&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Communications, Education,
And Public Affairs
(A-107)
176-B-91-001
October 1991
Developing Products
For The Public
A Handbook For
EPA Communicators
CONCEPT NOTIFICATION
STEI
FINAL DRAFT REVIEW
STET
STEr
U.S. Environmentallection Agency
^Ve%6JaS £« 12th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604-3590
-------
DEVELOPING PRODUCTS
FOR THE PUBLIC
A HANDBOOK FOR EPA COMMUNICATORS
CONTENTS
Introduction
How This Handbook Can Help You 2
~} Major Problems the Process Can Solve 2
^ Expectations for the Product Review Process 2
Sources of Help 3
^ Product Categories Included in the Process 3
•s "~V
Frequently Used Terms 4
^ The Major Steps: An Overview of the Notification and Review Process.... 5
The Notification and Review Process 6
Concept Notification Steps 6
For the Product Originator 6
For the AA/RA's Product Review Officer 8
For OCEPA's Communications Planner 10
And again for the AA/RA's Product Review Officer 12
Final Draft Review Steps
For the Product Originator 14
For the AA/RA's Product Review Officer. 16
For OCEPA's Communications Planner. 18
And again for the AA/RA's Product Review Officer. 20
APPENDICES: 21
A. Sample Notification &. Review Forms 22
B. Screening Criteria 26
C. Checklist of Potential Reviewers 28
D. Product Categories Exempted From the Process 29
E. Product Planning and Development Checklist 30
F. Public-Information-Product Inventory Form 32
G. Regulations for Publishing Products Prepared Under a Contract 34
or Assistance Agreement
1 U£) Printed on Recycled Paper
-------
INTRODUCTION
At EPA, communication means informing and
educating people about the environment and letting
them know that there is an important link between
individual behavior and environmental quality.
This process is an essential element in EPA's
strategic approach to environmental protection. To
help create an environmentally aware society, the
Agency must work to make sure that individuals
and organizations have the information they need
to participate in the Agency's decision-making
process and to make environmentally responsible
choices.
That's why the Administrator has put renewed
emphasis on effective communication of EPA's
major regulatory and policy decisions and on the
development of high quality communications
products. In the past, however, several of the
Agency's public-oriented products contained
significant policy errors and other serious mistakes
that were not caught until the last minute. To
avoid these problems, the Deputy Administrator
asked me to form an Agency-wide work group to
develop a process that would reveal potential
mistakes at an early stage of product development.
The work group consisted of representatives from
almost every major program in the Agency, and
Regions 5, 9, and 10; this Handbook is the result of
their efforts.
HOW THIS HANDBOOK CAN HELP YOU
This Handbook describes step-by-step the Agency's
process to ensure that the right "players" and
reviewers are involved at the right time during
product development. The handbook also discusses
the most important questions you need to consider
in developing a product intended for a major
segment of the public. For the purposes of this
Handbook, a "product" could be a written
document, a video, a public service announcement,
or anything else intended for distribution outside
EPA (with some exceptions listed in Appendix D).
In addition, the Handbook will answer many of the
questions you might have as you follow the
notification and review process, and it lists sources
of help you can turn to.
MAJOR PROBLEMS THE PROCESS CAN SOLVE
Misinterpretation of policy and resulting
embarrassment for the Agency
Inconsistencies with Agency policy and
thinking
Duplication of products among offices in
Headquarters and the Regions
Surprises- public-oriented products that
surface at the last minute without the
knowledge or involvement of all the appropri-
ate players
Missed opportunities to communicate the
Agency's priorities and themes.
EXPECTATIONS FOR THE PRODUCT NOTIFICATION
AND REVIEW PROCESS
The work group designed the process to meet the
following expectations:
Retain AA/RA authority for developing
products
Be speedy, causing only brief delays
Be targeted to certain categories of products
(not a blanket process)
Focus on prevention of mistakes, not on finding
and correcting mistakes after they have been
made
Not be burdensome (by setting clear criteria and
creating little paperwork)
Be integrated with other EPA or government
requirements for product development.
With your help, the notification and review process
can minimize these problems because, if it's properly
followed, all the right "players" will be involved at
the right time to assist you in developing the best
possible products for the public. A well-understood
and efficient process can be the key to success, and
that is what this Handbook is intended to provide.
Lewis S.W. Crampton
Associate Administrator,
Office of Communications,
Education, and Public Affairs
-------
PRODUCT CATEGORIES
INCLUDED IN THE
NOTIFICATION AND REVIEW PROCESS
This is not an all-inclusive list of public-oriented
products. If your product is neither on this list
nor on the "exempted" list in Appendix D, call
your AA/RA's Product Review Officer for
guidance.
Phase Note: For all these product categories, it
makes no difference whether the item is being
developed under a contract, cooperative
agreement, or grant (although the latter two have
some special stipulations; please see Appendix. G).
What does make a difference is whether the product is
intended for a major segment of the public or not (see
also the definition of "technical" and "public-
oriented" on page 4 under "Frequently Used Terms").
• All public-oriented publications, whether
they are called pamphlets, leaflets, booklets,
manuals, handbooks, guidebooks, or
workbooks
• Reports to Congress and other branches of
government
• Posters
• Bumper stickers
• Billboard art
• Printed pins, buttons, T-shirts, and other spe-
cial items Note: The Office of General Counsel
reviews procurement requests for these items for their
legality: the request must be considered in line with
and directly linked to the goals of the Agency. Earth
Day T-shirts, for example, were approved.
* Fact sheets (unless pan of a press release)
• Newsletters Note: submit only the first issue for
notification and review, and then one copy a year to
show that the newsletter is still being produced.
• Magazines
• Articles for periodicals (unless they do not reflect
the official views of EPA; for an exact definition, see
"Product Categories Exempted from the Process")
• Audiovisual products intended for broadcast
or distribution (videos, slides, vu-graphs, filmstrip
presentations, audio tapes, public service announcements,
television and radio spots)
FOR PRODUCTS SPECIFICALLY
EXCLUDED FROM THIS PROCESS,
PLEASE REFER TO APPENDIX D.
SOURCES OF HELP
JL) This Handbook includes explanations and
sample forms.
2) The Product Planning and Development
Checklist helps you make sure you consider
all important substantive aspects of
developing a public-oriented product (see
Appendix E),
3) The Screening Criteria; a list of the kinds of
criteria you or your AA/RA's Product Review
officer should consider to flag important
issues in the product concept and determine
what consultations or reviews ^outside the
AA/RA's office would be helpful (see
AppendixB). " ' /';"'' ^.'V'-.^".'1''.' '
4) Publication Management is a complete guide ;
to how you develop a publication that is in ^
compliance with all the applicable tecjtpical ;
..government and EPAjprcductibn -/^ 'f;'' -\ :
requirements. It is available from OCEPAfs
- * ••- • ••"* - -• • - rV< --«*!»..:-4«.- j^;;-&--•"•-*-
^vision-:;, ,; v^;. jg. ....,
;'{K: .telephone,*
Al The Checklist of Potential Reviewers ff \. -^ ,'"';'
(Appendix G) helps you tiiink a|>out wtio else
should be involved in the dkrroi^pnM^'^^i*
your product or who should look at it in draff
f ''„"' ' ' " " " "' *"
,.. form.-
Spreading tne Word: AGuide tci(
••:.-1 -f.;"r ,;ij
" ?.>"
.common communications tpoftus^in-iheH.^
- '<>;'"•,, - - %" i> "- ' ''/-fi/l- !«5'^,' • ••_ s* • ""-^v 'Jfll.'l^i' "^' - ''•-• '*^X ' ''
^Agency and the services available fiom l&e|
Office of Communications, Bdacatkm/.to4-^.-;s
Public Affeiis (abp awilable fromjlDCIjPAV ; ,
-------
i'REO.UENTLY USED TERMS IN THIS HANDBOOK
PUBLIC-ORIENTED PRODUCT:
Any document or audio-visual product intended for
a major segment of the public, except Federal
Register Notices, testimony, etc. For a detailed list
of exempted product categories, please refer to
Appendix D; for those included, see page 3.
