Jfc United States
WMKtf ¦¦¦	Environmental Protection
¦¦¦I	Agency
Proposal Guidelines for
Brownfields Assessment,
Revolving Loan Fund, and
Cleanup Grants

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Table of Contents
1.	The National Brownfields Program and the New Brownfields Law	1
1.1.	Background	1
1.2.	The New Brownfields Law	1
2.	Summary of Brownfields Grant Programs 	4
2.1.	Applicant Eligibility	4
2.2.	Assessment Grant Program	5
2.3.	Revolving Loan Fund Grant Program	5
2.4.	Cleanup Grant Program 	6
3.	Proposal Submission and Selection Process Overview	8
3.1.	Step 1—Initial Proposals 	8
3.2.	Step 2-Final Proposals	9
3.3.	Final Selection and Funding Award	10
3.4.	Proposal Submission Schedule	10
3.5.	General Proposal Requirements	11
4.	Initial Proposal Guidelines	12
4.1.	Preliminary Information	12
4.2.	Assessment Grants 	16
4.3.	Revolving Loan Fund Grants 	20
4.4.	Cleanup Grants	25
5.	Final Proposal Guidelines 	30
5.1.	Assessment Grants 	31
5.2.	Revolving Loan Fund Grants 	34
5.3.	Cleanup Grants	38
Appendix 1. EPA Regional and Headquarters Contacts	41
Appendix 2. Prohibitions on Use of Funds 	43
Appendix 3. Guidance on Sites Eligible for Brownfields Funding Under CERCLA §104(k) . . 45
Appendix 4. Guidance for Requests for Property-Specific Determinations for Funding	57
Table of Contents
Page i

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
1. The National Brownfields Program and the New
Brownfields Law
These guidelines are provided pursuant to Federal Register Notice No.	and in accordance
with Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance #66.811 (a revised CFDA # entry has been
submitted for approval). A brownfield site is "real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or
reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous
substance, pollutant, or contaminant," as defined in the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 §101(39), as amended (CERCLA). The new
Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act ("Brownfields Law" or "the
Law", P.L. 107-118) requires the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to publish
guidance to assist applicants in preparing grant proposals. These guidelines implement that
requirement for assessment, revolving loan fund, and cleanup grants. EPA estimates that $100
million will be available to make up to 200 grant awards, contingent upon the availability of
funds in FY 2003.
1.1. Background
In the early 1990s, stakeholders expressed their concerns to EPA about the problems associated
with brownfields across the country. More than 600,000 properties that were once used for
industrial, manufacturing, or other commercial uses were lying abandoned or underused due to
the suspicion of hazardous substance contamination. Brownfield areas, particularly those in city
centers, were contributing to blight and joblessness in surrounding communities. Unknown
environmental liabilities were preventing communities, developers, and investors from restoring
these properties to productive use and revitalizing impacted neighborhoods.
In 1994, EPA responded to the brownfield problem with an environmental protection approach
that is locally based, encourages strong public-private partnerships, and promotes innovative and
creative ways to assess, clean up, and redevelop brownfield sites. This approach empowers state,
tribal, and local environmental and economic development officials to oversee brownfield
activities, and encourages implementing local solutions to local problems. EPA also has
provided funding to create local environmental job training programs to ensure that the
economic benefits derived from brownfield revitalization efforts remain in local neighborhoods.
1.2. The New Brownfields La w
On January 11, 2002, President George W. Bush signed into law the Small Business Liability
Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act. The Brownfields Law expands potential federal
financial assistance for brownfield revitalization, including grants for assessment, cleanup, and
job training. The new law also limits the liability of certain contiguous property owners and
prospective purchasers of brownfield properties, and clarifies innocent landowner defenses to
encourage revitalization and reuse of brownfield sites. The Brownfields Law also includes
National Brownfields Program
Page 1

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
provisions to establish and enhance state and tribal response programs, which will continue to
play a critical role in the successful cleanup and revitalization of brownfields.
The Brownfields Law contains some features that are important for grant applicants to keep in
mind when using these guidelines.1 Some of those features are summarized below.
The Brownfields Law expands eligibility for brownfields funding by broadening the
entities eligible for funding. It also permits the award of cleanup grants to eligible
entities, including nonprofit organizations, that own the property they wish to clean up.
EPA has adopted a definition of nonprofit organizations that includes universities and
other nonprofit educational institutions. In addition, EPA will continue its policy of
accepting proposals from "coalitions," or groups of eligible entities, to pool their
revolving loan capitalization grant funds. A coalition is a grouping of two or more
eligible entities joined together under one grant recipient. The grant recipient must
administer the grant, is accountable to EPA for proper expenditure of the funds, and will
be the point of contact for the other coalition members.
The Brownfields Law defines a brownfield site broadly, but does exclude certain sites
from funding eligibility unless EPA makes a property-specific determination to fund (see
Appendix 3 for additional information). This determination will be based on whether or
not awarding a grant will protect human health and the environment and either promote
economic development or enable the property to be used for parks, greenways, and
similar recreational or nonprofit purposes. (Sqq Appendix 3 and Appendix 4 for more
information on "eligibility for funding" and "property-specific determinations.")
Generally, the law allows EPA to award brownfield grant funds for activities at
petroleum-contaminated sites that: 1) EPA or the state determines are of "relatively low
risk" compared with other petroleum-contaminated sites in the state; 2) EPA or the state
determines have no viable responsible party and that will be assessed, investigated, or
cleaned up by a person that is not potentially liable for cleaning up the site; and 3) are not
subject to a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 9003(h) order. EPA must
make available 25 percent of the total grant funds for assessment and/or cleanup of
petroleum-contaminated sites. EPA has designed these guidelines to allow applicants to
specify the amount of funding that will be used at petroleum-contaminated sites. (See
Appendix 3 for additional information.)
The Brownfields Law requires a 20 percent cost share for revolving loan fund and
cleanup grants.
Grant funds cannot be used for administrative costs. Grant funds cannot be used to pay
response costs at a brownfield site for which the recipient of the grant or loan is
potentially liable under CERCLA §107. (S qq Appendix 2, Prohibition on Use of Funds,
for additional prohibitions).
'The authority to provide grants in the Brownfields Law is codified at §104(k) of
CERCLA.
National Brownfields Program	Page 2

