FR Doc 03-14324

[Federal Register: June 6, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 109)]
[Notices]
[Page 33934-33942]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06jn03-69]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-7508-5]

Office of Environmental Justice; Environmental Justice
Collaborative Problem-Solving Grant Program Request for Applications
(May 30, 2003-September 30, 2003)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The purpose of this notice is to solicit applications from
eligible community-based organizations in order for the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to provide financial assistance
to those organizations through the new Environmental Justice
Collaborative Problem-Solving Grant Program described in this notice.
Community-based organizations who are eligible to receive financial
assistance must be non-government, nonprofit organizations currently
exempt from taxation under section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue
Code or exempt under applicable state law, and working on or planning
to work on projects to address local environmental and/or public health
concerns in their communities. All awards will be made in the form of a
Federal grant in the amount of $100,000.00 to be used over a three-year
period.
This Request for Applications Includes the Following
I. Scope and Purpose of the Request for Applications
II. Commonly Asked Questions About Environmental Justice

[[Page 33935]]

III. Description of the Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-
Solving Model
IV. Evaluation Criteria (Performance Measures) for Collaborative
Problem-Solving Grant Program
V. Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Grant
Application Instructions
VI. Selection Process and Program Schedule
VII. Reporting Requirements/Special Conditions

Translations Available

A Spanish translation of this material is available at 1-800-952-
6215. It can also be downloaded from: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/recent/ej.html
.

I. Scope and Purpose of Request for Applications

The purpose of this notice is to solicit applications from eligible
community-based organizations in order for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency to provide financial assistance to those
organizations through the new Environmental Justice Collaborative
Problem-Solving Grant Program described in this notice. Community-based
organizations who are eligible to receive financial assistance must be
non-government, nonprofit organizations currently exempt from taxation
under section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code or exempt under
applicable state law, and working on or planning to work on projects to
address local environmental and/or public health concerns in their
communities. All awards will be made in the form of a Federal grant to
15 community-based organizations in the amount of $100,000.00 to be
used over a three-year period.
Identification Number: CFDA 66.306.
Date of Notification: May 30, 2003.
Submission Due Date: September 30, 2003.
EPA's Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ), in coordination with
the Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice (IWG),
has developed an Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving
Model. (See section III of this RFA for a complete description of this
model.) The purpose of the Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-
Solving (CPS) Grant Program is for EPA to provide financial assistance
to community-based organizations to utilize this model to address one
or more environmental and/or public health issues in their communities.
An underlying purpose of the Environmental Justice CPS Grant Program is
to replicate lessons learned so that the Environmental Justice
Collaborative Problem-Solving Model can be utilized by other, similarly
situated communities seeking to address local environmental and/or
public health issues.
This Request for Applications (RFA) outlines the purpose, goals,
and general procedures and guidelines for applying for the
Environmental Justice CPS Grants, for Fiscal Year (FY) 2003. OEJ's
Environmental Justice CPS Grants seek to accomplish a strategically
defined set of objectives that address one or more local environmental
and/or public health issues by focusing on two key areas (e.g.,
capacity-building of the community residents, and forming collaborative
partnerships). Application instructions are provided in section V of
this RFA.
Number of Grants Proposed: Fifteen (15) Environmental Justice CPS
grants will be awarded for fiscal year (FY) 2003.
Applications must be date stamped by courier service or postmarked
by U.S. Postal Service by 12 p.m. Eastern Time, September 30, 2003. Use
the appropriate address below, depending on your method of delivery.

VIA U.S. Postal Service

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental
Justice (MC 2201A), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001.
Attention: Linda K. Smith, Project Officer, Phone: (202) 564-2602.

VIA Federal Express, Airborne, United Parcel Service, or Other Courier
Service

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental
Justice, Ariel Rios Building South, Room 2232, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.,
NW., Washington, DC 20004.
Attention: Linda K. Smith, Project Officer, Phone: (202) 564-2602.

Applications Sent by Fax or E-mail Will Not Be Accepted

II. Commonly Asked Questions About Environmental Justice

How Does EPA Define Environmental Justice?

EPA defines ``environmental justice'' as the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color,
national origin or income with respect to the development,
implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies. Fair treatment means that no one group of people, including
racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic groups, should bear a disproportionate
share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from
industrial, municipal, and commercial operations or the execution of
federal, state, local, and tribal environmental programs and policies.
Meaningful involvement means that: (1) Potentially affected community
residents have an appropriate opportunity to participate in decisions
about a proposed activity that will affect their environment and/or
health; (2) the public's contribution can influence the regulatory
agency's decision; (3) the concerns of all participants involved will
be considered in the decision-making process; and (4) the decision-
makers seek out and facilitate the involvement of those potentially
affected.

What Is the EPA's Commitment to Environmental Justice?