Please note that all products whether developed in-house or under
a contract, grant, or cooperative agreement (i.e. through
assistance programs) are covered by this process if they are intended
for the public. For the latter two, please refer to the special
conditions described in the Federal Register Notice on "Publishing
Assistance- Program Documents" provided in Appendix G.
TECHNICAL PRODUCT:
A highly technical document or audio-visual
product intended solely for people with a
professional interest in the subject. Such a product
would not require "translation" of the technical
information to be understood, as is the case with
most field manuals. For example:
Guidance on inspecting for asbestos written for
asbestos inspectors (not school administrators)
A handbook on cleanup technologies written
for cleanup contractors
CONCEPT:
When the Product Originator and his or her
superiors have started to plan a product and have
decided on the product's targeted audience,
message, purpose, communications method, etc., as
listed on the concept notification form.
FINAL DRAFT:
For written materials:
A product can be considered in final draft form
when the Product Originator has completed the
format, layout, and graphics or illustrations and
incorporated all appropriate comments from his or
her own office, other relevant Program and
Regional offices, and external organizations or
individuals, if external reviews were conducted.
For audio-visual products:
For videos other than documentaries, the product
can be considered in final draft form when a script
contains exact, verbatim narration and dialogue,
and complete scene-for-scene descriptions of the
visuals, effects and key directorial and editing
elements.
Documentary videos are in final draft form when a
script contains an extremely detailed description of
how the interview will be conducted, what scenes
will be shot, what material will be addressed, and
what material will be considered for the final
version. Other audio-visual products such as
displays, exhibits, posters, etc., can follow the
guidelines for publications.
PRODUCT ORIGINATOR:
The person responsible for developing the product.
AA/RA's PRODUCT REVIEW OFFICER:
Under the Product Review process, each AA/RA
has designated a Product Review Officer to help
conduct needed notifications, consultations, or
reviews. To learn the identity of your Product
Review Officer, call your AA/RA's secretary.
EPA's "INTERNAL OUTREACH EXPERTS":
(A complete listing follows; reviewers would be
chosen as appropriate for a particular product)
Office of Communications, Education and
Public Affairs
Public Liaison
Press Relations
Education
Editorial Services
Multi-Media Services
Office of Regional Operations and State/ Local
Relations
Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs
Office of the Administrator/ Deputy
Administrator (Chief of Staff, Special
Assistants, Deputies)
Office of the Historian (a new office in OARM
maintaining a running history of EPA)
Product Review Officers of other potentially
interested offices
Regional and Laboratory Public Information
Officers
-------
1V1AJOK ^ 1
AN OVERVIEW OF THE NOTIFICATION AND REVIEW PROCESS
CONCEPT NOTIFICATION
The Product
Originator, after proper
Office Director
clearance, submits a
Concept Notification
Form (see Appendix A)
for any public-oriented
product (with some
exceptions) to the
AA/RA's Product
Review Officer.
STEI*
The AA/RA'S
Product Review
Officer reviews the
Concept Notification
Form and sends it to the
Director of the Office of
Communications,
Education, and Public
Affairs' (OCEPA)
Communications i
Planning Division.
An OCEPA
Communications
Planner distributes the
Concept Notification
Form "FYI" to EPA
outreach experts. If there
are really important
comments, the Planner
relays them to the
AA/RA's Product
Review Officer.
-------
THE
PRODUCT
ORIGINATOR
WHAT EXACTLY Do I NEED To Do?
CONSULT:
FILL OUT THE FORM:
FOLLOW YOUR OFFICE'S GUIDELINES:
SEND THE FORM:
CONCEPT NOTIFICATION
The Product Originator, after proper Office
Director clearance, submits a Concept
Notification Form for any public-oriented
product (with some exceptions-see
Appendix D) to the AA/RA's Product
Review Officer.
A list of resources to help you plan the product is
provided in the front of this Handbook (page 3).
Fill out a Concept Notification Form (see sample form in
Appendix A) for all public-oriented products, except
certain products such as Federal Register Notices, press
releases, speeches, etc. (see Appendix D).
Note: In the concept stage, you are merely notifying other offices of
your plan and not submitting it for formal review-although, of
course, some discussion of the planned product might ensue. If you
wish and it makes sense, you can continue work on the product
during all the steps of this phase since it is only a notification and not
a formal review, unless you specifically request cousultation with
outreach experts.
Obtain your management's approval f$>r your product
concept and follow any other guidelines specific to
your AAship, RAship, or office concerning product
development or review.
Send the Concept Notification form to your AA/RA's
Product Review Officer and to any other potentially
interested or affected Program or Regional office, as you
see fit. OCEPA will only notify internal outreach
experts (see "Frequently Used Terms," page 4).
-------
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON STEP 1
Q: Why do I have to do this?
A: In the Introduction, we described some major
problems with products that occurred in the
recent past. The Administrator and your AA or
RA, based on an Agency-wide work group's
recommendation, have developed this concept
notification process to give the Agency's
outreach experts an early heads-up on upcoming
products. The process will also help you comply
with statutory, regulatory, and executive order
requirements for review of new products and
alert you to potential problems such as related
actions in other programs, possible changes in
policy, duplication of effort, etc.
Q: What's a "public-oriented product"?
A: See definition in the front of this Handbook
under "Frequently Used Terms."
Q: What's a "concept"?
A: See definition in the front of this Handbook
under "Frequently Used Terms."
Q: Who is the AA/RA's Product Review Officer?
A: Under the Product Review process, each
AA/RA has designated a Product Review
Officer to conduct needed notifications,
consultations, or reviews. To learn the identity
of your Product Review Officer, call your
AA/RA's secretary.
Q: Why does the Notification Form have to go to
the Office of Communication, Education, and
Public Affairs (OCEPA) rather than directly
to appropriate outreach offices in EPA?
A: Program, support office, and Regional staff have
repeatedly asked for "one-stop" shopping for, at
the least, all outreach expert comments. The
Communications Planning Division is prepared
to serve as a central contact among EPA's
outreach experts to help minimize delays in the
review process and confusion about who needs
to review what and when. You can, of course,
consult all offices directly, but please indicate
that you are doing so on the Concept
Notification Form.
Q: Does this Notification and Review Process
replace the Agency's peer review process?
A: No. The peer review process is intended to
control the scientific quality and programmatic
content of publications and is, therefore, not
replaced by this notification and review process
for communications purposes.
Q: Who are the "Agency's Internal Outreach
Experts" OCEPA will contact?
A: As appropriate-
Staff in OCEPA's Divisions:
Public Liaison
Press Relations
Education
Editorial Services
Multi-Media Services
Office of Regional Operations and State and
Local Relations
Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs
Office of the Administrator/ Deputy Administrator
(Chief of Staff, Special Assistants, Deputies)
Office of the Historian (OARM)
Product Review Officers of other potentially
interested offices
Regional and Laboratory Public Information
Officers.
-------
CONCEPT NOTIFICATION
The AA/RA's Product Review Officer
reviews the Concept Notification Form and
sends it to the Director of OCEPA's
Communications Planning Division.
Review the Concept Notification Form submitted by
the Product Originator.
Decide on whether the concept form should be sent to
OCEPA as notification only or whether consultation
on the concept or a particular question would be
beneficial. Please use the screening criteria provided
in Appendix B to guide you in this decision.
