutant,
or
contaminant
entering
any
waste
stream
or
otherwise
released
into
the
environment
(
including
fugitive
emissions)
prior
to
recycling,
treatment
or
disposal;


reduces
the
hazards
to
public
health
and
the
environment
associated
with
the
release
of
such
substances,
pollutants,
or
contaminants;
and

reduces
or
eliminates
the
creation
of
pollutants
through:
(
i)
increased
efficiency
in
the
use
of
raw
materials,
energy,
water
,
or
other
resources;
or
(
ii)
protection
of
natural
resources
by
conservation.

(
See
PPA
Section
6603
and
40
CFR
35.343
and
35.662).
Pollution
prevention/
source
reduction
includes:
equipment
or
technology
modifications,
process
or
procedure
modifications,
reformulation
or
redesign
of
products,
substitution
of
raw
materials,
and
improvements
in
housekeeping,
maintenance,
training,
or
inventory
control.

Pollution
prevention/
source
reduction
does
not
include
any
practice
which
alters
the
physical,
chemical,
or
biological
characteristics
of
the
volume
of
a
hazardous
substance,
pollutant,
or
contaminant
through
a
process
or
activity
which
itself
is
not
integral
to
and
necessary
for
the
production
of
a
product
or
the
providing
of
a
4
service.(
See
PPA
Section
6603
and
40
CFR
35.343
and
35.662).

C.
Program
History.
EPA
started
the
P2
(
previously
known
as
Pollution
Prevention
Incentives
for
States
­
PPIS)
grant
program
with
the
philosophy
that
States
should
play
a
primary
role
in
encouraging
industry,
small
and
medium­
sized
businesses,
local
governments,
and
the
public
to
shift
priorities
from
pollution
control
to
pollution
prevention.
EPA
established
the
program
believing
that
since
States
have
more
direct
contact
with
generators,
the
States
are,
therefore,
more
aware
of
their
needs
and
problems
and
in
a
better
position
to
provide
pollution
prevention
assistance.
As
a
result,
State­
based
environmental
programs
could
make
a
unique
contribution
to
the
national
effort
to
promote
source
reduction.

EPA
set
the
following
goals
at
the
outset
of
the
program:


Learn
from
and
build
upon
innovative
means
of
implementing
pollution
prevention
at
both
the
State
and
facility
level.


Provide
resources
for
pollution
prevention
technical
assistance
and
training.


Foster
Federal,
State,
and
Tribal
information
sharing
and
communication.

The
P2
grant
program
has
evolved
­
and
will
continue
to
evolve
­
to
meet
the
changing
needs
and
priorities.
In
the
first
years
of
the
grant
program,
EPA
administered
the
grant
program
from
EPA
Headquarters
in
Washington,
D.
C.,
with
the
goal
of
jump­
starting
as
many
State
pollution
prevention
programs
as
possible.
EPA
believed
that
by
educating
businesses
and
providing
P2
technical
assistance,
the
businesses
would
quickly
realize
the
benefits
of
a
preventive
approach
and
implement
pollution
prevention
projects.

Once
most
States
developed
basic
pollution
prevention
programs,
EPA
shifted
responsibility
for
implementing
the
grant
program
from
EPA
Headquarters
to
the
EPA
Regions.
This
enabled
the
Regions
to
focus
resources
on
regional
priorities.
Many
States
initiated
regulatory
integration
projects
to
develop
prevention
strategies;
train
regulatory
staff
on
P2
concepts;
and
examine
opportunities
for
incorporating
pollution
prevention
into
permits,
inspections,
and
enforcement.
Some
Regions
also
encouraged
applicants
to
establish
partnerships
with
State
agencies
in
nonindustrial
sectors
such
as
agriculture,
energy,
health,
and
transportation.

Prior
to
1992,
essentially
no
formal
pollution
prevention
activities
were
under
way
on
Tribal
lands.
Since
the
first
award
of
a
P2
grant
to
a
Tribe
in
1992,
EPA
has
funded
30
Tribal
P2
grant
projects.
Federal
grant
programs,
such
as
the
P2
grants,
have
provided
Tribes
with
the
flexibility
to
begin
addressing
the
most
salient
pollution
issues
on
reservations.
A
few
Tribes
have
taken
a
broad
approach
to
pollution
prevention
program
development,
focusing
on
building
infrastructure
rather
than
implementing
specific
projects.
As
Tribal
environmental
programs
develop
and
Tribal
5
environmental
managers
move
beyond
the
most
immediate
environmental
problems
on
their
reservation,
pollution
prevention
ideas
and
programs
will
become
further
integrated
into
Tribal
programs.