EPA Administrator Christine Todd Whitman reaffirmed the Agency's
commitment to environmental justice as the ``goal to be achieved for
all communities and persons across this Nation * * * when everyone,
regardless of race, culture, or income, enjoys the same degree of
protection from environmental and health hazards and equal access to
the decision-making process to have a healthy environment in which to
live, learn and work.'' In her August 9, 2001, memorandum, the
Administrator directed EPA's senior managers and staff to integrate
environmental justice into all EPA policies, programs, and activities.
Consequently, in FY 2003, each Regional and Headquarters Office
developed Environmental Justice Action Plans to transform the
Administrator's words into action, with strategic goals and measurable
results. Each Regional and Headquarters Office began implementing these
action plans which are available at: http://epa.gov/compliance/environmentaljustice.
Inherently strategic in nature and deemed as
``works in progress,'' these action plans represent the commitments of
each office over the next 1-5 years.
Consistent with this commitment, EPA, through OEJ, will provide
financial assistance to those community-based organizations who wish to
engage in capacity-building initiatives, and also utilize constructive
engagement and collaborative problem-solving to seek viable solutions
for their community's environmental and/or public health issues.
Moreover, OEJ staff members will provide hands-on technical assistance
to those grantee community-based organizations throughout the duration
of the grant.

What Does the OEJ Mean by Capacity-Building?

Capacity-building refers to the mechanisms a community uses which

[[Page 33936]]

provide the residents with the information, skills, and tools to more
effectively achieve their goals. These mechanisms may lead to better
documentation and assessment of an environmental and/or public health
problem. Documentation and assessment mechanisms range from
neighborhood surveys to the use of mapping tools through the EPA's
geographic information systems. A particularly helpful tool in this
regard would be the Environmental Justice Mapper which is available at:
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/whereyoulive.html. Other capacity-
building mechanisms may involve increasing the community's ability to
understand the permitting process and to use legal tools to participate
in the environmental decisionmaking process, such as those described in
the Environmental Law Institute's ``A Citizen's Guide to Using
Environmental Laws to Secure Environmental Justice.'' This publication
is available at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/ej/citizen_guide_ej.pdf
.
A third type of capacity-building mechanism may involve enhancing
the community's understanding and appreciation of the partnership
development process, consensus building, and the use of alternative
dispute resolution to address local environmental and/or public health
concerns.

What Does the OEJ Mean by Constructive Engagement and Collaborative
Problem-Solving?

Constructive engagement and collaborative problem-solving are
essential approaches to address local environmental and/or public
health concerns. A key starting point is the community's involvement in
clearly formulating and articulating a goal to be accomplished (e.g.,
establishment of a health clinic or medical screening program; or
replacement of diesel buses with clean fuel buses). Constructive
engagement means outreach and education to affected community residents
and other stakeholders. Collaborative problem-solving requires an
understanding of the need to seek other partners such as industry;
federal, state and local governments; academia; and environmental
organizations to address the community's environmental and/or public
health concerns. It involves developing strategic partnerships, by
including all organizations which can play a role in addressing the
problems. Collaborative problem-solving involves a well-designed and
strategic plan to sustain the partnership and to work towards
addressing the local environmental and/or public health issues.

III. Description of the Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-
Solving Model

The elements of the Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-
Solving Model are discussed in detail in below. A sample of a project
where the elements of the Model have been used is also provided below.
The elements of the Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving
Model are discussed in detail below. A sample of a project where the
elements of the Model have been used is also included below. More
examples of how the Model has been applied can be found on the
Internet, the ``Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental
Justice Status Report, (February 2002). (http://epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/ej/iwg-status-02042002.pdf
), an evaluation
report for six of the 2002 demonstration projects http://www.epa.gov/evaluate/ej.htm
and, the recent 2003 List of Revitalization Projects
http://epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/ej/iwg-2003.pdf.

1. Issue Identification, Community Vision, and Strategic Goal Setting

Long-standing concerns in the affected community tend to surface
from the efforts of one individual or a small group of individuals who
are particularly active in the community. These concerns can include
``substantive issues'' such as high asthma rates, children suffering
from high levels of lead poisoning, undesirable land uses, the close
proximity of residences to pollution-generating facilities, the lack of
parks and recreational areas, or the lack of access to health care or
medical monitoring. These concerns also can include ``process issues''
such as the need to strengthen public participation, identifying
leaders or leadership development, improved education of stakeholders,
and trust among stakeholder groups to work together. Collaborative
problem-solving stresses moving beyond merely identifying the issues to
formulating viable strategies to address and resolve them. Involving
the broader community in a planning process usually leads to greater
clarity in the goals set, common understanding and trust, and the
ability to act collectively. Strategic goals should not only address
the problem but also lead to greater community capacity, viable
partnerships, and leveraging of resources-institutional, technical, and
financial. A key step in the goal-setting process is determining
whether or not the conditions are ripe for a collaborative problem-
solving process. The following list provides several important steps a
community-based organization can take to identify an issue, articulate
a community vision, and set strategic goals:
[sbull] Building upon existing leadership and expertise in the
affected community;
[sbull] Conducting local education and outreach efforts, fact-
finding and assessments;
[sbull] Involving affected community residents early in identifying
concerns and crystallizing issues;
[sbull] Identifying early on potential partners from all
stakeholder groups;
[sbull] Building upon a strong understanding of community history
and practices;
[sbull] Building upon a clearly articulated community vision of its
goals; and,
[sbull] Employing tools for involving the affected community
residents in planning project activities.