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Under the Brownfields Law, a local government may use up to 10 percent of its grant
funds for monitoring the health of populations exposed to one or more hazardous
substances, pollutants, or contaminants from a brownfield site and monitoring and
enforcement of any institutional control used to prevent human exposure to any
hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant from a brownfield site. To effectively
oversee assessments and cleanups, local governments may use grant funds (subject to the
10 percent limit) for other related program development and implementation activities.
For additional information, contact your Regional Brownfields Contact listed in Appendix 1.
National Brownfields Program
Page 3

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
2. Summary of Brownfields Grant Programs
Three competitive brownfields grant programs are discussed in these guidelines: assessment
grants, revolving loan fund (RLF) grants, and cleanup grants. Eligible applicants, including those
with existing brownfields grants, may apply for one, or all, of the grant programs. Contact your
EPA Regional representative for assistance.
2.1. Applicant Eligibility
The following table indicates, by grant program, what types of entities are eligible to receive
EPA funds for brownfields assessment, RLF, and cleanup grants:
Type of Applicant
Assessment
RLF1
Cleanup1
General Purpose Unit of Local Government2
/
/
/
Land Clearance Authority or other quasi-governmental
entity that operates under the supervision and control of,
or as an agent of, a general purpose unit of local
government
/
/
/
Government Entity Created by State Legislature
/
/
/
Regional council or group of general purpose units of
local government
/
/
/
Redevelopment Agency that is chartered or otherwise
sanctioned by a state
/
/
/
State
/
/
/
Indian Tribe other than in Alaska3
/
/
/
Alaska Native Regional Corporation, Alaska Native
Village Corporation, and Metlakatla Indian
Community4
/
/
/
Nonprofit organizations5


/
1	To be eligible for a cleanup grant or an RLF subgrant, the fund recipient must own the site for
which they seek funding.
2	For purposes of the brownfields grant program, EPA defines general purpose unit of local
government as a "local government" as that term is defined under 40 CFR Part 31.
3	Intertribal Consortia are eligible for funding in accordance with EPA's policy for funding
intertribal consortia to be published in the Federal Register. This policy also may be obtained
from your Regional Brownfields Contact.
Brownfields Grant Programs
Page 4

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
4	Alaska Native Regional Corporations and Alaska Native Village Corporations are defined in
the Alaskan Native Claim Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601 and following).
5	For the purposes of the brownfields grant program, EPA will use the definition of nonprofit
organizations contained in Section 4(6) of the Federal Financial Management Assistance Act of
1999, Public Law 96-107.
2.2. Assessment Grant Program
Assessment grants provide funding for a grant recipient to inventory, characterize, assess, and
conduct planning and community involvement related to brownfield sites.
An eligible entity may apply for up to $200,000 to address sites contaminated by
hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants (including hazardous substances co-
mingled with petroleum) and up to $200,000 to address sites contaminated by petroleum.
Grant funds may not exceed $400,000 per applicant unless a waiver is requested, which
must be based on the anticipated level of contamination, size, or ownership status of the
site. Applicants may request a waiver of the $200,000 limits up to $350,000 for sites
contaminated by hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants (including hazardous
substances co-mingled with petroleum) and up to $350,000 to address sites contaminated
by petroleum. Due to budget limitations, no entity may apply for funding assessment
activities in excess of the $700,000 as described above.
The performance period for these grants generally will be two years.
• Refer to Appendix 2, Prohibitions on Use of Funds, for more information on activities
that may not be funded using brownfields grant funds.
2.3. Revolving Loan Fund Grant Program
Revolving Loan Fund grants provide funding for a grant recipient to capitalize a revolving loan
fund and to provide subgrants to carry out cleanup activities at brownfields sites.
An eligible entity may apply for up to $1,000,000 for an initial RLF grant. Coalitions of
eligible entities may apply together under one recipient for up to $1,000,000 per eligible
entity. These funds may be used to address sites contaminated by petroleum and
hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants (including hazardous substances co-
mingled with petroleum).
Proposals may be submitted by "coalitions," or groups of eligible entities, to pool their
revolving loan capitalization grant funds. A coalition is a grouping of two or more
eligible entities joined together under one grant recipient. The grant recipient must
administer the grant, be accountable to EPA for proper expenditure of the funds, and be
the point of contact for the other coalition members. Members of the coalition other than
the grant recipient must submit letters agreeing to be part of the coalition.
Brownfields Grant Programs
Page 5

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
An RLF grant recipient must use at least 60 percent of the awarded funds to capitalize a
revolving loan fund. Revolving loan funds generally are used to provide no-interest or
low-interest loans for brownfields cleanups. An RLF grant recipient also may use its
funds to award subgrants to other eligible entities, including nonprofit organizations, for
brownfields cleanups on sites owned by the subgrantee; however, an RLF grant recipient
may use no more than 40 percent of the awarded funds for cleanup subgrants. Unlike
loans, cleanup subgrants do not require repayment.
An RLF award requires a 20 percent cost share, which may be in the form of a
contribution of money, labor, material, or services, and must be for eligible and allowable
costs (the match must equal 20 percent of the amount of funding provided by EPA and
cannot include administrative costs). An RLF grant applicant may request a waiver of the
20 percent cost share requirement based on hardship. Applicants must contact their
Regional representative (listed in Appendix 1) to discuss applying for a waiver prior to
submitting Initial Proposals.
Existing Brownfields Cleanup Revolving Loan Fund (BCRLF) recipients who were
awarded funding prior to January 11, 2002, may choose to "transition" their grants to the
requirements of the new law. BCRLF recipients who choose to transition must comply
with all requirements of the new law. BCRLF recipients who do not choose to transition
will continue to operate pursuant to the terms and conditions of their existing cooperative
agreements. EPA will be providing information about this transition option to existing
BCRLF grant recipients.
The performance period for these grants generally will be five years.
Refer to Appendix 2, Prohibitions on Use of Funds, for more information on activities
that may not be funded using brownfields grant funds.
2.4. Cleanup Grant Program
Cleanup grants provide funding for a grant recipient to carry out cleanup activities at brownfield
sites.
An eligible entity may apply for up to $200,000 per site. Due to budget limitations, no
entity should apply for funding cleanup activities at more than five sites. These funds
may be used to address sites contaminated by petroleum and hazardous substances,
pollutants, or contaminants (including hazardous substances co-mingled with petroleum).
Cleanup grants require a 20 percent cost share, which may be in the form of a
contribution of money, labor, material, or services, and must be for eligible and allowable
costs (the match must equal 20 percent of the amount of funding provided by EPA and
cannot include administrative costs). A cleanup grant applicant may request a waiver of
the 20 percent cost share requirement based on hardship. Applicants must contact their
Regional representative (listed in Appendix 1) to discuss applying for a waiver prior to
submitting Initial Proposals.
Brownfields Grant Programs
Page 6