II.
Award
Information.
EPA
plans
to
award
$
5
million
in
pollution
prevention
grants
to
the
States,
Tribes,
and
Intertribal
Consortia
in
FY
2004
for
prevention
activities
during
FY
2005.
In
previous
years,
EPA
has
awarded
grants
in
the
range
of
$
25,000
­
$
150,000.
Grant
dollars
are
targeted
at
State
and
Tribal
technical
assistance
programs
that
address
the
reduction
or
elimination
of
pollution
across
all
environmental
media:
air,
land,
and
water.
All
awards
shall
be
made
through
a
competitive
process.
EPA
will
not
fund
projects
that
exceed
a
three
year
period.

III.
Eligibility
Information.
C.
Eligible
Applicants.
Eligible
applicants
for
purposes
of
funding
under
this
program
include
the
50
States,
the
District
of
Columbia,
the
U.
S.
Virgin
Islands,
the
Commonwealth
of
Puerto
Rico,
any
territory
of
or
possession
of
the
United
States,
any
agency
or
instrumentality
of
a
State
including
State
universities,
and
Indian
Tribes
that
meet
the
requirement
for
treatment
in
a
manner
similar
to
a
State
at
40
CFR
35.663
and
intertribal
consortia
that
meet
the
requirements
at
40
CFR
35.504.
Local
governments,
private
universities,
private
nonprofit,
private
businesses,
and
individuals
are
not
eligible
for
funding.
Eligible
applicants
are
strongly
encouraged
to
establish
partnerships
with
business
and
other
environmental
assistance
providers
to
seamlessly
deliver
pollution
prevention
assistance.
Successful
applicants
will
be
those
that
best
meet
the
evaluation
criteria
in
Section
V.
of
this
guidance.
In
many
cases,
this
is
likely
to
be
accomplished
through
partnerships.

D.
Cost
Sharing
and
Matching
Requirements.
Recipients
of
grants
under
section
6605
of
the
Pollution
Prevention
Act
of
1990
must
provide
at
least
50
percent
of
the
total
allowable
project
cost.
For
example,
the
Federal
government
will
provide
half
of
the
total
allowable
cost
of
the
project,
and
the
recipient
will
provide
the
other
half.
Contributions
may
include
dollars,
in­
kind
goods
and
services,
and/
or
third
party
contributions
consistent
with
40
CFR
31.24.

Funds
for
a
Pollution
Prevention
grant
may
be
included
in
a
Performance
Partnership
Grant
(
PPG);
however,
the
P2
Grant
program
is
a
competitive
grant
program.
Therefore,
State
and
tribal
proposals
must
first
be
selected
under
the
competitive
grant
process
and,
in
accordance
with
40
CFR
35.138
and
35.535,
the
work
plan
commitments
that
would
have
been
included
in
the
P2
work
plan
must
be
included
in
the
PPG
work
plan.

If
a
Tribe
or
Intertribal
Consortium
is
selected
for
award
of
a
Pollution
Prevention
Grant
and
the
Tribe
includes
the
funds
in
a
PPG
awarded
under
40
CFR
Part
35,
Subpart
B,
the
required
Tribal
match
for
the
Pollution
Prevention
portion
of
the
PPG
will
6
be
reduced
to
5%
of
the
allowable
Pollution
Prevention
project
cost
for
the
first
two
years
of
the
PPG
grant.
After
the
first
two
years
in
which
a
Tribe
or
Intertribal
Consortium
receives
a
Performance
Partnership
Grant,
the
Regional
Administrator
must
determine
through
objective
assessment
whether
the
Tribe
or
the
members
of
an
Intertribal
Consortium
meet
socio­
economic
indicators
that
demonstrate
the
ability
of
the
Tribe
or
the
Intertribal
Consortium
to
provide
a
cost
share
greater
than
five
percent.
If
the
Regional
Administrator
determines
that
the
Tribe
or
the
members
of
Intertribal
Consortium
meet
such
indicators,
then
the
Regional
Administrator
shall
increase
the
required
cost
share
up
to
a
maximum
of
10
percent
of
the
allowable
cost
of
the
work
plan
budget
for
each
program
with
a
cost
share
greater
than
five
percent.