2. Community Capacity Building

Capacity building refers to mechanisms which provide the community-
based organizations with information, skills, and tools to more
effectively achieve the community's goals. These mechanisms may involve
better documentation and assessment of a problem, use of consensus
building, and alternative dispute resolution. Capacity building efforts
should focus on residents of the affected community as well as other
stakeholders. Leadership skills in areas such as strategic thinking,
management processes, and effective communications are very critical.
The ability to build trust and build partnerships across stakeholder
groups is one such leadership skill. Therefore, particular attention
should be paid to nurturing the leadership skills of key individuals in
a project. Capacity building and leadership development can be
accomplished through a range of activities, from attendance at
meetings, workshops, and training sessions to participation in
mentoring opportunities. Several key steps toward community capacity
building and to acquiring successful leadership skills could include:
[sbull] Building upon existing organizational capacity in the
affected community;
[sbull] Identifying specific capacity building mechanisms which are
tailored to community needs and project goals;
[sbull] Fostering capacity through training, mentoring, technical
assistance, or resource support;

[[Page 33937]]

[sbull] Ensuring capacity building for those community
representatives directly involved in the collaborative problem-solving
processes; and
[sbull] Developing processes that help ensure capacity building and
leadership development of community residents in the future.

3. Consensus Building and Dispute Resolution

Collaborative problem-solving encourages all parties to seek to
find common ground and derive ``mutual gains'' from participating in a
consensus building process. More often than not, this will lead to
greater capacity to address the community's concerns and the eventual
resolution of issues. Moreover, consensus building efforts often result
in greater understanding and trust among different stakeholders that
will lead to a greater capacity to address other issues. There also
will be cases in which crystallized disputes require the use of a
facilitator or mediator to help resolve such disputes. There exists a
wide array of approaches within the area of dispute resolution--ranging
from unassisted negotiation to arbitration--that communities can employ
to best suit their needs. Several key steps a community can employ to
achieve consensus building and successful dispute resolution are:
[sbull] Designing processes, both formal and informal, to help
ensure fair treatment and meaningful participation of all collaborative
problem-solving stakeholders;
[sbull] Instituting processes which promote the development of a
common vision, and goals among all partners;
[sbull] Identifying, nurturing and promoting collaborations with
win/win scenarios and the ``mutual gains'' approach;
[sbull] Promoting the use of facilitation or mediation to ensure
understanding of the consensus building process; and
[sbull] Ensuring that existing or potential conflicts are resolved,
where necessary, through the use of alternative dispute resolution
techniques.

4. Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships, and Resource Mobilization

Building a successful partnership requires vision, clear problem
identification, organizational capacity and commitment, individual
leadership, use of technical resources, and, in some cases, use of a
facilitator. This is an evolving process that grows with existing
capacity on the part of the affected community as well as other
stakeholder groups. Different stakeholder groups will require different
assistance to ensure their effective participation. For example,
community groups may need support in accessing government resources
while industry may need education on how to work effectively and
proactively with communities. Well-structured partnerships assemble the
needed capacity to resolve issues. They are important vehicles for
creating a broad-based framework that mobilizes the resources
necessary--human, institutional, technical, legal, and financial--to
address a problem. In this way, they are a critical part of a capacity
building strategy. Several ways to achieve well structured multi-
stakeholder collaborative partnerships include:
[sbull] Establishing dialogues which lead to possible partnerships
with all relevant stakeholders/parties, which invariably include the
community, business, and government;
[sbull] Ensuring clarity of goals, objectives, and common vision
among all members of the partnership;
[sbull] Developing a clear, workable organizational structure and
workplan to address communications and coordination needs of the
collaborative partnership;
[sbull] Identifying and recruiting partners to address the resource
needs of a project (e.g., human, institutional, technical, legal, and
financial);
[sbull] Strengthening partnerships as new issues and relationships
are understood; and
[sbull] Establishing processes that allow for the inclusion of new
partners as they emerge.

5. Supportive and Facilitative Role of Government

Environmental and public health government agencies can play an
important role in addressing a community's concerns because the
agencies are invested with the statutory authority to address those
issues. They make decisions of a regulatory nature, provide technical
assistance and resources, and can help ensure that all relevant
stakeholders come to the table. It is important that community
organizations seeking to resolve a problem formulate a clear strategy
to engage government agencies at the local, state, tribal, and/or
Federal levels. Securing support from environmental and public health
government regulatory agencies can be accomplished by:
[sbull] Securing commitments from multiple agencies, whether
Federal, state, local, or tribal government agencies, as appropriate;
[sbull] Seeking to ensure interagency and intergovernmental
cooperation and coordination to address complex environmental and/or
public health, housing, transportation, economic development, community
revitalization, etc.; and
[sbull] Accessing and securing support for a specific community
need that coincides with a current activity being conducted by an
environmental and/or public health government agency.