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
An eligible entity must own the site for which it is requesting funding in order to qualify.
The performance period for these grants generally will be two years.
Refer to Appendix 2, Prohibitions on Use of Funds, for more information on activities
that may not be funded using brownfields grant funds.
Brownfields Grant Programs
Page 7

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
3. Proposal Submission and Selection Process
Overview
The Brownfields Law provides that eligible entities may apply for grants through EPA Regional
offices and that EPA establish a competitive system for awarding grants to the applicants with
proposals that received the highest rankings. EPA brownfields grants will be selected on a
competitive basis using a two-step proposal selection process. This section provides an overview
of the two-step proposal submission and selection process and general requirements for proposal
preparation.
3.1. Step 1-Initial Proposals
Step 1 is the submission, evaluation, and ranking of Initial Proposals through EPA Regional
Offices. All eligible applicants, including those with existing brownfields grants awarded prior to
January 11, 2002, may prepare Initial Proposals in response to these guidelines. These guidelines
address three types of grant activities-assessment, revolving loan fund, and cleanup. All
applicants, including those applying for more than one type of grant activity (assessment,
revolving loan fund, and/or cleanup), must submit a single Initial Proposal.
There are two different types of criteria-threshold criteria and ranking criteria. Threshold and
ranking criteria will be clearly indicated in each section below. If you are requesting funding for
more than one type of grant activity, your Initial Proposals must include responses to each
threshold criterion and ranking criterion for each grant activity type.
In preparing Initial Proposals, applicants are encouraged to work with their EPA
Regional Brownfields Contacts listed in Appendix 1. Regional representatives can help
you understand applicant eligibility, site eligibility, activities that funding may and may
not be used for, terminology, budgets, and other issues. Such assistance is available to
all applicants upon request.
To submit an Initial Proposal, applicants must send an original Initial Proposal to their
Regional representative and a copy to EPA Headquarters at the addresses shown in
Appendix 1. Refer to Section 4, Initial Proposal Guidelines, for instructions on preparing
Initial Proposals. Refer to Appendix 1 for Regional and Headquarters contact mailing
addresses. Initial Proposals must be postmarked or sent via registered or tracked mail to
the appropriate Regional and Headquarters representative by November 27, 2002.
Initial Proposals will be evaluated and ranked by Regional evaluation panels. These
panels will evaluate responses to threshold criteria on a pass/fail basis and will evaluate
responses to ranking criteria on a numerical scoring basis. If a response to a threshold
criterion fails, the proposal will be disqualified from further consideration under these
guidelines. However, EPA Regions may seek clarification from an applicant regarding its
response to certain threshold criteria. Scores on each ranking criterion will be totaled to
determine proposal rankings.
Proposal Submission and Selection Process
Page 8

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Funding requests for assessment, RLF, and cleanup grants will be evaluated separately
and ranked independently for each type of grant funding activity.
EPA will determine those Initial Proposals that have the highest rankings, and then invite
those applicants to prepare and submit Final Proposals, the second step in the two-part
proposal process. EPA decisions may take into account other statutory and policy
considerations, such as urban and non-urban distribution and other geographic factors;
the benefits of promoting the long-term availability of funds under the RLF grants;
designation as a federal Empowerment Zone, Enterprise Community, or Renewal
Community; population; and whether the applicant is a federally recognized Indian tribe.
EPA will take information on relevant response or enforcement actions into account prior
to making final decisions.
Ineligible or lower ranking applicants will not be invited to prepare a Final Proposal.
These applicants will be advised of this decision at the same time that invitations for
Final Proposals will be sent to higher ranking applicants. EPA anticipates a highly
competitive process. Depending on the number of Initial Proposals submitted and
availability of funding, EPA expects to eliminate from competition a significant number
of Initial Proposals.
Applicants eliminated from competition at the Initial Proposal stage can contact their
Regional Brownfields Contact for feedback on their proposals.
3.2. Step 2-Final Proposals
Step 2 is the submission, evaluation, and ranking of Final Proposals. Final Proposals will be
accepted by EPA invitation only. Applicants should submit separate Final Proposals responding
to these guidelines for each type of grant activity (assessment, revolving loan fund, and/or
cleanup).
To submit a Final Proposal, applicants must send an original Final Proposal to their
Regional representative and a copy to EPA Headquarters at the addresses shown in
Appendix 1. Refer to Section 5, Final Proposal Guidelines, for instructions on preparing
Final Proposals. Refer to Appendix 1 for Regional and Headquarters contact mailing
addresses. Final Proposals must be postmarked or sent via registered or tracked mail to
the appropriate Regional and Headquarters representative by March 5, 2003.
Final Proposals will be evaluated and ranked by National Evaluation Panels composed of
representatives from EPA Regional and Headquarters offices and representatives of other
federal agencies. These panels will evaluate and rank responses to ranking criteria based
on a numerical scoring system. Scores on all Final Proposal ranking criteria will be
totaled and 20 percent of the total Initial Proposal scores will be added to determine Final
Proposal rankings.
Proposal Submission and Selection Process
Page 9