Further,
the
Regional
Administrator
may
waive
the
cost
share
required
for
a
PPG
upon
request
of
the
Tribe
or
Intertribal
Consortium,
if,
based
on
an
objective
assessment
of
socio­
economic
indicators,
the
Regional
Administrator
determines
that
meeting
the
cost
share
would
impose
undue
hardship
(
see
40
CFR
35.536(
d)).

E.
Other
Eligibility
Criteria.
6.
Applicable
Regulations.
State
applicants
and
recipients
of
Pollution
Prevention
Grants
are
subject
to
the
requirements
of
40
CFR
Parts
31
and
35,
Subpart
A.

Tribal
applicants
and
recipients
of
Pollution
Prevention
Grants
are
subject
to
the
requirements
of
40
CFR
Parts
31
and
35,
Subpart
B.

7.
Federal
Requirements.
An
applicant
whose
proposal
is
selected
for
federal
funding
must
complete
additional
forms
prior
to
award
(
see
40
CFR
30.12
and
31.10).
In
addition,
successful
applicants
will
be
required
to
certify
that
they
have
not
been
Debarred
or
Suspended
from
participation
in
Federal
assistance
awards
in
accordance
with
40
CFR
Part
32.

IV.
Application
and
Submission
Information.
H.
Address
to
Request
an
Application
Package.
Applicants
may
download
applicable
forms
from
the
Internet
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
ogd/
AppKit/
application.
htm.
In
addition,
applicants
may
contact
their
Regional
P2
Coordinator
listed
in
Section
VII.
of
this
guidance
to
receive
regional
guidance
and
information
on
application
submission.

I.
Content
and
Form
of
Application.
Applicants
should
contact
their
Regional
P2
Coordinator
listed
in
Section
VII.
of
this
guidance
to
receive
regional
guidance
and
information
on
application
submission.

J.
Submission
Dates.
To
participate
in
the
process,
eligible
applicants
must
submit
proposals
to
the
EPA
Regional
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator.
Exact
deadlines
for
grant
proposals
vary
among
regions,
so
please
contact
the
appropriate
7
regional
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator
for
details.
Below
are
the
grant
applications
due
dates
for
each
of
the
Regional
Office.
Funding
decisions
will
be
made
by
June/
July
2004.
Region
1
­
Pre­
proposals
are
due
on
March
31,
2004
Region
2
­
Applications
are
due
March
31,
2004
Region
3
­
Applications
are
due
March
31,
2004
Region
4
­
Pre­
proposals
are
due
March
5,
2004
Region
5
­
Applications
are
due
March
31,
2004
Region
6
­
Pre­
proposals
are
due
March
31,
2004
Region
7
­
Applications
are
due
March
31,
2004
Region
8
­
Applications
are
due
March
31,
2004
Region
9
­
Applications
are
due
March
19,
2004
Region
10
­
Pre­
proposals
are
due
March
31,
2004
K.
Intergovernmental
Review.
Applicants
must
comply
with
the
Intergovernmental
Review
Process
and/
or
the
consultation
provisions
of
Section
204,
of
the
Demonstration
Cities
and
Metropolitan
Development
Act,
if
applicable,
which
are
contained
in
40
CFR
part
29.
All
State
applicants
should
consult
with
their
EPA
Regional
office
or
official
designated
as
the
single
point
of
contact
in
his
or
her
State
for
more
information
on
the
process
the
State
requires
when
applying
for
assistance;
if
the
State
has
selected
the
program
for
review.
If
you
do
not
know
who
your
Single
Point
of
Contact
is,
please
call
the
EPA
Headquarters
Grant
Policy
Information
and
Training
Branch
at
202­
564­
5325
or
refer
to
the
State
Single
Point
of
Contact
web
site
at
http://
www.
whitehouse.
gov/
omb/
grants/
spoc.
html.
Federally­
recognized
tribal
governments
are
not
required
to
comply
with
this
procedure.