Within five working days from receipt, sign the
Concept Notification Form and insert it into a special,
blue Product Review Folder or attach a special Product
Review Cover Sheet for faxing and send it to the
Director of the Communications Planning Division in
the Office of Communications, Education, and Public
Affairs (OCEPA), Mail Code A-107. To get a fax
number, please call 260 - 4361.
8
-------
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON STEP 2
Q: What's a "concept"?
A: Please refer to the definition provided under
"Frequently Used Terms" in the front of this
Handbook.
Q: Why do I have to send the form to OCEPA's
Communications Planning Division instead of
directly to EPA's outreach experts, such as
OCEPA's Public Liaison Division or the Office of
Regional Operations and State/Local Relations?
A: Program, support, and Regional offices have asked
repeatedly for "one-stop shopping" and the
Planning Division is offering this service as the
central contact to minimize confusion and
simplify the process.
Q: Do the internal outreach experts have "veto
power" over the product?
A: No. This stage is designed to be notification only,
with optional consultation, thus retaining
complete AA/RA authority to develop the
product. OCEPA Planners, however, should
communicate any really important comments to
the AA/RA's Product Review Officer. The
Program or OCEPA can, of course, also call
meetings to discuss the concept if there is a valid
reason to do so. The Product Originator, if he or
she wishes and it makes sense, can continue work
on the product during all steps of the concept
notification stage.
SUMMARY OF SCREENING CRITERIA FOR CONCEPT
CONSULTATION AND FINAL DRAFT PRODUCT
REVIEWS
Refer to Appendix B for more detailed information about the Screening Criteria.
You should consider sending the concept or final draft to OCEPA if you anwer "yes* or
"not sure* CD any of the following questions about a produce
• Does the product need meuage clarification and/or better audinv*
definition?
• Would it benefit from a review by people inside and/or ouulde the Agency
who are affected by or have an interest in this product!
• Does the product reflect a major new policy decision?
• Will it have high visibility!
• Would assistance in better reflecting and highlighting the Agency's or
Administrator's themes, policies, and priorities be useful?
• Could another office possibly be working on a similar or related product?
• Is the cost likely to raise any questions, because it is, e-g., very high in
proportion to the number of people to be reached?
WHAT HELP CAN I GET?
Feel free to call the OCEPA Planner
assigned to your program or the Planning
Division's Director* You may also want to
refer to Spreading the Word: A Guide to
OCEPA Services, available from the
Editorial Services Division-— v
telephone#26031351/-*$:K ''--- ., -y*
For questions about publications, read the
• -'^ ' '''' />&~J(-.--: ! ^f -*"•%*." ' '''•'''''•• " ,' V* '"
Publications Management Manual : ,
available from die Editorial Sendees
'»»»%^'" »"'% * "'• •"- * -^K^>*'>; ^"'" -•w •",•"" ,'-';; %V "- :'' '-•'
Division, r :.;:-^yvf;-.';-V;2/'':'fe.;- ' ' ':
-------
CONCEPT NOTIFICATION
An OCEPA Planner distributes the Concept
Notification Form "FYI" to internal
outreach experts. If there are really
important comments, the Planner relays
them to the AA/RA's Product Review
Officer.
Distribute the Concept Notification Form within two
working days from receipt to appropriate internal
outreach experts (see list under Qs&As on next page)
using a special blue Product Review Folder or the special
Product Review Cover Sheet (for faxing) to attract
attention to the notification.
Note:The Product Originator can continue work on the product during
this phase since it is only a notification and not a formal review.
IF CONSULTATION WAS REQUESTED BY THE AA/RA's
PRODUCT REVIEW OFFICER OR THE PRODUCT
ORIGINATOR THEN YOU:
Set comment deadlines for no longer than five working
days and collect and synthesize comments from the
outreach experts who were consulted.
Sign the concept review form indicating consultation has
been completed.
Pass the form and any comments, including, for example,
a list of recommended additional "players," on to the
AA/RA's Product Review Officer. If desired, convene a
meeting or conference call among the product originator,
AA/RA's product review officer and appropriate outreach
experts to discuss the concept. As the product unfolds,
keep the originating office aware of developments that
may affect the product, such as a change in Agency policy
or priorities.
Keep a log of all concept notifications. Stay involved in
important products, helping Product Originators in any
waY possible during the development of the product so
£5 that the outcome is not a surprise.
10
-------
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON STEP 3
Q: Who are the "Agency's Internal Outreach
Experts" I should consider for notification
purposes?
A: As appropriate-
Staff in OCEPA's Divisions:
Public Liaison
Press Relations
Education
Editorial Services
Multi-Media Services
Office of Regional Operations and State and Local
Relations
Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs
Office of the Administrator/ Deputy Administrator
(Chief of Staff, Special Assistants, Deputies)
Office of the Historian (OARM)
Product Review Officers of other potentially
interested offices
Regional and Laboratory Public Information
Officers
Q: Do the internal outreach experts have "veto
power" over the product?
A: No. This stage is designed to be notification only,
with optional consultation, thus retaining
complete AA/RA authority to develop the
product. OCEPA Planners, however, should relay
comments to the AA/RA's Product Review Officer
and if there are valid reasons, either the Program
or OCEPA can call meetings to discuss the
concept. If the Product Originator wishes and it
makes sense, he or she can continue work on the
product during all steps of the concept notification
stage.
WHAT HELP CAN I GET?
Spreading the Word; This Guide to
OCEPA Services decribes the different
Divisions' expertise and is available from
OCEPA's Editorial Services Division-
telephone f 260*4359
The Checklist of Potential Reviewers
(Appendix C) is a helpful reminder of
who else should be involved in the
development of the product. *
SUMMARY CHECKLIST OF POTENTIAL REVIEWERS
See Appendix C for a full list of Potential Reviewers.
Internal reviews for appropriateness and content:
• Managers in the Originating Program Office
• Other Appropnate Program AAs, RAs, OGC, or Other Offices
Internal reviews for determining effectiveness, compliance with Agency
communications directives, consistency with Agency policy:
• OCEPA AA or Divisions
• Administrator's Office
External reviewers you might consider to help you ensure that products communicate
effectively and answer constituent questions:
• Other Federal Agencies
• Constituency Groups (such as environmental groups and trade associations)
• Organizations/Individuals Mentioned in the Product
11
-------
CONCEPT NOTIFICATION
The AA/RA's Product Review Officer passes
any comments on to the Product Originator.
Communicate comments from OCEPA, if any, to the
Product Originator. If you have any concerns with
which the Product Originator disagrees, you obviously
have the option of calling a meeting or bringing them
to your AA/RA's attention.
Remind Product Originators to include a period of 2-3
weeks for reviews of the final draft in their product
development schedule. This review cycle is often
forgotten in the early stages of product development
and later causes frustration when not properly
planned for.
12
-------
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON STEP 4
Q: Does the AA/RA Product Review; Officer have
veto power over the product?
A: This decision is left up to each AA/RAship.
WHAT HEL1?Cm'I.GET?
If die SOURCE^ OEOTLB on
Cii s- . „,, .... ^ . •, ¥^Aj~^^'*' - ^
don't answer
._, •- .^ •,*,>;, o^-.'^fr^r*^;
Planner vwth fdilf *
;;" a.-..\f-,«-™,'; i"^ '&,>;
review^
ofthe
" C-, * >'v * »:' •***•
mumcatipns
-.•spfcii
'' ' *^
wSri:
SUMMARY PRODUCT PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT CHECKLIST
See Appendix E for a more detailed checklist:
You should consider the following when planning and developing products for public
audiences.
In the Concept Stage:
• What is the Message?
• Is Policy Final?
• Who's the Audience?
• Why this Product?