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Applicants eliminated from competition at the Final Proposal stage can contact their
Regional Brownfields Contact for feedback on their proposals.
EPA reserves the right to reject all proposals or applications and make no awards.
3.3. Final Selection and Funding Award
Final selections will be made by EPA senior management based upon the evaluation and ranking
of Final Proposals by the National Evaluation Panels. EPA decisions may take into account other
statutory and policy considerations, such as urban and non-urban distribution and other
geographic factors; the benefits of promoting the long-term availability of funds under the RLF
grants; designation as a federal Empowerment Zone, Enterprise Community, or Renewal
Community; population; and whether the applicant is a federally recognized Indian tribe. EPA
also will take information on relevant response or enforcement actions into account prior to
making final decisions. Successful proposal applicants will be informed in writing of their
selection.
Funding will be awarded as a cooperative agreement. The applicants whose proposals are
selected will be asked to submit a formal cooperative agreement application package to their
EPA Regional office. This package will include an EPA-approved work plan, a final budget, and
the required forms. Applicants will be required to submit progress reports in accordance with
grant regulations found in 40 CFR 30.51 or 40 CFR 31.40, as applied by EPA Regional offices.
EPA will work closely with the applicant to process and finalize the cooperative agreement
package. EPA anticipates substantial involvement with the cooperative agreement recipient.
Any disputes regarding proposals or applications submitted in response to these guidelines will
be resolved in accordance with 40 CFR 30.63 and Part 31, Subpart F.
In accordance with Executive Order 12372, EPA encourages applicants to contact their State
Intergovernmental Review Office early so that the required intergovernmental review process
may begin immediately upon selection by EPA. If the state does not have an Intergovernmental
Review Office, the successful applicant must provide notice of the proposed agreement directly
to affected state, area-wide, regional, and local entities. Contact your Regional Brownfields
Contact for assistance, if needed.
3.4. Proposal Submission Schedule
EPA will adhere to the following schedule for the submission of grant proposals:
Initial Proposals
Evaluation Results
Assessment Final Proposals
RLF Final Proposals
Cleanup Final Proposals
postmarked by November 27, 2002
mid-January
postmarked by March 5, 2003
postmarked by March 5, 2003
postmarked by March 5, 2003
Proposal Submission and Selection Process
Page 10

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
3.5. General Proposal Requirements
All materials included in the proposal (including maps and other attachments) must be printed on
letter-sized paper (&V2" by 11") and font sizes may be no smaller than 12 points. Proposals
received by EPA will be copied and distributed to appropriate reviewers; therefore, binders and
color printing are discouraged. Generally, Initial Proposals should be between 7 and 10 pages in
length, not including attachments. Generally, Final Proposals should be between 7 and 10 pages
in length, not including attachments. Applicants should clearly mark information they consider
confidential. EPA will make final confidentiality decisions in accordance with Agency
regulations in 40 CFR Part 2, Subpart B.
Proposals should be concise and well organized, and must provide the information requested in
the guidelines, including responses to each criterion. Factual information about your proposed
project and community should be provided. Proposals should not include discussions of broad
principles that are not specific to the proposed work or project. Responses to criteria should
include the criteria number and title but need not restate the entire text of the criteria.
If you are applying for more than one type of grant activity, you may repeat responses when
responding to similar criteria used in the guidelines for more than one type of grant activity. For
example, you may wish to use the same description of "community need" in your responses to
Initial Proposal ranking criteria for assessment, RLF, and cleanup grants. However, assessment,
RLF, and cleanup proposals will be evaluated separately and different reviewers may review
each grant program activity section. Each section of your proposal should stand on its own
merits. Applicants are encouraged to discuss the links between grant proposals.
Electronic copies of the guidelines can be obtained from the EPA brownfields web site
(www.epa.gov/brownfields) or by contacting your Regional Brownfields Contact listed in
Appendix 1.
Proposal Submission and Selection Process
Page 11

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
4^nitiaM^roj)osaKji^^
To request funding, applicants must submit a single Initial Proposal. The Initial Proposal will be
used to address up to three types of brownfields grant activities (assessment, RLF, and cleanup).
Generally, Initial Proposals should be between 7 and 10 pages in length, not including
attachments.
The Initial Proposal will consist of the following items:
Cover Letter (optional)
• Applicant Information
Requested Programs and Funding
Project Overview
Responses to Assessment Grant Criteria (if applicable)
1.	Threshold Criteria
2.	Ranking Criteria
Responses to RLF Grant Criteria (if applicable)
1.	Threshold Criteria
2.	Ranking Criteria
Responses to Cleanup Grant Criteria (if applicable)
1.	Threshold Criteria
2.	Ranking Criteria
Attachments
4.1. Preliminary Information
Please provide the following:
I.	Cover Letter (Optional)
Submission of a cover letter is optional. If a cover letter is submitted, please prepare it on
the applicant's letterhead and have it signed by an official of your organization.
II.	Applicant Information
A.	Project Title: Be as specific as possible.
B.	Name of Applicant: The proposed recipient of the grant funds.
Note: For RLF coalition proposals, the entity named here will be considered the
cooperative agreement recipient.
Initial Proposals—Preliminary Information
Page 12

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
C.	Project contact: Name, mailing address, telephone and fax numbers, and email
address of the person from your organization who is responsible for the project
proposal. We will contact this person if we need further information.
D.	Chief Executive: Name of the elected official who represents the applicant (e.g.,
Mayor, County Executive, Tribal Chairperson, etc.), mailing address, and phone
and fax numbers.
Note: For RLF coalition proposals, provide the information for the chief
executive for each eligible entity.
E.	Location: City, county, and state or Indian Reservation, tribally-owned lands,
tribal fee lands, etc., of the project area.
Note: For RLF coalition proposals, list the relevant information for each eligible
entity.
F.	Population: The population of your jurisdiction and of your proposed project area.
Tribes should provide the number of tribal/non-tribal members affected.
Note: For RLF coalition proposals, list the relevant information for each eligible
entity.
G.	Special Consideration: Indicate whether you qualify for special consideration
during proposal evaluation (i.e., population of your community under 100,000;
federally recognized tribe; federally designated Empowerment Zone/Enterprise
Community in your community; or federally designated Renewal Community).
Initial Proposals—Preliminary Information
Page 13