6. Management and Implementation

Realizing a vision to address identified issues requires attention
to three major areas: (1) Action plans; (2) management; and (3)
partnership design. Plans to address these areas should be formulated
and executed in ways that build upon the unique assets and challenges
of specific communities and stakeholder partners. Action plans should
include clear objectives, timelines, and delegation of
responsibilities. Management plans should ensure proper communications,
coordination, and utilization of resources. Well-formulated partnership
designs should address the convening processes, the role of lead
organizations, planning for regular meetings, and understanding ways to
increase the capacity of partner organizations. As a result, all
partners must articulate and follow through on commitments for the
project to: (1) Address the identified issues thoroughly; (2)
strengthen and maintain partnerships; and (3) realize the shared goals.
Several ways that could accomplish a successful management plan
include:
[sbull] Ensuring tangible outcomes and improvements in community
conditions;
[sbull] Developing strategies tailored to the community's assets
and deficits;
[sbull] Designing projects to meet the strength of partnerships,
resources and the capacity of the partners;
[sbull] Producing clearly defined, well-formulated action plans;
[sbull] Identifying and building upon small successes achieved
along the way;
[sbull] Ensuring clear commitments on the part of all partners; and
[sbull] Clustering and ordering tasks to promote the efficient use
of time and resources.

7. Framework, Lessons Learned, and Replication of Best Practices

Key to deepening and sustaining the work is the ability to sum up
progress in quantitative, qualitative, institutional, and social terms,
and to incorporate lessons learned into a continuous process.
Formulating a plan for evaluating one's work is an important element of
success. Not only will it help the project implementation plan stay on

[[Page 33938]]

course, but such a plan will also allow for greater clarity of lessons
learned. Lessons learned need to be shared not only with the affected
community residents, but also with other communities and stakeholders
so that best practices can be replicated broadly. Several key steps
that should be included in developing an evaluation framework for
lessons learned can consist of:
[sbull] Clearly defining measures of success of project objectives,
process, outputs, institutional effects, and quality-of-life results;
[sbull] Understanding and evaluating, from different stakeholder
perspectives, indicators used to measure success;
[sbull] Developing a ``template'' for successful collaborative
models, based on experience in a specific community;
[sbull] Developing mechanisms to integrate the lessons into future
efforts as new issues and challenges are identified; and
[sbull] Sharing, publishing, and disseminating experiences and
lessons learned.

Example of a Project Where the Environmental Justice Collaborative
Problem-Solving Model Is Used

An example of a community-based organization that has successfully
utilized elements of the Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-
Solving Model is outlined below. CPS Project X, located in Any Town,
USA, is a proactive community-based organization of 1,400 members who
have taken the lead in establishing collaborative partnerships to
address local environmental and/or public health issues through
environmental cleanup and community revitalization initiatives. A
synopsis of the CPS Project X Partnership as it relates to the
Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Model follows:
1. Issue Identification/Vision: A community survey confirmed
concerns about public health problems associated with two abandoned
toxic waste sites. The community developed a vision of environmental
cleanup and community revitalization. Their goals included cleanup and
redevelopment plans involving improved housing, and the need for a
technology and job-training center, greenway development, and a health
clinic.
2. Community Capacity Building: Proactive, committed, and strategic
leadership provided by a champion resulted in the formation of CPS
Project X, a community-based organization, and the development of the
broad-based CPS Project X Partnership. Among other things, the CPS
Project X Partnership educated the community on the fundamentals of
brownfields redevelopment and sustainable development.
3. Consensus Building and Dispute Resolution: Partners have been
and continue to be committed to a consensus building process that rests
upon a common vision among its partners. All major stakeholders have
participated in the development of a common vision for the project.
4. Multi-Stakeholder Collaborative Partnerships: The CPS Project X
Partnership established a steering committee co-chaired by CPS Project
X, the City of Any Town, and the County of All Towns, and EPA. Other
partners included: local banks; State Department of Health and
Environmental Control; State Economic Development Administration; the
University of State; and several elected officials. These partners have
brought significant resources--human, technical, and institutional--to
help realize the community's goals.
5. Supportive and Facilitative Role of Government: Several Federal
agencies have provided resources and technical assistance, including
EPA; the Departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development,
and Energy; the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences,
and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Federal
funding for this effort has exceeded $1.5 million.
6. Management and Implementation: A well-formulated partnership
design, which included specific subcommittees geared to address the
project goals, and a set of clear objectives have resulted in a viable
workplan. Assistance in organizational management issues is being
provided by an expert in nonprofit organizations. Ongoing coordination
is being provided by a partnership consisting primarily of the steering
committee co-chairs.
7. Evaluation Framework/Lessons Learned: While the CPS Project X
Partnership has not developed an overall evaluation framework, some
measures of success are built into discreet project components such as
the Health Care Clinic Workplan, Brownfields Assessment Workplan, and
the Dump Superfund Initiative Workplan. A case study of this project
has been completed by EPA: another is being planned by a non-government
organization.
More examples of how the Model has been applied can be found in two
EPA documents, the ``Federal Interagency Working Group on Environmental
Justice Status Report, (February 2002). (http://epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/ej/iwg-status-02042002.pdf
) and the recent 2003
List of Revitalization Projects http://epa.gov/compliance/resources/publications/ej/iwg-2003.pdf
.