• Are Agency Themes and Priorities Reflected?
• Does It Afreet a Specific Industry or Company?
• Should You Consult with Appropriate People In and Outside EPA?
• Should You Consult the EPA Publications Manual or Staff?
In the Development Stage:
• Inappropriate Illustrations?
• Factual Accuracy?
• Proper Identification of Contacts?
• Proper Tone?
• Plain English?
•Well Organized?
• How and How Many? Is There a Distribution Plan?
• Should You Distribute the Product Itself or Just Information
13
-------
THE
PRODUCT
ORIGINATOR
FINAL DRAFT REVIEW
The Product Originator submits the final
draft product and review form to the
AA/RA's Product Review Officer
NOTE: Please remember to allow t
-------
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON STEP 1
Q: What's a "final draft"?
A: Please refer to the definitions under "Frequently
Used Terms" in the front of this Handbook.
Q: What do I gain from sending this to OCEPA for
review by Agency outreach experts?
A: Several things:
1. The Agency's outreach experts in OCEPA,
OROSLR, and OCLA are in daily
communication with outside constituencies that
could be interested in your product. They
generally have years of experience in dealing
with the public and can point out potential
problems, controversies, or opportunities for you
to be aware of before the product is completed
and distributed.
2. Program and Regional staff have repeatedly
asked for "one-stop shopping" on reviews. The
OCEPA Communications Planning Division is
prepared to coordinate the reviews by outreach
experts in OROSLR, OCLA, and within
OCEPA itself.
3.OCEPA is committed to very fast turn-around
times, which help you avoid delays.
4. The prescribed forms help you speed up reviews
because they anticipate most questions
reviewers will have about your product.
5. You have complete Agency concurrence and
support for your product.
Q: Does this "Notification and Review Process
replace the Agency's peer review process?
A: No. The peer review process is intended to
control the scientific quality and programmatic
content of publications and is, therefore, not
replaced by this Notification and Review Process
which focuses on the communications
perspective.
Q: Why is there a second form for inventory
purposes?
A: For two reasons:
l.The Government Printing Office requires 30
days advance notice for all publications before
printing, so that they can plan printing,
marketing, and distribution work. OCEPA's
Editorial Services Division will handle that
notification for you based on the form you fill
out.
2. EPA is establishing a computerized inventory of
all Agency publications and videos (public-
oriented or not, technical or non-technical) to
help the public and ourselves gain better access
to available products. To do that, OCEPA needs
basic information on all new products to feed
into the inventory system. Full-scale review by
outreach experts, however, is needed only for
those products that are intended for a major
segment of the public (see definition of "public-
oriented product" in the front of this Handbook
under "Frequently Used Terms").
15
-------
FINAL DRAFT REVIEW
THE
AA/RA's
The AA/RA's Product Review Officer reviews
the final draft package, screens it, and if
appropriate, sends it to the Director of OCEPA's
Communications Planning Division.
WHAT EXACTLY no I NEED TO DO?
REVIEW THE FORM:
REMINDER:
SCREEN & DECIDE:^
SIGN THE FORM & SEND THE
REVIEW PACKAGE:
STEP
Within five working days from receipt, review the Final Draft
Review Form, and, if appropriate, the Public-Information-
Product Inventory Form, as well as the final draft product
itself.
For inventory purposes, the Public-Information-Product
Inventory Form must be filled out and forwarded to
OCEPA's Editorial Services Division for any kind of
publication or video (public-oriented or technical), whether
it will be reviewed by OCEPA or not.
Ako: The Product Originator should by now have sent you a
copy of the required Summary Communications Plan and, if
indicated, a detailed Communications Plan.
Screen the final draft product for review questions and issues
based on the Screening Criteria and the Product Planning
and Development Checklist provided in the Appendices of
this handbook. Decide whether the final draft should be
reviewed by OCEPA and other EPA outreach experts.
If you decide the product should go to OCEPA for review by
EPA's internal outreach experts, sign the form within five
working days from receipt and have the package of materials
handcarried in a special blue folder or fax it with the special
cover sheet to the Director of OCEPA's Communications
Planning Division.
The package should include:
• The signed Final Draft Review Form
• The final draft product
• The earlier Concept Notification Form (for
reference purposes, if you still have it)
• The Public-Information-Product Inventory Form,
if it's a publication or video
16
-------
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON STEP 2
Q: What's a "final draft"?
A: Please refer to the definition provided under
"Frequently Used Terms" in the front of this
Handbook.
Q: What is the "screening" all about?
A: The screening criteria listed in Appendix B will
help you decide which product or issues in the
product to flag for attention and consultation
with other offices during final review.
Q: Who are EPA's Internal Outreach Experts?
A: Staff in OCEPA's Divisions:
Public Liaison
Press Relations
Education
Editorial Services
Multi-Media Services
The Office of Regional Operations and
State/Local Relations
The Office of Congressional and Legislative
Affairs
Office of the Historian (OARM)
Staff in the Office of the Administrator
and Deputy Administrator
Product Review Officers of other potentially
interested offices
Regional Public Information Officers
SUMMARY CHECKLIST OF POTENTIAL REVIEWERS
See Appendix C for a full list of Potential Revieweis.
Internal reviews for appropriateness and content:
• Managers in the Originating Program Office
• Other Appropriate Program AAs, RAs, OGC, or Other Offices
Internal reviews for determining effectiveness, compliance with Agency
communications directives, consistency with Agency policy:
• OCEPA AA or Divisions
• Administrator's Office
External reviewers you might consider to help you ensure that products communicate
effectively and answer constituent questions:
• Other Federal Agencies
• Constituency Groups (such as environmental groups and trade associations)
• Organizations/Individuals Mentioned in the Product
WHAT HELP CAN I GET?
Feel free to call the OCEPA Planner
assigned to your program or the Planning
Division's Director. For a list of other
helpful people and resources, please refer
to the list provided on page 3 of this
Handbook* To screen out products or flag
issues that would benefit from
consultation with EPA's outreach experts,
' **f " ., / " >' ,- - ;A - '•"•' ,'•."• - ^
please refer to the Screening Criteria in>
' '' ~' '
Checklist of Potential Reviewers
you determine
e product.
SUMMARY OF SCREENING CRITERIA FOR CONCEPT
CONSULTATION AND FINAL DRAFT PRODUCT
REVIEWS
Refer Co Appendix B for more detailed information about rhe Screening Criteria.
You should consider sending rhe concept or final draft to OCEPA if you answer "yes" or
"not sure* to any of the following questions about a produce
• Does rhe product need message clarification and/or better audience
definition?
• Would it benefit from a review by pec .pie inside and/or outside the Agency
who are affected by or have an interest: in rhis product?
• Does rhe product reflect a major new ixJicy decision?
• Will it have high visibility?
• Would assistance in better reflecting, nd highlighting rhe Agency's or
Administrator's themes, policies, an? priorities be useful?
• Could another office possibly be working on a similar or related product?
• Is the cost likely to raise any questions, because it is, e.g., very high in
proportion to rhe number of people ro be reached?
17
-------
/ THE
OGEPA
PLANNER
WHAT EXACTLY no I NEED TO DO?
COORDINATE REVIEWS:
SIGN THE FORM & ^
SEND YOUR COMMENTS
FACILITATE RESOLUTION OF ISSUES:^
SEND PUBLIC-INFORMATION'
PRODUCT INVENTORY FORM:
FINAL DRAFT REVIEW
The OCEPA Planner reviews and circulates
the package among internal EPA outreach
experts, collects and synthesizes everyone's
comments, and gives them to the AA/RA's
Product Review Officer.
