Transcript FY-2009 ARC Guidelines

Changes to the EPA Brownfields
Assessment, Revolving Loan Fund and
Cleanup (ARC) Grant Proposal
Guidelines
What You Need to Know
May 6, 2008
Presented by:
Megan Quinn
US EPA Headquarters
Brownfields Program
http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/
Agenda
• Purpose of Revisions
• New Proposal Requirements
• New Opportunities
• New Format
• Next Steps
• Q&A Time
Background
• EPA has awarded over $500 million in
brownfields grants since program inception
• In FY08 EPA received 845 proposals
• Selected 314 for award of over $74 million
• Expect increased amount in coming years
Purpose
 Responding to stakeholders frustrated with cumbersome grant
guidelines
 10 Regional Representatives (1 from each EPA region) met
from July-February
 Clear and accessible guidelines to attract a dynamic
pool of applicants.
 Streamlined proposal effort.
 Revised proposal requirements designed to help ensure
grantee success.
 Increased applicant flexibility.
Important Items to Remember
 Basic format hasn’t changed
 Threshold/Ranking Sections are still there
 Significant streamlining of threshold “legalese”
and clarifying ranking criteria
 90 days- more time to adapt to the process
Streamlining Effort
 Reorganized format for Ranking Criteria.
 Reduced complex terminology i.e. legalese.
 Reduced leading statements.
 Separate guidance documents for each grant
type.
 Single proposal for community-wide assessment
(Continued)
Streamlining Effort
 Reduced number of legal opinions (RLF grants
only).
 Community notification back in Threshold.
 Added proposal Check Lists at the end of
threshold & ranking criteria.
 Eliminated several appendices.
 Enhanced Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
posted to web.
Revised Proposal Requirements
 Cleanup Grant – requires Phase II report complete
 Community Based Organization Letters of
Support
 Assessment Coalition – Commitment Letters
 2 page limit for cover letters
 18 page limit for narrative proposal
Increased Opportunities/Applicant Flexibility
 Assessment Coalitions
 Single proposal for community-wide
assessment- $200k limit still applies
 hazardous/petroleum requests can be combined in one
proposal for a total of $400k
Assessment Coalitions
 3 or more eligible entities
 Up to $1 million haz/petro or combined
(e.g. $500k hazardous, $500k petroleum)
 Memorandum of Agreement
 Documents site selection process & plans for
funds distribution
 Must assess a minimum of 5 sites
 Members cannot apply for additional assessment
funds
Examples of Options for Assessment Grant
Applicants
Community Wide Site Specific
Coalitions
Up to $200,000 for
hazardous substances and
$200,000 for petroleum
addressing the same
community.
Up to $1 million per
coalition.
Coalition Members can
NOT apply for individual
assessment funding.
Up to $200,000 for
petroleum and/or
hazardous substances
(comingled)
May request a waiver for
up to $350,000
Maximum Combined
Amount $400,000
Maximum Amount
$350,000
Maximum Amount
$1 million
Revised Format
 Ranking criteria now 4 sections:
1. Community Need
2. Project Description/Feasibility for Success
3. Community Engagement/Partnerships
4. Project Benefits
Community Need
 Health, welfare, environmental needs of the targeted
community (e.g. the number and size of the brownfields,
the health, welfare and environmental impacts of these sites,
health and welfare of sensitive populations).
 Financial needs of the targeted community (e.g.
economic impact of brownfields on the targeted community).
Project Description/Feasibility of Success
 Project Description [incl. RLF business plan]
 EPA Budget/Leveraging
 Budget Table w/ narrative describing outputs
(Continued)
Project Description/Feasibility of
Success
 Programmatic Capability (i.e. demonstrate your
ability to manage and successfully perform all phases of
work under previous or existing cooperative
agreement(s)).
 Still reviewed by the home region.
Community Engagement/Partnerships
 Community Engagement Plan (i.e. plan for
engaging the targeted community in the project).
 Local, state/tribal health and/or environmental
agency/other partners
 Community-based organization partners (e.g.
local citizen or business groups, environmental or civic
organizations, educational institutions, and local labor
organizations).
 Letters of support (i.e. from organizations mentioned
in proposal that describes their role and affirms any
referenced commitments).
Project Benefits
 Public Welfare/Public Health Benefits (i.e.
environmental, social and/or public health benefits
anticipated from the redevelopment of sites assessed under
this grant).
 Economic Benefits/Greenspace (e.g. increased
employment and expanded tax base of the redevelopment of
sites assessed under this grant, acres of greenspace created).
 Infrastructure Reuse/Sustainable
Reuse/Environmental Benefits (e.g. use of existing
infrastructure, such as utilities and public transit, reuse of
existing structures, construction and demolition material
recycling).
Next Steps
 CLU-In Sessions scheduled through the
summer
 Final ARC Grant Guidelines posted in
late summer 2008 for 2009 competition
 Questions