IV. Evaluation Criteria (Performance Measures) for the Collaborative
Problem-Solving Grant Program

As required by 40 CFR 30.63, anticipated accomplishments must be
stated. The following criteria will be used to determine the
effectiveness of the Environmental Justice CPS Grant Program in meeting
its anticipated objective. The overarching goal of the Environmental
Justice CPS Grant Program is to build the capacity of the communities
to address strategically defined local environmental and/or public
health issues in a collaborative problem-solving partnership, and to
create positive public health and/or environmental improvements in each
of the affected communities selected for this program.
The Environmental Justice CPS Grant Program is intended to seek:
1. Improvements in the capacity of affected communities to think
strategically and to work with other stakeholders; and
2. Improvements in the environmental conditions in the communities
that are perceived to have an impact on the health of the residents of
these affected communities.
The following criteria will be used by EPA to measure the success
of the overall Environmental Justice CPS Grant Program. These criteria
are for the evaluation of the grant program as a whole. However, each
grantee must include evaluation criteria for its project at the time
the application is submitted. All grant applications must reflect the
following four key elements:
1. Proper documentation and assessment of the local environmental
and/or public health problem.
2. Development of the appropriate partnerships, including all
organizations which can play a role in addressing the problem(s).
3. Formulation of a well-designed strategic plan to sustain the
partnerships and to ensure resolution of the issue(s).
4. Development of mechanisms to share lessons learned from the
process.
EPA will use several measures to evaluate the success of the
Environmental Justice CPS Grant Program, including, but not limited to:
[sbull] Operation and maintenance of effective collaborative
partnerships are sustained throughout the period of the grant and
afterwards.
[sbull] More effective oversight of the grant program by EPA is
achieved with OEJ

[[Page 33939]]

staff members and regional staff more involved in the grants.
[sbull] Significant reduction in public health and environmental
risks in affected communities is achieved.
[sbull] Significant improvement in the quality of life issues for
the affected communities is achieved.
[sbull] Facilitation and/or mediation services are effectively
utilized to help resolve local environmental and/or public health
issues in affected communities.
[sbull] Community capacity is significantly improved for program
participants.
[sbull] Outcomes or lessons learned in affected communities are
transferred to other similarly situated communities.

V. Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving Grant
Application Instructions

A. Who May Submit Applications and May Applicants Submit More Than One?

Any affected community-based organization with nonprofit status
either demonstrated through designation by the Internal Revenue Service
as a section 501(c)(3) organization or incorporated as a nonprofit
under applicable state law may submit an application during the period
of this solicitation. Applicants must be nonprofit, non-governmental
organizations to receive these Federal funds. Universities are not
eligible to apply for this grant program. Please also refer to Appendix
E for Guidance on Lobbying Restrictions.
The Environmental Justice CPS Grant Program is a competitive
process. EPA will consider only one application per community-based
organization for any given project.
The community-based organization who applies for an Environmental
Justice CPS Grant must submit one original, signed by a person
authorized to receive funds for the organization, and two copies of the
application (double-sided copies encouraged). Applications must be
reproducible (for example, stapled once in the upper left hand corner,
on white paper, and with page numbers).

B. What Activities Under the Environmental Justice CPS Grants Are
Eligible for Funding?

The Environmental Justice CPS Grant Program is designed for multi-
media environmental issues and/or public health concerns. For this
reason, each project must include activities which are authorized by
two or more of the following federal environmental statutes.
(1) Clean Water Act, section 104(b)(3): Conduct and promote the
coordination of research, investigations, experiments, training,
demonstration projects, surveys, and studies relating to the causes,
extent, prevention, reduction, and elimination of water pollution.
(2) Safe Drinking Water Act, section 1442(c)(3)(A): Develop,
expand, or carry out a program (that may combine training, education,
and employment) for occupations relating to the public health aspects
of providing safe drinking water.
(3) Solid Waste Disposal Act, section 8001(a): Conduct and promote
the coordination of research, investigations, experiments, training,
demonstration projects, surveys, public education programs, and studies
relating to solid waste (e.g., health and welfare effects of exposure
to materials present in solid waste and methods to eliminate such
effects).
(4) Clean Air Act, section 103(b)(3): Conduct research,
investigations, experiments, demonstration projects, surveys, and
studies related to the causes, effects (including health and welfare
effects), extent, prevention, and control of air pollution.
(5) Toxic Substances Control Act, section 10(a): Conduct research,
development, monitoring, public education, training, demonstration
projects, and studies on toxic substances.
(6) Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, section
20(a): Conduct research, development, monitoring, public education,
training, demonstration projects, and studies on pesticides.
(7) Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act, section 203:
Conduct research, investigations, experiments, training, demonstration
projects, surveys, and studies relating to the minimizing or ending of
ocean dumping of hazardous materials and the development of
alternatives to ocean dumping.

Please Note: Applications for proposed projects that are
inconsistent with the above stated EPA statutory authorities or
goals of the program are ineligible for funding and will not be
evaluated and ranked.