Review and circulate the final draft product and
form(s) to appropriate internal experts (see list in
Appendix C) within two working days from receipt,
setting a four working-day deadline for comments to be
returned to you. Collect comments, review and
synthesize them within two working days.
Sign the Final Draft Review Form and send it along
with the synthesized comments to the AA/RA's
Product Review Officer.
If there are difficult or unresolved issues, you or the
Program/Regional staff can set up a meeting or
conference call including the Product Originator,
AA/RA's Product Review Officer, appropriate outreach
experts, and yourself, to discuss and facilitate
resolution of the issues. If there is no resolution, you
may want to bring the issue to the attention of the
Associate Administrator, OCEPA.
For all publications and videos, send the Public-
Information-Product Inventory Form to the Editorial
Services Division for processing.
18
-------
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ON STEP 3
Q: Who are the. internal outreach experts I should
contact for reviews?
A: As appropriate -
Staff in OCEPA's Divisions:
Public Liaison
Press Relations
Education
Editorial Services
Multi-Media Services
The Office of Regional Operations and
State/Local Relations
The Office of Congressional and Legislative
Affairs
Office of the Historian (OARM)
Staff in the Office of the Administrator
and Deputy Administrator
Product Review Officers of other potentially
interested offices
Regional Public Information Officers
Q: Do these reviewers have "veto power" over the
product?
A: No. But their comments should, of course, be
given serious consideration, and if unresolved
issues remain, you should call a meeting. If those
fail, you can raise the issues to the AA/OCEPA
for discussion with other AAs and RAs.
SUMMARY CHECKLIST OF POTENTIAL REVIEWERS
See Appendix C for a hill list of Potential Reviewers.
Internal reviews for appropriateness and content:
• Managers in the Originating Program Office
• Other Appropriate Program AAs, RAs, OOC, or Other Offices
Internal reviews for determining effectiveness, compliance with Agency
communications directives, consistency with Agency policy:
• OCEPA AA or Divisions
• Administrator's Office
External reviewers you might consider to help you ensure that products communicate
effectively and answer constituent questions:
• Other Federal Agencies
• Constituency Groups (such as environmental groups and trade associations)
• Organizations/Individuals Mentioned in the Product
WHAT HELP CAN I GET?
The Product
Checklist in Appendix E is
reminder of questions that should have
«-
The Scree
particularly helpful at this s
for
a«*
The Checklist of Potential
SUMMARY PRODUCT PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENT CHECKLIST
See Appendix E for a more detailed checklist:
You should consider the following when planning and developing products for public
audiences.
In the Concept Stage:
• What is the Message?
• Is Policy Final?
• Who's the Audience?
• Why this Product?
• Are Agency Themes and Priorities Reflected?
• Does It Affect a Specific Industry or Company?
• Should You Consult with Appropriate People In and Outside EPA?
• Should You Consult die EPA Publications Manual or Staff?
In the Development Stage:
• Inappropriate Illustrations?
• Factual Accuracy?
• Proper Identification of Contacts?
• Proper Tone?
• Plain English?
• Well Organized?
• How and How Many? Is There a Distribution Plan?
• Should You Distribute the Product Itself or Just Information
About the Product?
19
-------
FINAL DRAFT REVIEW
The AA/RA's Product Review Officer
relays all comments as soon as possible to
the product originator and, if all else fails,
brings unresolved issues to the attention of
the AA or RA.
Send the signed Final Draft Review Form and all
comments within two working days back to the
Product Originator, or call. The exact steps are left up
to your AA/RAship's internal procedures.
If difficult or unresolved issues remain after the
reviews, you or the OCEPA planner can set up a
meeting or conference call including all appropriate
"players" to discuss the issues. If attempts to resolve
the difficulties fail, you may want to bring them to the
attention of your AA/RA.
WHJ^T HEtP CAN 10ET?
wtnunicatioiis * *
tojfonr
"iS
you with questions or with
resolving issues among off ices.
20
-------
APPENDICES
A. Sample Forms
Concept Notification—Public-Oriented Products 22
Final Draft Review—Public-Oriented Products 24
B. Screening Criteria 26
C. Checklist of Potential Reviewers 28
D. Product Categories Exempted From the Process 29
E. Product Planning and Development Checklist 30
F. Public-Information-Product Inventory Form 32
G. Regulations for Publishing Products Prepared Under a Contract 34
or Assistance Agreement
21
-------
Concept Notification — Public-Oriented Products
Submitted for:
O Notification Only
O Consultation Requested
Visibility: rj Low
Date Submitted:
D Medium D High
Projected Release Date:
Working Title:
Project Originator:
Name—
Phone—
Office-
Product Type:
Estimated Cost:
(Include printing &
distribution costs)
Estimated Quantity:
Target Audience(s)
Message/Purpose/Need:
Issues To Be Flagged:
EPA and external offices/organizations that your office will involve in the
product's development. (Rater to *LJst of Potential Reviewers' in the handbook
Developing Products for the Public.)
AA/RA's Product Review Officer's Recommendation: I have reviewed this product concept based on EPA's
Product Screening Criteria in the Handbook and I recommend: D Notification Only, D Consultation
Name:
Office:
Signature: .
Telephone:
Date:
OCEPA Communication Planning Division Recommendations:
Final-Draft review D Needed, D Not Needed
Comments:
Recommended Reviewers:
Signature:
Date:
EPA Form 2200-6 (10-91)
APPENDIX A 22
-------
Concept Notification — Public-Oriented Products
Submitted for
^Notification Only
n Consultation Requested
Visibility:
n LoW B^Medium D High
Date Submitted: -2S~-
Projected Release Date:
- f/
Working Title:
Project Originator:
Name— C/MteC£*J€
Phone—^60-^2
Product Type:
Estimated Cost:
Estimated Quantity:
6 60 0
Target Audience(s)
Message/Purpose/Need:
Issues To Be Flagged:
o
A;or A M-€ALT*4
T#€
ruC'j^cr
EPA and external offices/organizations that your office will involve in the
product's development. (Refer to 'IJst of Potential Reviewers' in the handbook
Developing Products for tha Pubtc.)
AA's<
AA/RA's Product Review Officer's Recommendation: I have reviewed this product concept based on EPA's
Product Screening Criteria in the Handbook and I recommend: D Notification Only, D Consultation
~ fVmJ «
Name:
Office:
APPENDIX A 23
-------
Final Draft Review — Public-Oriented Products
Official Title:
Working Title {if different):
Project Originator:
Name—
Phone-
Off ice-
Product Type:
Estimated Cost:
(Include printing &
distribution costs)
Estimated Quantity:
Target Audience(s)
Message/Purpose:
Issues To Be Flagged:
EPA and external offices/organizations your office has involved in the
development of this product.
AA/RA's Product Review Officer's Recommendation: I have reviewed this final draft based on EPA's Product
Screening Criteria in the Handbook and I forward the draft to OCPA for review.
Name:
Office:
Signature:
Telephone:
Date:
OCEPA Communication Planning Division:
O Reviewed without comment
D Reviewed with comments (attached)
D A meeting is necessary to discuss comments. (The product should not proceed further prbr to this meeting.)
D Please send for further review to
Signature:
Date:
EPA Form 2200-7 (10-91)
APPENDIX A 24
-------
Final Draft Review — Public-Oriented Products
Official Title:
^
R£DU.C.?U&
working Title (if different):
Project Originator
Name-
Phone—
-------
SCREENING CRITERIA FOR CONCEPT CONSULTATION
AND FINAL DRAFT PRODUCT REVIEWS
This checklist is intended to help Product Originators and AA/RA's Product Review officers sort out
which product concepts or final drafts may need wider Agency consultation or review through the
Office of Communications, Education, and Public Affairs to safeguard against
• policy misinterpretations and resulting embarassment
• inconsistencies with Agency policy or thinking
• duplication of products among offices in Headquarters and the Regions
• surprise products that surface at the last minute without the knowledge or involvement of all
appropriate "players"
• missed opportunities to communicate the Agency's priorities and themes.