L.
Funding
Restrictions.
EPA
grant
funds
may
only
be
used
for
the
purposes
set
forth
in
the
grant
agreement,
and
must
be
consistent
with
the
statutory
authority
for
the
award.
Grant
funds
may
not
be
used
for
matching
funds
for
other
Federal
grants,
lobbying,
or
intervention
in
Federal
regulatory
or
adjudicatory
proceedings.
In
addition,
Federal
funds
may
not
be
used
to
sue
the
Federal
government
or
any
other
government
entity.
All
costs
identified
in
the
budget
must
conform
to
applicable
Federal
Cost
Principles
contained
in
OMB
Circular
A­
87;
A­
122;
and
A­
21,
as
appropriate.
Ineligible
costs
will
be
reduced
from
the
final
grant
award.

M.
Other
Submission
Requirements.
Applicants
should
clearly
mark
information
contained
in
their
proposal
which
they
consider
confidential
business
information.
EPA
reserves
the
right
to
make
final
confidentiality
decisions
in
accordance
with
Agency
regulations
at
40
CFR
Part
2,
Subpart
B.
If
no
such
claim
accompanies
the
proposal
when
it
is
received
by
the
EPA,
it
may
be
made
available
to
the
public
by
EPA
without
any
further
notice
to
the
applicant.

V.
Application
Review
Information.
8
A.
2004
P2
Grant
Program
National
Criteria.
Funds
awarded
under
the
P2
grant
program
must
be
used
for
State
technical
assistance
programs
for
businesses
to
support
pollution
prevention
programs
that
address
the
transfer
and
reduction
of
potentially
harmful
pollutants
across
environmental
media:
air,
water,
and
land.
Programs
should
reflect
comprehensive
and
coordinated
pollution
prevention
planning
and
implementation
efforts.
Special
emphasis
will
be
placed
this
year
upon
grants
which
replicate
prior
successes
to
achieve
regional
and,
preferably,
national
impact.
Regions
will
have
the
flexibility
to
work
out
an
appropriate
mix
of
replication
and
other
projects,
with
their
States.

This
section
describes
the
four
national
program
criteria
EPA
will
use
to
evaluate
proposals
under
this
grant
program
in
addition
to
the
statutory
criteria
discussed
in
Section
I
part
C.
of
this
guidance.
In
addition
to
the
statutory
criteria
and
the
national
program
criteria,
there
may
be
regionally
specific
criteria
that
the
proposed
activities
are
also
required
to
address.
For
more
information
on
the
EPA
regional
requirements,
applicants
should
contact
their
EPA
Regional
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator,
listed
in
Section
VII.
of
this
document.
As
well
as
ensuring
that
the
proposed
activities
meet
EPA's
definition
of
pollution
prevention,
the
applicant's
proposal
must
include
how
they
plan
to
address
the
following
four
criteria:


Promote
multimedia
pollution
prevention.
Applicants
should
identify
how
projects
will
encourage
source
reduction
to
actively
prevent
pollution
across
environmental
media:
air,
water
and
land.
Programs
should
reflect
comprehensive
and
coordinated
pollution
prevention
planning
and
implementation
efforts
State­
wide.
Programs
might
focus
on,
for
example:

­
developing
multimedia
pollution
prevention
activities
including
but
not
limited
to
providing
technical
assistance
to
businesses,
collecting
and
analyzing
data
to
target
outreach
and
technical
assistance
opportunities,
conducting
outreach
activities,
developing
measures
to
determine
progress
in
pollution
prevention,
and
identifying
and
addressing
regulatory
and
non­
regulatory
barriers
and
incentives
to
pollution
prevention.

­
institutionalizing
multimedia
pollution
prevention
as
an
environmental
management
priority,
establishing
pollution
prevention
goals,
developing
strategies
to
meet
those
goals,
and
integrating
the
pollution
prevention
ethic
within
the
organization.

­
initiating
demonstration
projects
that
provide
technical
assistance
to
test
and
support
innovative
pollution
prevention
approaches
and
methodologies.