C. Have You Received Any Other Grants or Cooperative Agreements From
EPA in the Last 3 Years?

Please list the grant or cooperative agreement number, title of the
project, and amount of funding provided by EPA.

Please Note: Do not use the same project description for this
application that was used for any prior award. To do so will
disqualify your application.

D. How Much Money May Be Requested, and Are Matching Funds Required?

Costs will be determined in accordance with OMB Circular No. A-122
for nonprofit organizations. The ceiling in federal funds for
individual grants is $100,000. Funds can be dispersed as needed or up
to 80% of the grant award can be obtained. The remaining 20% of the
grant award will be available upon the successful completion of the
grant and the acceptance by EPA of the final report as detailed in the
grant. Applicants are not required to provide matching funds.

E. Are There Any Restrictions on the Use of the Federal Funds?

Yes. EPA grant funds can 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 from this program cannot be used
for matching funds for other federal grants, lobbying, or intervention
in federal regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings. In addition, the
grantee may not use these federal assistance funds to sue the federal
government or any other government entity. Refer to 40 CFR 30.27,
entitled ``Allowable Cost.'' The scope of Environmental Justice CPS
grants may not include construction, promotional items (e.g., T-shirts,
buttons, hats, and furniture purchases).

F. Who Should You Call if You Have Questions About the Environmental
Justice CPS Grants?

For questions concerning CPS grants, you may contact the
Environmental Justice Coordinator in your region. Because this is a
competitive grant program, any questions concerning the application and
review process must be submitted via e-mail or fax in order to ensure
fairness to all possible applicants. You can contact the Project
Officer by calling direct to (202) 564-2602 or to the Toll-free number
1-800-962-6215. All questions must be sent via e-mail to
smith.linda@epa.gov or by fax to (202) 501-1162. They will be posted on
the Web site and sent via the EJ-EPA list serv.

G. What Must the Environmental Justice CPS Grant Contain?

Proposals from community-based organizations must have the
following (Forms Can be Downloaded from http://www.epa.gov/ogd/AppKit/application.htm
):
1. Form SF 424--Application for Federal Assistance. The official
form is required for all federal grants. It requests basic information
about the grantee and the proposed project.

[[Page 33940]]

2. Other Forms Required.

Budget Form SF 424A. Provides information on your budget. Budget
figures/projections should support your workplan narrative.
Separate Detailed Budget. The detailed budget should include the
specific components of the general categories you listed on the SF 424A
(e.g., personnel costs, fringe benefits, specific travel, equipment,
supplies, and contractor costs, broken down by project phases).
SF 424B. Assurances--Non-Construction Programs.
Preaward Compliance Review Report.
Certification Regarding Lobbying.
Quality Assurance Statement (if a research project).

3. A Project Workplan Narrative of the Proposal not to exceed 15
Typewritten Pages. A workplan narrative describes the applicant's
proposed project. The typed pages of the workplan must be in 12 point
font, on letter-size paper (8\1/2\ x 11 inches), single-spaced, single-
sided, and have 1'' margins. The project workplan narrative is one of
the most important components of your application and (assuming that
all other required materials are submitted) will be used as the primary
basis for selection. The workplan narrative must include all of the
information described in Item G below.
4. Letter(s) of Commitment. Your application must include letters
of commitment from the other stakeholder partners/organizations
identified in your application.
5. Documentation of Nonprofit Status. Any affected community-based
organization with nonprofit status either demonstrated through
designation by the Internal Revenue Service as a section 501(c)(3)
organization or incorporated as a nonprofit under applicable state law
may submit an application during the period of this solicitation.
Applicants must be nonprofit, non-governmental organizations to receive
these Federal funds. Universities are not eligible to apply for this
grant program. The application must include documentation as evidence
of the organization's current nonprofit status.
6. Resumes of the Key Personnel. The application must include
resumes of the Principal Investigator or Project Manager, and two other
key personnel who will be significantly involved in the project.
7. Evaluation Criteria for How To Determine the Success of The
Project (Performance Measures).
8. The answer to the question concerning past awards in Section V-
C.

Note: Applications that do not include ALL the information
listed above will not be considered.

Please mark any information in the proposal that you consider
confidential. EPA will follow the procedures at 40 CFR part 2 if
information marked confidential is requested from the Agency under the
Freedom of Information Act.