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
III. Requested Programs and Funding (print/copy and complete and submit with proposal)
Name of Applicant:	
Please respond as appropriate:
~	Assessment Grant (check if applying for this grant activity type)
~	Requested funding for assessment of sites contaminated by hazardous substances,
pollutants, or contaminants (including hazardous substances co-mingled with
petroleum):
$	 (no more than $200,000 per applicant)
Are you requesting a waiver of the funding limit?	
If yes, specify the amount requested:
$	(no more than $150,000 per applicant)
~	Requested funding for assessment of petroleum sites:
$	(no more than $200,000 per applicant)
Are you requesting a waiver of the funding limit?	
If yes, specify the amount requested:
$	(no more than $150,000 per applicant)
~	Revolving Loan Fund Grant (check if applying for this grant activity type)
$	(total amount requested, up to $1 million per eligible entity)
How much of this total is funding for addressing petroleum sites? $	
Are you submitting this proposal on behalf of a coalition?	
If yes, please indicate the number of eligible entities within the coalition:	.
~	Cleanup Grant (check if applying for this grant activity type)
$	(total amount requested, up to $200,000 per site)
For each site, list the amount requested and whether it is for a hazardous
substance, pollutant, or contaminant cleanup (including hazardous substances co-
mingled with petroleum) or a petroleum cleanup. (You may apply for up to 5
sites.)
For example, Site 1: $200,000 for a petroleum cleanup.
Site 1: $	
Site 2: $	
Site 3: $	
Site 4: $	
Site 5: $
Note: Only
those proposals
identifying
specific sites
will be eligible
to apply for a
waiver.
Initial Proposals—Preliminary Information
Page 14

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
IV. Project Overview
Describe your proposed project and your plans for using EPA grant funds, including
assessment, cleanup, and revolving loan fund grants, as appropriate.
Initial Proposals—Preliminary Information
Page 15

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
4.2. Assessment Grants
Provide responses to the following threshold and ranking criteria if you are applying for
assessment grant funding. Threshold criteria are pass/fail criteria. If your responses do not meet
the threshold criteria, you will not be invited to prepare Final Proposals.
Threshold Criteria
A. Applicant Eligibility
Note: For this threshold criterion, EPA may seek further clarification of responses, if
needed, during the selection review process.
Describe how you are an eligible entity for the grants for which you are applying. Refer
to the description of applicant eligibility in Section 2.1.
B. Community Notification
Note: EPA will not seek further clarification of responses to this criterion.
Describe how the community was notified of the preparation and submission of this
proposal.
Note: Those applicants selected to submit a Final Proposal will need to describe how the
community was given the opportunity to be involved in the preparation of the Final
Proposal.
C.	Letter from the State or Tribal Environmental Authority
Note: EPA will not seek further clarification of responses to this criterion.
For an applicant other than a state or tribal environmental authority, provide a letter from
the appropriate state or tribal environmental authority acknowledging that you plan to
conduct assessment activities. If you are applying for multiple types of grant program
activities, you need submit only one letter acknowledging the relevant grant activities.
Provide as an attachment.
D.	Description of Sites/Site Selection Process
Note: For this threshold criterion, EPA may seek further clarification of responses, if
needed, during the selection review process.
1. If you have not yet identified specific sites, address the following:
a. Describe how sites will be selected/site selection criteria will be
developed;
Initial Proposals—Assessment Grants
Page 16

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
b.	Describe possible inventory activities, prioritization efforts, or other
activities;
c.	If you anticipate conducting assessment activities on privately owned
sites, discuss possible access issues and how you would resolve the issues.
2. If you have identified specific sites, address the following for each site:
a.	List the site name and address and describe its operational history,
environmental concerns, and its current site use and activity.
b.	If you determine the site is not eligible for funding without a property-
specific determination, then you will need to apply for a property-specific
determination. To apply, please refer to Appendix 4.
Note: EPA may use available information to verify that the site is eligible
for funding.
c.	If the site is contaminated with petroleum, describe whether Leaking
Underground Storage Tank (LUST) trust fund money has been spent at
this site or whether the site is subject to a response under the Oil Pollution
Act (see Appendix 3).
d.	Identify who owns the site.
e.	Identify how the site became contaminated.
f.	If the applicant owns the site, describe how you took ownership of the site
(e.g., tax foreclosure) and date of acquisition.
g.	If the site is not owned by the applicant, describe your relationship with
the owner and their role in the work to be performed.
h.	If the applicant owns the site, describe whether you are responsible for
any of the environmental concerns at the site.
i.	For those sites that are not owned by the applicant, indicate how access
will be secured.
j. Indicate whether you are applying for a waiver of the $200,000 per site
funding limit. If so, indicate the dollar amount requested and provide a
justification as to why the waiver should be granted. Justification must be
based on the anticipated level of contamination, size, or status of
ownership (refer to Section 2.2. for a discussion of this waiver).
Initial Proposals—Assessment Grants
Page 17