AAs or RAs can, of course, add criteria appropriate for their organizations to this list.
Note: If your product falls into any of the categories below, you should consider sending the
concept or final draft to OCEPA for consultation in the concept stage or review in the final
draft stage. If any of the items below apply, please indicate that on the appropriate form to assist
reviewers.
Candidate products for consultation or review:
Please refer to the complete list of exempted product categories in Appendix D, and the list of included
product categories in the front of the Handbook.
CRITERIA
Yes Not Sure
• Does the product need message clarification and/or better audience definition? Q Q
(This needs to be done during concept development.)
• Would it benefit from a review by people inside and/or outside the Agency that are
affected by or have an interest in this product; for example, because it may
be inconsistent with other offices' products or policies, or views represented may
not be objective and balanced? r~] rn
Note: Consider this question during product development and definitely before
submitting a final draft for review.
— Inside, consider consulting with:
- OCEPA Divisions:
— Communications Planning
- Public Liaison
- Editorial Services
— Multi-Media Services
- Education
- Press Relations
- Office of Regional Operations and State and Local Relations
- Office of General Counsel
APPENDIX B 26
-------
Yes Not Sure
- Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs
- Office of the Historian
(a new office in OARM maintaining a running history of EPA)
- Regional Offices
Outside, consider consulting with the following groups if involvement or review is appropriate and
cannot be misinterpreted as improperly influencing the Agency;
- State and local governments or their associations
- Industry/trade organizations
- Consumer organizations
- Environmental/public interest groups
- Other federal agencies
-Other
• If the product reflects a major new policy decision, is the policy
- still fluid/not yet final
- affecting or of interest to another Agency program or office, or another
federal agency
Note: Make sure you try to resolve all "fluid" policy issues before submitting
a final draft for review.
• Will it have high visibility?
For example:
- It reflects a controversial decision
- It involves mass communications (TV/radio)
- It addresses the American consumer
- You plan to distribute
- over 10,000 printed copies a year
- over 50 video/slide-show copies
• Would assistance in better reflecting and highlighting the Agency's or
Administrator's themes, policies, and priorities be useful?
• Could another office possibly be working on a similar or related product?
Consider
- program offices
- support offices
- regions
- laboratories
• Is the cost likely to raise any questions because it is very high in proportion to the
number of people to be reached?
APPENDIX B 27
-------
CHECKLIST OF POTENTIAL REVIEWERS
In order for our informational materials and activities to provide the most complete picture of what EPA is
.ioing while fully addressing the concerns of the public, it is usually necessary for a variety of people both within
and outside the Agency to participate in their development and review. Although this review may seem
cumbersome, it helps us provide the public with the best possible information.
Following is a checklist of the kinds of people who may need to review your product. Although it certainly is not
necessary to involve all of these people, this checklist will help you decide who should be involved.
Internal reviews for appropriateness and
content:
Program Office
D Originator of Project
D Originator's Branch Chief
D Originator's Division Director
D Originator's Office Director
D AA or RA's Product Review Officer
DAAorRA
D Other appropriate Program/Regional offices
D Office of Regional Operations and
State/Local Relations
D Office of Congressional and Legislative
Affairs
D Office of General Counsel
D Office of Enforcement
O Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business
Utilization
G Office of Civil Rights
G Office of Cooperative Environmental
Management
G Office of the Historian
( a new office in O ARM maintaining a
running history of EPA)
Internal reviews for determining effectiveness,
compliance with Agency communications directives,
consistency with Agency policy:
OCEPA
D Communications Planning Division
D Multi-Media Services Division
O Editorial Services Division
D Public Liaison Division
O Press Relations Division
DAA/OCEPA
D Regional Public Information Offices
Administrator's Office
O Special Assistants
D Chief of Staff
O Administrator/Deputy Administrator
External reviewers to consider because they may
be able to help you ensure that products
communicate effectively and answer constituent
questions:
Note: Carefully think about whether
involvement or reviews could be
misinterpreted as improperly influencing the
Agency or as inappropriate for other reasons.
Also be sure to balance the list of organizations
you involve based on whom or what
they represent.
Other Federal Agencies
Constituency Groups
D Environmental/Public Interest Groups
D Trade Associations
D Professional Societies
O Consumer Groups
D Civic Associations
D Unions
D Businesses
G Educational Associations
O Youth Groups
Q Academic Institutions
G Organizations/Individuals Mentioned in
the Product
APPENDIX C 28
-------
PRODUCT CATEGORIES EXEMPTED FROM THE
NOTIFICATION AND REVIEW PROCESS
• Highly technical products for technical audiences
with a permanent professional interest in the
subject; these products do not require any
"translation" of the technical information to be
understood by the intended audience, as is the case
with most field manuals
For example:
Guidance on inspecting for asbestos written for
asbestos inspectors
A handbook on cleanup technologies written for
cleanup contractors
• Congressional testimony
• Verbatim testimony from hearings
• Advance notices of proposed rulemaking
(ANPRMs), proposed or final regulations subject to
a formal comment period
• Press releases approved by the Office of
Communications, Education and Public Affairs or a
counterpart organization within a Regional office or
laboratory
• Legal opinions, briefs, and memoranda, including
initial, final, or other decisions in quasi-judicial
administrative proceedings
• Federal Register notices
• Notices of public hearings
• Requests for proposal (RFPs)
• Materials (audiovisual, graphic, and printed) used
exclusively by Agency personnel (e.g. training)
• Materials which are devoid of any reference to the
Agency or which clearly state that they are not
endorsed by the Agency
• Articles by EPA employees and assistance recipients
submitted for publication to refereed scientific
journals which include a statement indicating that
the article does not reflect the official views of EPA
• Criteria documents and other similar documents
subject to a formal public comment period or review
by the Science Advisory Board or the Science
Advisory Panel
• Advisory committee statements and reports
• Internal policy statements, memoranda, and
directives
• Official Agency correspondence
• Publications of the Office of the Inspector General
• Fact sheets that are part of press releases
• Site-specific materials
• Speakers' kits
• Products intended for internal Agency use only
• Such other materials as are deemed appropriate for
exclusion by the Office of Communications,
Education, and Public Affairs
APPENDIX D 29
-------
PRODUCT PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
This list contains concerns the Office of Communications, Education.and Public Affairs and the
Administrator's staff suggest you consider when planning and developing products for public audiences. Doing
so can help you avoid basic problems with your product later on.
In the Concept Stage:
What's the Message?
Has your management agreed to your proposed message for
your product? Is it clear and easily spelled out?
Who's the Audience?
Who is the primary audience for the product? How will the
information affect the audience? Will they react with anger,
concern, a Reeling of being put down, confusion? Put
yourself in the shoes of the potential reader. Will the
product really be helpful? Make sure you address the reader's
potential concerns and questions, including "where can I
get more information?"
Why this Product?
What are you trying to accomplish through the product?
Have you chosen the best vehicle to deliver the message?
Which would be more effective for the targeted audience: a
printed document or an audio-visual product, or something
else such as a workshop or presentation?
Is the Policy Final?
Is there any chance that the policy the product is to reflect
or will touch upon is still fluid and not yet final or might
change during the product's development time (which may
be monuSs)? Are rhere any legal issues or concerns? If so, be
sure to get proper reviews of your concept from all
appropriate levels in the Agency (don't forget the office of
General Counsel) before you develop the final draft.
Are Agency Themes and Priorities Reflected?