H. How Will the Applications Be Evaluated?

The applications will be evaluated by an EPA Review Panel and
selected according to the following criteria. The corresponding points
next to each criterion are the weights EPA will use to evaluate the
applications. Please note that certain sections are given greater
weight than others. Your application will be ranked based on the
following evaluation criteria:
1. Clear and Concise Description of the Project (35 points)
The project workplan narrative is one of the most important
components of your application and (assuming that all other required
materials are submitted) will be used as the primary basis for
selection. The workplan narrative must provide the following
information:
a. Describe your community-based organization and its
qualifications to undertake this collaborative problem-solving project.
In addition, describe your qualifications as the Principal
Investigator/Project Manager to undertake this project. Include whether
or not your organization has received any grant/cooperative agreement
from EPA in the last 3 years as described in Item V-C. above. (5)
b. Describe the community being served (e.g., demographics,
geographic location, community history and assets, issues of concern).
Provide a discussion of the environmental and/or public health issues
your project seeks to address. (5)
c. Describe the strategic goals your project seeks to accomplish.
(5)
1. Describe the process your organization and your collaborating
partners used to formulate these goals (e.g., needs assessment,
planning charettes).
2. Describe how you intend to build consensus among your partners
around these goals.
3. Describe how achievement of those goals will address the issues
of concern and improve the environment and/or public health of your
community.
d. Describe the specific steps you have and/or will undertake to
engage in constructive engagement among collaborative partners, and to
establish and manage a formal collaborative problem-solving
partnership, including but not limited to the following: (5)
1. Strategies used;
2. Partnership structure (e.g., committee, work group, etc.);
3. Key obstacles to overcome;
4. Communications and coordination mechanisms and procedures;
5. Use of consensus building and dispute resolution techniques;
6. Decision-making process; and
7. Use of formal agreements.
e. Describe the organizations which are members of the formal
collaboration, including qualifications of each organization other than
the applicant; the roles of each organization; the commitments made by
each organization; and the ways by which each organization will
implement their commitments. (5)
f. Provide an implementation plan. Describe in chronological order
the activities you and your partners will undertake to carry this
project. Use of a timeline is encouraged. (5)
1. Describe your intended activities to build the capacity of your
community-based organization, the impacted community, and other
stakeholder partners to achieve the goals of your project. Describe how
such capacity building activities will enhance the ability of partners
to:
[sbull] address the strategically-defined issues; and
[sbull] undertake the collaborative problem-solving partnership.
I.
2. Provide the steps you intend to take to achieve the project's
objectives and desired results. Include an analysis of the obstacles,
gaps, and/or conflicts that your project will face, and discuss how
your implementation strategies are designed to overcome them.
g. Describe how the project will develop and incorporate an
evaluation strategy, establish and track milestones and performance
measures (activities, outputs, and outcomes), and share lessons
learned. Areas for evaluation may include, but are not limited to, the
following: (5)
1. Improvements in the capacity of the community-based organization
to form partnerships;
2. Improvements in the ability of the community-based organization
to build and sustain a strong working relationship with the partners in
order to resolve problems in a collaborative manner; and
3. Improvements in the environmental and/or public health
conditions in the community.

[[Page 33941]]

2. Adherence to the Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving
Model Described in Appendix D (25 points)
The following seven elements have been identified as key factors to
the success of an Environmental Justice Collaborative Problem-Solving
Model:
1. Issue Identification, Community Vision, and Strategic Goal
Setting;
2. Community Capacity Building;
3. Consensus Building and Dispute Resolution;
4. Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships and Resource Mobilization;
5. Supportive and Facilitative Role of Government;
6. Management and Implementation; and
7. Evaluation, Lessons Learned, and Replication of Best Practices.
a. Please describe how your project utilizes the elements of a
collaborative problem solving model, and how each contribute to the
overall success of the project.
b. Describe how the project, either through its implementation or
results, will contribute to further development of the Environmental
Justice Problem-Solving Model.
3. A detailed budget which shows how the funds will be specifically
used in terms of personnel, fringe benefits, travel, equipment,
supplies, contractor costs, and other costs. Funds cannot be used for
construction, lobbying, or litigation against the government. The
budget must list proposed milestones with deadlines, and estimated
costs and completion dates. (10 points)
4. An appendix which describes the qualifications of the Principal
Investigator or Project Manager and explains why he/she is qualified to
undertake this project. (10 points)
5. A Memorandum of Agreement signed by each representative of the
collaborative partnership which identifies the roles and
responsibilities of each partner. Each partner is valued at 2 points
with a maximum possible total of 10. (10 points)

Please Note: A letter of support from an individual or entity
does not qualify as a reflection of an agreement to participate in a
collaborative partnership.

6. A set of evaluation criteria which reflect how the success of
the project will be measured. These should include qualitative and
quantitative measures. (10)

I. When and Where Must Applications Be Submitted?

The applicant must submit one signed original application with
required attachments and two copies. Applications must be postmarked by
U.S. Postal Service or date stamped by courier service by 12 p.m.
Eastern Time, September 30, 2003. Use the appropriate address below,
depending on your method of delivery.

Applications Sent by FAX or E-Mail Will Not Be Accepted

VIA U.S. Postal Service

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental
Justice (MC 2201A), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-
0001,
Attention: Linda K. Smith, Project Officer, Phone: (202) 564-2602.

VIA Federal Express, Airborne, United Parcel Service, or Other Courier
Service

VI. Selection Process and Program Schedule

A. How Will Applications Be Reviewed?

A panel of EPA employees will review, evaluate, and rank the
applications of potential grant recipients. Applications will be
screened to ensure that they meet all eligible activities and
requirements described in sections IV and V above.