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Ranking Criteria
A.	Community Need (a maximum of 40 points may be received for this criterion)
1.	Provide a detailed description of the target community that the project(s) will
benefit. Include demographic information and indicators such as the poverty rate,
unemployment rate, special community situations (e.g., population size), or other
environmental justice factors that support community need relating directly to this
project (e.g., low-income and/or minority communities; sensitive populations,
such as children and pregnant women; or communities disproportionately
impacted by environmental factors).
2.	Characterize the impact of brownfields on your community (or communities) by
describing the extent of brownfields (e.g., size, number, location) and the
economic, health, and/or environmental impacts of the brownfields.
B.	Leveraging of Additional Resources (a maximum of 40 points may be received for this
criterion)
1.	Describe the financial needs for each phase of the project (assessment, cleanup,
and redevelopment), if known.
2.	Identify the funds (e.g., general revenues, Tax Increment Financing (TIF), staff
time/in-kind) that your agency/organization has committed or will commit to
meet the needs described above.
3.	Describe all other funding sources (e.g., federal, state, nonprofit, or private) that
will be committed to fill in any remaining funding gaps to ensure the success of
this project.
4.	Describe the extent to which this grant will meet the financial needs described
above and stimulate the availability of the other funding sources.
C.	Ability to Manage Grants (a maximum of 20 points may be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe your ability to manage this grant and oversee the assessment work, or
describe the system(s) you have in place to hire the requisite expertise.
2.	Describe your history of managing federal funds generally. You must identify and
provide information regarding the status of any adverse audit findings from an
OMB Circular A-133 audit, an audit conducted by a federal, state, tribal, or local
government inspector general or similar organization, or audits conducted by the
U.S. General Accounting Office. You also must note whether you are, or have
previously been, required to comply with special "high risk" terms and conditions
under agency regulations implementing OMB Circular A-102.
3.	If you are, or have been, a recipient of an EPA Brownfields Assessment
cooperative agreement, provide information regarding your compliance with
Initial Proposals—Assessment Grants
Page 18

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
quarterly progress reports, brownfields reporting measures, and annual financial
status reporting.
4.	If you are a current recipient of an EPA Brownfields Assessment cooperative
agreement, indicate the amount of funds remaining.
5.	If you are a current recipient of an EPA Brownfields Assessment cooperative
agreement, highlight significant accomplishments generated through the use of
the funds.
Initial Proposals—Assessment Grants
Page 19

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
4.3. Revolving Loan Fund Grants
Provide responses to the following threshold and ranking criteria if you are applying for
Revolving Loan Fund grant funding. Threshold criteria are pass/fail criteria. If your responses do
not meet the threshold criteria, you will not be invited to prepare Final Proposals.
Threshold Criteria
A.	Applicant Eligibility
Note: For this threshold criterion, EPA may seek further clarification of responses, if
needed, during the selection review process.
Describe how you are an eligible entity for the grants for which you are applying. Refer
to the description of applicant eligibility in Section 2.1.
Note: Coalition applicants for RLF grants must demonstrate that all coalition members
are eligible entities. In addition, for coalition members other than the applicant, you
must submit a letter from each eligible coalition member in which they agree to be part
of the coalition.
B.	Community Notification
Note: EPA will not seek further clarification of responses to this criterion.
Describe how the community was notified of the preparation and submission of this
proposal.
Note: Those applicants selected to submit a Final Proposal will need to describe how the
community was given the opportunity to be involved in the preparation of the Final
Proposal.
C.	Legal Authority to Manage a Revolving Loan Fund
Note: EPA will not seek further clarification of responses to this criterion.
Provide an opinion from your legal counsel that demonstrates your legal authority to
perform the actions necessary to manage a revolving loan fund. At a minimum, legal
authority must include the ability to hold funds, make loans, enter into loan agreements,
and collect repayments. This authority may be based on statute, regulation, or other
authority. Attach your counsel's legal opinion.
Initial Proposals—Revolving Loan Fund Grants
Page 20

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
D.	Cleanup Authority and Management Structure
Note: EPA will not seek further clarification of responses to this criterion.
1.	Describe how you will oversee the cleanup at the site. Provide a description of the
technical expertise you have to manage the cleanup and a description of any
additional expertise that will be acquired. If you plan to obtain additional
technical expertise, discuss how, consistent with 40 CFR 31.36, you will ensure
that this expertise is in place prior to beginning cleanup activities.
2.	Provide a legal opinion from your counsel that demonstrates that you have legal
authority to access and secure sites in the event of an emergency or default of a
loan agreement or non-performance under a subgrant. Attach your counsel's legal
opinion.
E.	Cost Share
Note: EPA will not seek further clarification of responses to this criterion.
RLF grant recipients are required by the new Brownfields Law to provide a 20 percent
cost share.2 This cost share is calculated as 20 percent of the total federal RLF funds
awarded. For example, if you are applying for $1 million of federal RLF funds, you must
provide a cost share of an additional $200,000. The cost share may be in the form of a
contribution of money, labor, material, or services from a non-federal source. If the cost
share is in the form of contribution of labor, material, or other services, it must be for an
eligible and allowable expense under the grant and not for ineligible expenses, such as
administrative costs (see Appendix 2 for a discussion of prohibited costs).
1. Describe your plans for providing the cost share as required for this RLF program
grant.
RLF grant applicants may petition EPA to waive the cost-share requirement if it would
place an undue hardship on the eligible entity. EPA will consider hardship waiver
requests on a case-by-case basis and will approve such requests on a limited basis. Undue
hardship may be defined as bankruptcy or such other indicator of distress, including low
per-capita income, unemployment rate above national average, or unemployment or
economic adjustment problems resulting from severe short-term or long-term changes in
economic conditions. Applicants should contact their regional representative (see
Appendix 1) to discuss applying for a hardship waiver prior to submitting their Initial
Proposal.
2Applicants for an RLF grant may use fees from borrowers, interest on loans, repayments
of loan principal, and other "program income" to meet the cost share requirement. However, if
an RLF grant applicant plans to use anticipated program income for cost share, the applicant also
must demonstrate how alternative sources for obtaining money, labor, material, or services can
be used to meet its cost share requirement if program income is less than anticipated during the
performance period for the grant.
Initial Proposals—Revolving Loan Fund Grants
Page 21