Advance
environmental
goals.
EPA
believes
that
State
and
Tribal
pollution
prevention
programs
have
a
unique
opportunity
to
promote
P2,
especially
9
through
the
environmental
performance
agreements.
By
developing
applications
that
support
stated
environmental
goals,
pollution
prevention
programs
can
help
ensure
that
States
and
Tribes
achieve
objectives
through
a
cost­
effective
preventive
approach.
Programs
will
continue
to
be
valuable
to
top
management
if
they
can
demonstrate
how
their
actions
will
help
advance
stated
goals.
EPA
would
like
to
ensure
that
pollution
prevention
is
integrated
and
that
the
funds
provide
a
service
that
supports
the
State's
or
Tribes
strategic
plan.
EPA
will
not
fund
any
projects
developed
apart
from
the
stated
strategic
plan.


Promote
partnerships.
For
the
past
6
years,
EPA
has
required
P2
grant
applicants
to
identify
major
environmental
assistance
providers
in
their
States
and
to
work
with
these
organizations
to
educate
businesses
on
pollution
prevention.
EPA
believes
that
P2
programs
that
do
not
develop
a
strong
relationship
with
other
environmental
assistance
providers
will
face
difficulties
accessing
State
and
Federal
resources
in
the
future.

EPA
continues
to
seek
more
cooperation
among
pollution
prevention
programs
and
the
other
environmental
and
business
assistance
providers
at
the
State
level.
These
can
include
university­
based
technical
assistance
and
cooperative
extension
programs,
and
other
assistance
programs
offered
within
the
State.
Partnerships
are
also
encouraged
with
regional
and
national
programs
such
as
the
P2Rx
centers,
National
Institute
of
Standards
and
Technology
(
NIST)
programs,
Office
of
Enforcement
and
Compliance
Assurance
(
OECA)
Compliance
Assistance
Centers,
EPA's
Small
Business
Assistance
Programs
(
SBAPs),
etc
By
developing
such
partnerships,
EPA
would
like
to
ensure
that
State
pollution
prevention
programs
leverage
this
outside
expertise.
These
partnerships
will
also
reduce
the
need
for
other
environmental
assistance
providers
to
develop
their
own
expertise,
duplicating
effort.


Assess
program
activities
and
share
results.
Effective
grants
management
requires
an
understanding
of
what
is
to
be
accomplished
with
the
funds
and
performing
timely
follow­
up
to
assess
the
actual
results
and
impacts
of
the
activities.
P2
grantees
should
work
with
their
EPA
Regional
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator
to
evaluate
and
report
on
progress
and
accomplishments
made
under
the
grant.

Such
reporting
should
include
several
elements:
­
Grantees
should
provide
data
regarding
the
scope
and
results
of
the
specific
activities
conducted
pursuant
to
the
work
plan
commitments,
to
support
the
wide
variety
of
pollution
prevention
activities,
encompassing
such
efforts
as
training,
case
studies,
and
P2
assessments.
10
­
Grantees
should
attempt
where
possible
to
assess
the
effect
of
these
activities,
in
terms
of
changes
in
knowledge,
capabilities,
attitudes,
and
behaviors
of
the
targeted
audiences.
These
changes
are
important
in
assessing
the
effectiveness
of
the
funded
activities
and
in
planning
future
actions.

­
Grantees
should
attempt
where
possible
to
assess
the
wide­
ranging
positive
environmental
and
economic
impacts.
Some
of
the
EPA
Regional
Offices
have
negotiated
with
their
States
specific
measurement
structures
which
may
provide
appropriate
frameworks
for
estimating
environmental
impact.
Particularly
important
are
the
P2
outcome
measures
included
in
EPA's
Strategic
Plan:
pounds
of
pollution
prevented,
amount
of
energy
and
water
conserved,
and
dollars
saved.
Grantees
should
also
look
to
existing
P2
measurement
reports
and
systems,
such
as
those
managed
by
the
National
Pollution
Prevention
Roundtable
(
NPPR),
the
Northeast
Waste
Management
Officials
Association
(
NEWMOA),
and
the
Pacific
Northwest
Pollution
Prevention
Resource
Center
(
PPRC)
for
examples
and
to
avoid
duplicative
reporting.
The
resulting
information
should
prove
invaluable,
not
only
in
ensuring
proper
management
of
grant
funds,
but
in
demonstrating
the
value
of
the
funded
work.
In
particular,
data
on
"
real
world"
impacts
of
P2
efforts,
especially
displayed
in
such
compelling
terms
as
pounds
of
pollution
prevented
or
dollars
saved,
can
be
a
powerful
indication
of
the
importance
of
P2
programs.
Grantees
are
encouraged
to
share
this
information
with
key
stakeholders
and
audiences,
including
program
sponsors,
affected
media
and
regulatory
offices,
other
environmental
programs,
elected
officials,
allied
organizations,
business
and
civic
groups,
and
the
general
public.