B. How Will the Final Selections Be Made?

After the individual projects are reviewed and ranked, OEJ will
compare the best applications and make final selections. Additional
factors that OEJ will take into account include geographic and
socioeconomic balance, the diverse nature of the projects, the
projected use of the funds, and projects whose environment and/or
public health benefits can be sustained after the grant is completed.
The OEJ Director will make the final grant selections.
Please note that this is a very competitive grants program. Limited
funding is available and many grant applications are expected to be
received. Therefore, the Agency cannot fund all applications. If your
project is not funded, a listing of other EPA grant programs may be
found in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance. This publication
is available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/compliance/recent/ej.html
.

C. How Will Applicants Be Notified?

After all applications are received, OEJ will mail acknowledgments
to the applicants. Once applications have been recommended for funding,
OEJ will notify the finalists. OEJ will notify those applicants in
writing whose projects are not selected for funding.

D. What Is the Expected Timeframe for Reviewing and Awarding the
Environmental Justice CPS Grants?

May 30, 2003--FY 2003 OEJ Collaborative Problem-Solving Grant Program
Application Guidance is available and published in the Federal Register
and on the Internet.
June 1, 2003 to September 30, 2003--Eligible grant recipients develop,
complete and submit their applications.
September 30, 2003--Applications must be date stamped by courier
service or postmarked by U.S. Postal Service by 12 p.m. Eastern Time,
September 30, 2003.
October 1, 2003-November 3, 2003--EPA reviews and evaluates
applications.
November 22, 2003-December 22, 2003--Applicants will be contacted if
their application is being considered for funding.
January 1, 2004--The OEJ Director will make final recommendations for
award.
January 31, 2004--OEJ will release the national announcement of the
2003 recipients.

VII. Reporting Requirements/Special Conditions

Activities must be complete and funds spent within the timeframe
specified in the three-year grant award. Project start dates will
depend on the grant award date. OEJ anticipates grant awards by January
1, 2004. Substantial communication between EPA and the grantee will
include:
A. Quarterly Reports--The grant recipient's Project Manager will be
required to submit quarterly reports to update OEJ on the project's
progress. The reports should include, but not be limited to,
information identified under the elements of the Environmental Justice
Collaborative Problem-Solving Model that pertain to:
1. Specific grant activities accomplished, such as establishing an
effective, collaborative partnership between the grant recipient and
other stakeholders;
2. Operating and maintaining an effective collaborative partnership
and problem-solving mechanism;
3. Noteworthy community capacity-building activities that took
place;

[[Page 33942]]

4. Identifying activities that resulted in the improvement of the
community's environmental and/or public health concerns;.
5. Stating how funding resources were committed; and,
6. Identifying any issues/problems encountered and the methods for
resolution.
B. Monthly Conference Calls--Moreover, the grantee will confer on a
monthly basis with the OEJ staff person identified as the technical
contact. A template will be furnished on those items to be discussed.
In general, every call and report will follow the evaluation criteria
described in section IV.
C. Development of Performance Measures for Grant--As a condition to
receiving Environmental Justice CPS grants, grantees are required to
develop measurable outcomes to be achieved through the activities for
which these grant funds were awarded. The performance measures
(evaluation criteria) should focus on solid, qualitative activities
related to the grantee's activities, outputs, and outcomes. These
performance measures will help gather insights concerning successful
implementation strategies and generate lessons learned that may be
applicable to future projects under this grant program.
The success of this grant program will be entirely dependent on the
work of the grantees. Therefore, EPA and the grantee will examine
whether, as a result of the grantee's activities and outputs, there has
been:
[sbull] Better overall environmental and/or public health
protection for community residents;
[sbull] Significant improvement in the quality-of-life of community
residents;
[sbull] Significant increase in the community's capacity as it
relates to understanding the environmental and/or public health issues
affecting the community; a better understanding of the permitting
processes; a better understanding of the use of environmental laws and
their implementing regulations to address environmental justice
concerns; and a better understanding of alternative dispute resolution
and negotiation techniques;
[sbull] Effective use of the collaborative problem-solving
processes;
[sbull] Transferability of the lessons learned to other communities
similarly situated; and,
[sbull] Effective community revitalization.
D. Final Report Requirement--All grant recipients must submit a
Final Technical Report for EPA approval within ninety (90) days of the
end of the project period. A draft of this report should be submitted
within 60 days of the end of the project period. A Financial Status
Report is also required and is described in the award agreement
document. The EPA will collect, review, and disseminate those final
reports which can serve as models for future projects.
E. Change in Project Requiring Project Officer Approval--The grant
recipient is responsible for the successful completion of the project.
However, any change in the Project Manager or Principal Investigator is
subject to approval by the EPA Project Officer. You must immediately
submit the reason for the change and the qualifications of the new
Project Manager or Principal Investigator to the Project Officer in
writing. This can be sent by e-mail to smith.linda@epa.gov or by fax to
(202) 501-1162.
For further information about this Environmental Justice CPS grant
program, please visit the EPA's Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/environmentaljustice/grants/index.html
or call our hotline
at 1-800-962-6215 (available in Spanish).

Dated: May 30, 2003.
Barry E. Hill,
Director, Office of Environmental Justice.
[FR Doc. 03-14324 Filed 6-5-03; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P