How does your product fit in with the Administrator's and
your AA's and RA's themes and priorities, such as pollution
prevention, risk-based decisionmaking, integrated
environmental management, etc.? Will it be consistent with
their policies, views, and approaches?
Does It Affect a Specific Industry or Company?
Check whether the product will have any effect on a
specific industry's or company's bottom line.
•Are we targeting any product(s)?
• If so, is there a policy basis for it or can it be
scientifically justified?
Should You Consult with Appropriate People In
and Outside EPA?
Make sure you consider all the proper people and
organizations interested in, concerned about, or affected by
the product's message in and outside the Agency, especially
environmental and trade groups.Would your product benefit
from consulting them to help you develop an objective and
balanced view without someone misinterpreting it as
improperly influencing the Agency? Not getting outside
viewpoints on the draft product can sometimes backfire
when it's final.
Questions to consider
• Will they be surprised by the product's message?
• Are they working with your office on developing die
policy reflected in the product?
• Are their comments on the policy being incorporated or
at least considered with due concern?
• Have you planned to consult with the appropriate
internal offices from the following list?
(Be sure you do even though it may add two to three
weeks to your development schedule.)
Program or support offices other than your own
The Office of Communications, Education, and
Public Affairs
Communications Planning Division
Public Liaison Division
Editorial Services Division
Multi-Media Services Division
Environmental Education Division
The Office of Congressional and Legislative Affairs
The Office of General Counsel
The Office of Regional Operations and State and Local
Relations
Office of the Historian (OARM)
The Regional Public Information Offices
Should You Consult the EPA Publications
Quidebook or Staff?
EPA has certain printing and production requirements
(some of diem government-wide) which are spelled out in a
manual called "Publication Management" available from
OCEPA's Editorial Services Division. To avoid problems
down die road, it's best to find out in the beginning what
the requirements are.
APPENDIX E 30
-------
-------
-------
The Inventory Form
1. TITLE—Short and simple is best with a key word
as dose to the start as feasible.
2. NUMBER—Numbers for all EPA information
products are assigned by the EPA Publications and
Information Center in Cincinnati, Ohio. Call
FTS-684-7980 to obtain a number.
3. FORMAT—Use one of the terms listed here if
applicable. If not, use the fewest and simplest terms
necessary to describe the product's format Don't
describe the content, i.e., "fact sheet," or "draft."
Flyer: A single sheet of paper with type placed with-
out regard for any folds.
Leaflet: A single, folded sheet with type placed in
columns between the folds.
Pamphlet: Two or more bound (usually stapled)
sheets without a separate cover (see "booklet").
Booklet: Any number of bound sheets with a sepa-
rate cover (one made of paper different in
weight, finish, or color from the inside pages).
Poster: A single sheet intended for wall-mounting or
similar public display.
Slides: 35mm transparencies.
Vu-Graphs: Overhead transparencies.
Videotape Audiotape
Film Microfilm
Floppy Disk Microfiche
CD-I Exhibit
CD-ROM
4. SERIES—Indicate here if the product is one of
several under an overall title or category, such as
'Tech Facts," or "public-service announcement."
5-8. Self-explanatory.
9. CONTRACTORS/GRANTEES—If a contractor or
grantee was, is, or will be involved in the research
(editorial, not scientific research), writing, editing,
design, or other preparation of the product, list the
company or organization's name, the EPA
contract/grant number, and the amount of money
spent.
10. SOURCE—The box(es) checked here will tell
catalog readers where to obtain your product. If
proper source isn't listed, give details in item 20.
11. Number of individual units to be produced.
For exhibits, indicate expected number of showings
per year and number of years of usefulness (i.e.
5/2).
12. COLORS—Do not include the color of the pa-
per stock. For example, black ink on blue paper is a
one-color process.
13. SIZE—For publications, this is the dimensions
of the folded product For leaflets, size typically will
be 4" x 9". Pamphlets and booklets may be 4" x 9",
x mn, or 8fc" x 11".
For videotapes, this is the type: VMS, %", 1", etc.
For audiotapes this is cassette, reel, etc.
For film, tills is 16mm, 8mm, etc.
For computer disks, 3fc" or 514".
For an exhibit, this is either table-top or free-
standing.
14. LENGTH—For publications, this is the number
of printed pages, not including any separate cover.
If the publication will be but is not yet typeset, the
number of pages can be roughly estimated by con-
sidering the following:
Amount Of Text Produced
Per Double-Spaced Page (25 lines)
Of Typewritten Text
Publication Size Portion of Page
4" x 9" three-quarters
5%" x 8%" two-thirds
81/iiX 11" one-third
For tapes and film, length is time. For trans-
parencies and microfilm/fiche this is number in
package. For computer disks, give length in bytes.
For exhibits, give width and depth.
15. AUDIENCE—Describe in terms of educational
level (i.e., children, average citizen, or college graduate),
degree of.subject knowledge (i.e. none, general, or
sfa'HoO, and involvement (uncaring, business/financial,
special-interest group, governmental, or personal).
16. PROMOTION—List quantities, audiences, and
timing for flyers, press releases, announcements,
advertisements (where? in what?), review copies (to
whom?), or other marketing activities planned for
the product. [This information is necessary to complete
GPO form 3868—Notification Of Intent To Publish.] For
many EPA documents, the response will be "none."
17. DESCRIPTION—A concise paragraph that clear-
ly gives the catalog reader enough information to
decide whether to order or seek out the product
18. KEY WORDS—These terms will be used to
locate your product in the Agency's electronic data-
bases and library files and indexes. Careful thought
in their selection is crucial to the effectiveness of
your product. In general, concentrate on terms that
distinguish and specify; avoid commonalities, such
as "environment" and "report."
19. CERTIFICATION—The Product Review Officer
is the person in each program office who has been
designated by the AA/RA to handle the EPA Prod-
uct-Review process. If you are unsure who this is in
your program, call your AA/RA's secretary or the
OCEPA Communications Planning Division at 260-
4361.
20. COMMENTS—Use this space to contain over-
flow information from items 9,10, and 16; or to flag
special characteristics or considerations.
APPENDIX F 33
-------
Protection of
Environment
40
PARTS 1 TO 51
Revised as of July 1, 1990
8 30.518 What are the procedures for pub-
lishing scientific, informational, and
educational documents?
(a) EPA encourages publication of
the results of Its assistance agree-
ments.
(b) You must comply with EPA's
peer and administrative review process
if you intend to release to the public
informational materials, reports, and
other products produced under an
EPA assistance agreement.
(1) Except for articles published
under paragraph (d) of this section,
you must submit three copies of the
documents to your project officer for
EPA review. EPA will evaluate the
documents and will provide you with
written, suggested changes, if any.
(2) You should make every effort to
accommodate suggestions arising from
the EPA review process while prepar-
ing a revised draft. You should alert
EPA reviewers to suggestions you
cannot accommodate and to changes
initiated by you in the revised draft. '
(3) If an agreement is reached that
the material is appropriate for release
as an EPA publication, the following
statement must be included in the doc-
ument:
The information In this document has been
funded wholly or in part by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency
under assistance agreement (number) to (re-
cipient). It has been subjected to the Agen-
cy's peer and administrative review and has
been approved for publication as an EPA
document. Mention of trade names or com-
mercial products does not constitute en-
dorsement or recommendation for use.
(c) If agreement cannot be reached
that the material is appropriate for re-
lease as an EPA publication, you may
independently publish and distribute
the document for your own use and at
your own expense provided you in-
clude the following statement in the
document:
Although the information in this document
has been funded wholly or in part by the
United States Environmental Protection
Agency under assistance agreement
(number) to (recipient), it may not necessar-
ily reflect the views of the Agency and no
official endorsement should be inferred.