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
2. If you are requesting a hardship waiver of the cost share, provide an explanation
for the basis of your request as part of your proposal.
F. Letter from the State or Tribal Environmental Authority
Note: EPA will not seek further clarification of responses to this criterion.
For an applicant other than a state or tribal environmental authority, provide a letter from
the appropriate state or tribal environmental authority acknowledging that the applicant
plans to conduct or oversee cleanup activities. If you are applying for multiple types of
grant program activities, you need only submit one letter acknowledging the relevant
grant activities. Provide as an attachment.
Ranking Criteria
A.	Community Need (a maximum of 40 points may be received for this criterion)
1.	Provide a detailed description of the target community that the project(s) will
benefit. Include demographic information and indicators, such as the poverty rate,
unemployment rate, special community situations (e.g., population size), or other
environmental justice factors that support community need relating directly to this
project (e.g., low-income and/or minority communities; sensitive populations,
such as children and pregnant women; or communities disproportionately
impacted by environmental factors).
2.	Characterize the impact of brownfields on your community (or communities) by
describing the extent of brownfields (e.g., size, number, location) and the
economic, health, and/or environmental impacts of the brownfields.
B.	Leveraging of Additional Resources (a maximum of 40 points may be received for this
criterion)
1.	Describe the financial needs for each phase of the project (cleanup and
redevelopment), if known.
2.	Identify the funds (e.g., general revenues, TIF, staff time/in-kind) that your
agency/organization has committed or will commit to meet the needs described
above.
3.	Describe all other funding sources (federal, state, nonprofit, or private) that will
be committed to fill in any remaining funding gaps to ensure the success of this
project.
4.	Describe the extent to which this grant will meet the financial needs described
above and stimulate the availability of the other funding sources.
Initial Proposals—Revolving Loan Fund Grants
Page 22

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
C.	Ability to Manage Grants/Management Structure (a maximum of 20 points may be
received for this criterion)
1.	Describe your history of managing federal funds generally. You must identify and
provide information regarding the status of any adverse audit findings from an
OMB Circular A-133 audit, an audit conducted by a federal, state, tribal, or local
government inspector general or similar organization, or audits conducted by the
U.S. General Accounting Office. You also must note whether you are, or have
previously been, required to comply with special "high risk" terms and conditions
under agency regulations implementing OMB Circular A-102.
2.	Provide your plan for managing the loan fund to ensure that it is managed in
accordance with prudent lending practices. Include information on the
qualifications of staff and institutions the applicant intends to use for financial,
analytical, legal, and record keeping activities to ensure that the loan fund is
managed in accordance with prudent lending practices.
3.	If you plan to acquire any fund management expertise, describe the relationship
between the potential cooperative agreement recipient and the institution or
individual and the type of agreement (e.g., contract3 or subgrant4) that is planned.
D.	Description of Target Market for RLF Loans and Subgrants (a maximum of 40 points
may be received for this criterion)
1.	If you have not identified particular borrowers or subgrantees, describe your
target market, including the types of borrowers and subgrantees (for example,
small businesses, developers, local governments) and types of sites (for example,
single property, multiple properties, geographic area).
2.	If you are identifying particular sites, address the following for each site:
a.	Identify the proposed borrower or subgrantee. Include the organizational
name and address.
b.	List the site name and address and describe its operational history,
environmental concerns, and its current site use and activity.
3Note, cooperative agreement recipients must comply with 40 CFR 31.36 when entering
into procurement contracts with RLF grant funds and 40 CFR 31.37 when issuing subgrants with
RLF grant funds. Nonprofit organizations receiving RLF loans/subgrants and cleanup grants
must comply with 40 CFR Part 30 when entering into procurement contracts with RLF grant
funds.
4Note, cooperative agreement recipients cannot award subgrants to for-profit
organizations.
Initial Proposals—Revolving Loan Fund Grants
Page 23

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
c.	If you determine the site is not eligible for funding without a property-
specific determination, then you will need to apply for a property-specific
determination. To apply, please refer to Appendix 4.
Note: EPA may use available information to verify that the site is eligible
for funding.
d.	If the site is contaminated with petroleum, describe whether LUST trust
fund money has been spent at this site or whether the site is subject to a
response under the Oil Pollution Act (see Appendix 3).
e.	Identify who owns the site.
Note: For subgrants, the subgrantee must own the site.
f.	Identify how the site became contaminated.
g.	If the borrower or subgrantee owns the site, describe how they took
ownership of the site (e.g., tax foreclosure) and the date of acquisition.
h.	If the applicant owns the site, describe whether you are responsible for
any of the environmental concerns at the site.
Note: An applicant may loan RTF grant funds to itself but may not issue
subgrants ofRLF grant funds to itself.
3. If you plan to award subgrants under the RLF, describe how you will take the
following into consideration5:
a.	The extent to which the subgrant will facilitate the creation of,
preservation of, or addition to a park, greenway, undeveloped property,
recreational property, or other property used for nonprofit purposes;
b.	The extent to which the subgrant will meet the needs of a community that
has an inability to draw on other sources of funding for environmental
remediation and subsequent redevelopment of the area in which a
brownfield site is located because of the small population or low income
of the community;
c.	The extent to which a subgrant will facilitate the use or reuse of existing
infrastructure; and
d.	The benefit of promoting the long-term availability of funds from a
revolving loan fund for brownfield remediation.
5RLF cooperative agreement recipients must take these into consideration when awarding
a subgrant.
Initial Proposals—Revolving Loan Fund Grants	Page 24

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
4.4. Cleanup Grants
Provide responses to the following threshold and ranking criteria if you are applying for cleanup
grant funding. Threshold criteria are pass/fail criteria. If your responses do not meet the
threshold criteria, you will not be invited to prepare Final Proposals.
Note: One eligible entity may apply for up to 5 sites, at up to $200,000 per site.
Threshold Criteria
A.	Applicant Eligibility
Note: For this threshold criterion, EPA may seek further clarification of responses, if
needed, during the selection review process.
Describe how you are an eligible entity for the grants for which you are applying. Refer
to the description of applicant eligibility in Section 2.1.
Note: In order to receive a cleanup grant, the applicant must own the property for which
they are applying.
B.	Community Notification
Note: EPA will not seek further clarification of responses to this criterion.
Describe how the community was notified of the preparation and submission of this
proposal.
Note: Those applicants selected to submit a Final Proposal will need to describe how the
community was given the opportunity to be involved in the preparation of the Final
Proposal.
C.	Description of Sites
Note: For this threshold criterion, EPA may seek further clarification of responses, if
needed, during the selection review process.
For each site, provide the following:
1.	List the site name and address and describe its operational history, environmental
concerns, and its current site use and activity.
2.	If you determine the site is not eligible for funding without a property-specific
determination, then you will need to apply for a property-specific determination.
To apply, please refer to Appendix 4.
Note: EPA may use available information to verify that the site is eligible for
funding.
Initial Proposals—Cleanup Grants
Page 25