B.
Regional
Priorities
for
FY
2004
Pollution
Prevention
Grants.
As
well
as
noting
how
the
grant's
proposed
activities
meet
the
national
criteria,
the
proposals
must
also
document
how
the
proposed
activities
meet
the
regional
specified
criteria
listed
below.
Region
1
Region
1
invites
applicants
to
address
any
of
the
following
EPA
regional
priorities,
their
own
distinct
priorities,
or
a
combination
of
shared
and
distinct
priorities.
 
Activities
that
integrate
P2
and
Compliance
objectives,
including
those
that
focus
on
Colleges
and
Universities;
Marinas;
Schools;
Hospitals;
Junkyards;
and
Phase
II
of
the
Storm
Water
program,
 
Environmental
Management
Systems,
 
Greening
Government
Agencies
(
energy
efficiency,
environmentally
preferable
purchasing,
etc),
 
Greening
the
Supply
Chain
(
manufacturers
leveraging
P2/
performance
among
their
suppliers),
 
Energy
Conservation
and
Renewable
Energy,
11
 
Persistent,
Bioaccumulative
and
Toxic
chemicals
(
mercury,
lead,
dioxin,
etc),
 
Homeland
Security
and
Emergency
Preparedness
(
through
reducing
use/
storage
of
hazardous
substances),
 
Urban
Environments
and
Environmental
Justice
(
as
focus
for
P2
efforts),
 
Implement
programs
or
initiatives
on
a
watershed
basis
in
areas
where
EPA
has
existing
place­
based
projects.

Region
2
­
Reductions
in
persistent,
bioaccumulative,
and
toxic
(
PBT)
contaminants
­
Integration
of
technologies
which
have
P2
market
transformation
potential
­
Integration
of
source
reduction
and
waste
minimization
practices
in
agricultural,
industrial,
business,
manufacturing
and
institutional
operations
­
Minimize
waste
and
reduce
pollution
through
the
procurement
of
environmentally
preferable
products
and
services
­
Build
P2
program
capacity
among
States,
territories
and
Indian
nations
Region
3
No
specific
regional
priorities
beyond
National
Criteria.

Region
4
­
Maintain
strong
coordinated
State
P2
Programs
­
Estimate
environmental
outcomes
from
technical
assistance
and
other
P2
Initiatives.
­
Promote
regulatory
integration
by
encouraging
demonstration
or
pilot
projects
that
integrate
P2
practices,
policies,
and
procedures
into
State
and
local
regulatory
sectors.
­
Instill
a
P2
ethic
into
public
and
government
agencies.
­
Utilize
EMS
activities
as
an
organizational
support
structure
and
driver
for
P2
activities
­
Encourage
efforts
to
support
P2
in
the
Resource
Conservation
Challenge
with
priority
on
Targeted
Chemical
Reduction
Initiative.
­
Encourage
the
greening
of
State
and
local
governments.

Region
5
­
Likelihood
of
showing
actual
measurable
results,
especially
direct
environmental
benefit
of
waste
reduced
and
resources
saved.
­
Leverage
successes
from
or
add
benefit
to
National/
Regional
P2
projects
such
as:
Hospitals
for
a
Healthy
Environment,
Environmentally
Preferable
Purchasing,
Greening
Government
or
other
pollution
prevention
voluntary
partnerships.
 
An
application
cannot
exceed
a
request
for
more
than
$
125,000.

Region
6
 
Provide
measurable
results
in
any/
all
of
the
following:
 
reductions
in
hazardous
waste
(
especially
reductions
in
persistent,
bioaccumulative,
and
toxic
(
PBT)
contaminants)
12
 
reductions
in
non
hazardous
wastes
 
reductions
in
air
emissions
 
water
conserved
 
energy
conserved
 
reduced
regulatory
exposure
(
e.
g.
a
facility
no
longer
needing
a
permit
or
reducing
waste
sufficiently
to
be
able
to
go
from
large
quantity
generator
to
small
quantity
generator
or
be
conditionally
exempt)
 
cost
savings
 
Encourage
partnerships
resulting
in
measurable
improvement
for
sustainable
and
healthy
communities
through
pollution
prevention,
especially
in
environmental
justice
areas,
tribal
areas
and/
or
in
the
highest
Toxic
Release
Inventory
(
TRI)
areas.
Partnerships
may
include
any/
all
of
the
following:
other
State
agencies,
tribes,
nongovernmental
organizations
(
NGO),
local
governments,
the
regulated
community
and
related
trade
associations
and
environmental
justice
groups.
 