(d) EPA also encourages independ-
ent publication of reports in referred
journals at any time. You must submit
. a copy of the article to your project of-
ficer when you send it for publication.
Following publication, three copies of
the article should be submitted to the
project officer. The article must in-
clude the following statement:
Although the research described in this ar-
ticle has been funded wholly or in part by
the United States Environmental Protection
Agency under assistance agreement
(number) to (recipient), it has not been sub-
jected to the Agency's peer and administra-
tive review and therefore may not necessari-
ly reflect the views of the Agency and no of-
ficial endorsement should be inferred.
§30.520
(e) Documents that are not to be re-
leased to the public as EPA publica-
tions but are part of a recipient's regu-
lar pollution control activities are not
subject to the EPA peer and adminis-
trative review process, e.g.. State pollu-
tion control agency-published newslet-
ters and operation and maintenance
manuals under the wasterwater treat-
ment construction grants program.
However, EPA encourages you to es-
tablish a similar reveiw process before
publishing any documents at your own
expense. You may publish such docu-
ments only If you include the follow-
ing statement:
This project has been funded wholly or in
part by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency under assistance agree-
ment (number) to (recipient). The contents
of this document do not necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of
trade names or commercial products consti-
tute endorsement or recommendation for
use.
[48 PR 49062. Sept. 30. 1983: 48 PR 38946.
Oct. 2. 1984]
APPENDIX G 34
-------
In the Development Stage:
Plain English?
For general audiences, the writing should be at about 8th
grade level; for more specialized audiences, not higher than
10th grade. Watch out for technical lingo, jargon, and
acronyms, and especially, passive voice!
Proper Tone?
Is the writing properly targeted to the audience —
not preachy, condescending, arrogant, or unfriendly?
Appropriate Illustrations?
Think about whether the graphics, illustrations, or photos
might suggest something to others, especially people outside
the Agency, that would be inappropriate. Consider whether
they might endorse a specific product, or make
inappropriate reference to health conditions, safety, race,
religion, sex, or handicaps.
Factual Accuracy?
Make sure the proper people have proofread the text and
doublechecked the facts for typos, especially in charts,
footnotes, etc.
Proper Identification of Contacts?
For the reader/viewer to get more information, ask questions
about the product, or obtain more copies, is the responsible
office properly identified? Be sure the names and numbers
are accurate! Double check! Contacts should be alerted to
the distribution. Are they ready to receive calls or requests
for copies?
Well Organised?
Is the text presented in a clear, logical manner? Is there an
introduction and a conclusion? Are the messages easy to
find and understand?
How; and How Many?
Is there a distribution plan? How many copies will be sent
out? To whom? Will you have enough supply to meet the
demand? What will the demand be? How will you distribute
the material? What distribution vehicles will be used? Will
you make camera-ready copies, the item itself, or both
available?
Should You Distribute the Product Itself or
Just Information about the Product?
Consider whether it is best to send out the product itself or
information about, or a summary of, the product. Especially
when dealing with large numbers, consider what's more
important: that the audience receive the product itself or
just learn that it exists and how they can get it.
APPENDIX E 31
-------
PUBLIC-INFORMATION-PRODUCT INVENTORY FORM
Guidance in completing this form is given on the reverse side. Print neatly in black ink.
1. Title
2. EPA Product Number
3. Format
4. Series
5. Date Submitted [mo.-day-yr]
6. Publication Date imo.-yr.]
7a. Contact Name
7b. Mail Code
7c. Telephone
8. Issuance
D Initial D Periodcal— Frequency wil to ___issues per
D Reprint— Data last printed
O Revision of existing document— Titte'_
Number.
9. Contractors/Grantees
ID No
Name
Amounts.
10. Source D Public Information Center
D Program D Cincinnati Clearinghouse
n-»20 o National Technical Information Service
11. Quantity
12. No. of Ink Colors
Cover Text —
13. Size
14. Length
15. Audience
16. Promotion/Marketing Plan (flyers, announcements, etc.. quantities, and audience)
17. Catalog Description (topics covered and points made)
18. Key Words (for indexes and databases) [no more than 12]
19. Product-Review Officer's Certification—The concept of this material and the expenditure of resources for its production are approved by
Program/Regional management, and the OCEPA Communications Planning Division has been notified in ample time for comment It wiH be
produced in accordance with al applicable and pertinent Agency and federal rules and regulations (including those given in the OCEPA
PubScations Management manual.) Two copies of afl non-technical publications wil be sent to the Editorial Services Division of OCEPA upon
completion. One copy of video/audio products w9 be sent to the Multi-Media Services Division of OCEPA upon completion.
Name (printed)
Oat*
Signature
20. Comments
Send to: Editorial Services Division, OCEPA (A-107), U.S.EPA, Washington DC 20460 — FAX * 202-260-0231
Fcr OCEPA Use Only
1 Received
1 c
T
E
Completed
Editorial Services Division (Signature below of Director or Deputy Director of Editorial Services Division. OCEPA. serves as signature of
same on Printing Request form 2340-1)
EPA Form 2200-5 (10-91)
APPENDIX F 32
-------
Federal Acquisition
Regulations System
48
CHAPTER 15 TO END
Revised as of October 1, 1990
1S5T237-70 Contract publication review
procedure*.
As prescribed In 1537.110. insert the
following contract clause when the
products of the contract are subject to
contract publication review.
CONTRACT PUBLICATION Review PKOCCTOUS
(An 1084)
(a) Material generated under this contract
Intended for release to the public is subject
to the Agency's publication review process
in accordance with the EPA Order on this
subject and the following.
(b) Except at Indicated in paragraph (c)
below, the Contractor shall not Independ-
ently publish or print material generated
under this contract until after completion
of the EPA review process. The Project Of-
ficer will notify the Contractor of review
completion within calendar days after
the Contractor's transmittal to the Project
Officer of material generated under this
contract. If the Contractor does not receive
Project Officer notification within this
period, the Contractor shall immediately
notify the Contracting Officer in writing.
(c) The Contractor may publish, In a sci-
entific journal, material resulting directly or
indirectly from work performed under this
contract, subject to the following:
(1) The Contractor shall submit to the
Contracting Officer and the Project Officer.
at least 30 days prior to publication, a copy
of any paper, article, or other dissemination
of information Intended for publication.
(I) The Contractor shall Include the fol-
lowing statement in a journal article which
has not been subjected to EPA review. "Al-
though the research described in this article
has been funded wholly or in part by the
United States Environmental Protection
Agency contract (number) to (Name of Con-
tractor). It has not been subject to the
Agency's review and therefore does not nec-
essarily reflect the views of the Agency, and
no official endorsement should be inferred."
(J) Following publication of the journal
article, the Contractor T*»M' submit five
copies of the journal article to the Project
Officer, and one copy to the Contracting
Officer.
(d) If the Government has completed the
review process and agreed that the contract
material may be attributed to EPA. the
Contractor shall Include the following state-
ment In the document:
This material has been funded wholly or
in part by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency under contract (number)
to (name). It has been subject to the Agen-
cy's review, and, tt has been approved for
APPENDIX G 35
publication as an EPA document. Mention
of trade names or commercial products does
not constitute endonement or recommenda-
tion for use.
(e) If the Government has completed the
review process, but decides not to publish
the material the Contractor may Independ-
ently publish and distribute the material for
its own use and Its own expense, and shall
Include the following statement in any inde-
pendent publication:
Although the information described in
this article has been funded wholly or In
part by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency under contract (nuzaber)
to (name), it does not necessarily reflect the
views of the Agency and no official endone-
ment should be Inferred.
(End of clause)
US. Environmental.:toctk* Apenci
Region 5, Library x,- • y ,
77 WesU^c!-^ n-oc'.'-;A l^Jl Ho
------- |