Promote
participation
and
bring
in
new
partners
in
Pollution
Prevention
initiatives
such
as:
Hospitals
for
a
Healthy
Environment
(
H2E),
Environmentally
Preferable
Purchasing
(
EPP),
Greening
Government
or
Supply
Chain,
Performance
Track,
and/
or
P2
based
Environmental
Management
Systems
(
EMS).

Region
7
­
Reductions
in
persistent,
bioaccumulative,
and
toxic
(
PBT)
contaminants.
­
Projects
or
approaches
which
address
pollution
prevention
within
the
agriculture
sector.

Region
8
No
specific
regional
priorities
beyond
National
Criteria
Region
9
No
specific
regional
priorities
beyond
National
Criteria
Region
10
­
Technical
assistance
to
businesses,
­
Measurement
on
financial,
and
environmental
benefits
due
to
technical
assistance
to
business
­
Projects
that
target
Persistent
Bioaccumulative
and
Toxic
(
PBTs)
Chemicals
C.
Review
and
Selection
Process.
5.
Review
Process.
Proposals
will
be
reviewed
and
evaluated
by
EPA
Regional
reviewers
based
on
the
above
National
and
Regional­
specific
criteria
listed.
For
specific
information
regarding
your
Regions'
review
process,
contact
the
P2
Coordinator
or
visit
the
regional
web
site
listed
in
Section
VII.
of
this
guidance
.
6.
Selection
Process.
Proposals
will
be
selected
for
funding
based
on
their
ability
13
to
address
the
national
and
regional­
specific
criteria,
to
meet
the
eligible
applicant
requirements,
and
to
meet
the
needs
of
the
Regions
in
terms
of
distribution
of
grant
funds.

7.
Selection
Official.
Selection
of
proposals
will
be
made
by
the
Division
Director
in
each
EPA
Region
responsible
for
pollution
prevention.

VI.
Award
Administration
Information.
H.
Award
notices.
Applicants
will
receive
acknowledgment
of
EPA's
receipt
of
their
proposal.
Once
initial
proposals
have
been
reviewed
and
evaluated,
applicants
will
be
notified
regarding
the
outcome
of
the
competition.

B.
Administration
and
National
Policy
Requirements.
Awards
for
FY
2004
funds
will
be
managed
through
the
EPA
regional
offices.
Applicants
should
contact
their
EPA
Regional
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator,
listed
under
Section
VII.
of
this
document,
to
obtain
specific
requirements
for
submitting
proposals.

C.
Dispute
Resolution
Process.
Procedures
at
40
CFR
30.63
and
40
CFR
31.70
apply.

D.
Reporting.
The
work
plans
and
reporting
must
be
consistent
with
the
requirements
of
40
CFR
§
§
35.107,
35.115,
35.507,
and
35.515.
The
grantee,
along
with
the
Regional
Project
Officer,
will
develop
a
process
for
jointly
evaluating
and
reporting
progress
and
accomplishments
under
the
work
plan
(
see
40
CFR
§
§
35.115
and
35.515).
A
description
of
the
evaluation
process
and
a
reporting
schedule
must
be
included
in
the
work
plan
(
see
§
§
35.107(
b)(
2)(
iv)
and
35.507(
b)(
2)(
iv)).

The
evaluation
process
must
provide
for:
(
1)
A
discussion
of
measurable
accomplishments
when
weighed
against
work
plan
commitments;
(
2)
A
discussion
of
the
cumulative
effectiveness
of
the
work
performed
under
all
work
plan
components;
(
3)
A
discussion
of
existing
and
potential
problem
areas;
and
(
4)
Suggestions
for
improvement,
including,
where
feasible,
schedules
for
making
improvements.

EPA's
Pollution
Prevention
Division
has
created
an
optional
progress
report
form
to
facilitate
national
reporting
on
status
of
pollution
prevention
grant
activities.
You
may
download
the
form
from
the
PPIS
page
of
the
P2
web
site
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
p2/
grants/
ppis/
ppis.
htm).
The
progress
report
form
is
not
required
but
has
been
used
by
several
States
in
previous
years.

Unless
waived
by
EPA's
project
officer,
all
final
products
generated
from
the
P2
14
grants
must
be
sent
to
the
Project
Officer,
as
well
as,
to
the
Pollution
Prevention
Division
in
Washington,
D.
C.
Examples
of
final
products
include:
fact
sheets,
pamphlets,
handbooks,
model
curricula,
assessment
and
audit
tools,
videos,
event
brochures,
etc.
The
Pollution
Prevention
Division
may
share
the
final
product
with
the
appropriate
regional
P2Rx
center
and
will
house
it
in
the
Pollution
Prevention
Information
Clearinghouse.
Please
address
the
documents
to:
P2
Grant
Products
Pollution
Prevention
Division
(
7409M)
Environmental
Protection
Agency
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue,
N.
W.
Washington,
D.
C.
20460
15
VII.
Agency
Contacts.
For
further
information,
please
contact
the
appropriate
EPA
Regional
Office.

State
REGIONAL
EPA
OFFICE
PHONE
CT,
MA,
ME,
NH,
RI,
VT
Region
1
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator
1
Congress
Street
Suite
1100
(
SPP)
Boston,
MA
02114­
2023
Regional
web
site:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
region01/
grants/
index.
html
(
617)
918­
1814
NJ,
NY,
PR,
VI
Region
2
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator
290
Broadway,
25th
Floor
(
SPMMB)
New
York,
NY
10007­
1866
Regional
web
site:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
region02/
cgp/
ppis/
index.
html
(
212)
637­
3753
DC,
DE,
MD,
PA,
VA,
WV
Region
3
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator
1650
Arch
Street
(
3EA40)
Philadelphia,
PA
19103­
2029
Regional
web
site:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
reg3p2p2/
grants.
htm
(
215)
814­
5415
AL,
FL,
GA,
KY,
MS,
NC,
SC,
TN
Region
4
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator
61
Forsyth
Street
SW
Atlanta,
GA
30303
Regional
web
site:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
region4/
financial/
grants.
html
(
404)
562­
9028
IL,
IN,
OH,
MI,
MN,
WI
Region
5
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator
77
West
Jackson
Boulevard
(
DW­
8J)
Chicago,
IL
60604­
3590
Regional
web
site:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
region5/
p2/
grants.
htm
(
312)
353­
4669
AR,
LA,
NM,
OK,
TX
Region
6
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator
1445
Ross
Avenue,
Suite
1200
(
6EN­
XP)
Dallas,
TX
75202
Regional
web
site:
http://
yosemite1.
epa.
gov/
r6/
r6w3c2.
nsf/
WebGran
t?
OpenView&
Start=
1&
Count=
130
(
214)
665­
2119
IA,
KS,
MO,
NE
Region
7
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator
901
N.
15th
Street
(
ARTD/
SWPP)
Kansas
City,
KS
66101
Regional
web
site:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
region7/
p2/
grants.
htm
(
913)
551­
7533
State
REGIONAL
EPA
OFFICE
PHONE
16
CO,
MT,
ND,
SD,
UT,
WY
Region
8
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator
999
18th
Street,
Suite
300
(
8P­
P3T)
Denver,
CO
80202­
2405
Regional
web
site:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
region08/
conservation_
recycl
ing/
grants.
html
(
303)
312­
6385
AZ,
CA,
HI,
NV,
AS,
GU
Region
9
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator
75
Hawthorne
Street
(
WST­
7)
San
Francisco,
CA
94105
Regional
web
site:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
region09/
cross_
pr/
p2/
grants.
html
(
415)
972­
3286
AK,
ID,
OR,
WA
Region
10
Pollution
Prevention
Coordinator
1200
Sixth
Avenue
(
01­
085)
Seattle,
WA
98101
Regional
web
site:
http://
yosemite.
epa.
gov/
R10/
OI.
NSF/
Pollution+
Pr
evention+(
P2)/
Pollution+
Prevention
(
206)
553­
4072