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
3.	If the site is contaminated with petroleum, describe whether LUST trust fund
money has been spent at this site or whether the site is subject to a response under
the Oil Pollution Act (see Appendix 3).
4.	Identify how the site became contaminated.
5.	Describe how you took ownership of the site (e.g., tax foreclosure) and date of
acquisition.
Note: applicants will be required to supply documentation reflecting ownership of
the property before the final award is made.
6.	Describe whether you are responsible for any of the environmental concerns at
the site.
7.	Summarize the site assessment results.
8.	Describe your approach for working with your state voluntary cleanup program or
other relevant response program, if appropriate.
D. Cleanup Authority and Management Structure
Note: EPA will not seek further clarification of responses to this criterion.
1.	Describe how you will oversee the cleanup at the site. Provide a description of the
technical expertise you have to manage the cleanup and a description of any
additional expertise that will be acquired. If you plan to obtain additional
technical expertise, discuss how, consistent with 40 CFR 31.36, you will ensure
that this expertise is in place prior to beginning cleanup activities.
2.	Cleanup response activities often impact adjacent or neighboring properties. For
example, access to neighboring properties may be necessary to conduct the
cleanup, perform confirmation sampling, or monitor offsite migration of
contamination. If this type of access is needed, provide your plan to acquire
access to the relevant property.
Initial Proposals—Cleanup Grants
Page 26

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
E.	Cost Share
Note: EPA will not seek further clarification of responses to this criterion.
Cleanup grant recipients are required by the new Brownfields Law to provide a 20
percent cost share.6 This cost share is calculated as 20 percent of the total federal cleanup
funds awarded. For example, if you are applying for $1 million of federal cleanup funds,
you must provide a cost share of an additional $200,000. The cost share may be in the
form of a contribution of money, labor, material, or services from a non-federal source. If
the cost share is in the form of contribution of labor, material, or other services, it must
be for an eligible and allowable expense under the grant and not for ineligible expenses,
such as administrative costs (see Appendix 2 for a discussion of prohibited costs).
1.	Describe your plans for providing the cost share as required for this cleanup
program grant.
Cleanup grant applicants may petition EPA to waive the cost share requirement if it
would place an undue hardship on the eligible entity. EPA will consider hardship waiver
requests on a case-by-case basis and will approve such requests on a limited basis. Undue
hardship may be defined as bankruptcy or such other indicator of distress, including low
per-capita income, unemployment rate above national average, or unemployment or
economic adjustment problems resulting from severe short-term or long-term changes in
economic conditions. Applicants should contact their regional representative to discuss
applying for a hardship waiver prior to submitting their Initial Proposal.
2.	If you are requesting a hardship waiver of the cost share, provide an explanation
for the basis of your request as part of your proposal.
F.	Letter from the State or Tribal Environmental Authority
Note: EPA will not seek further clarification of responses to this criterion.
For an applicant other than a state or tribal environmental authority, provide a letter from
the appropriate state or tribal environmental authority acknowledging that the applicant
plans to conduct cleanup activities. If you are applying for multiple grant programs, you
need only submit one letter acknowledging the relevant grant activities. Provide as an
attachment.
6Applicants for a cleanup grant may use fees from borrowers, interest on loans,
repayments of loan principal, and other "program income" to meet the cost share requirement.
However, if a cleanup grant applicant plans to use anticipated program income for cost share, the
applicant also must demonstrate how alternative sources for obtaining money, labor, material, or
services can be used to meet its cost share requirement if program income is less than anticipated
during the performance period for the grant.
Initial Proposals—Cleanup Grants	Page 27

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Ranking Criteria
A.	Community Need (a maximum of 40 points may be received for this criterion)
1.	Provide a detailed description of the target community that the project(s) will
benefit. Include demographic information and indicators such as the poverty rate,
unemployment rate, special community situations (e.g., population size), or other
environmental justice factors that support community need relating directly to this
project (e.g., low-income and/or minority communities; sensitive populations,
such as children and pregnant women; or communities disproportionately
impacted by environmental factors).
2.	Characterize the impact of brownfields on your community (or communities) by
describing the extent of brownfields (e.g., size, number, location) and the
economic, health, and/or environmental impacts of the brownfields.
B.	Leveraging of Additional Resources (a maximum of 40 points may be received for this
criterion)
1.	Describe the financial needs for each phase of the project (cleanup and
redevelopment), if known.
2.	Identify the funds (e.g., general revenues, TIF, staff time/in-kind) that your
agency/organization has committed or will commit to meet the needs described
above.
3.	Describe all other funding sources (federal, state, nonprofit, or private) that will
be committed to fill in any remaining funding gaps to ensure the success of this
project.
4.	Describe the extent to which this grant will meet the financial needs described
above and stimulate the availability of the other funding sources.
C.	Ability to Manage Grants (a maximum of 20 points may be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe your ability to manage this grant or describe the system(s) you have in
place to hire the requisite expertise.
2.	Describe your history of managing federal funds generally. You must identify and
provide information regarding the status of any adverse audit findings from an
OMB Circular A-133 audit, an audit conducted by a federal, state, tribal, or local
government inspector general or similar organization, or audits conducted by the
U.S. General Accounting Office. You also must note whether you are, or have
previously been, required to comply with special "high risk" terms and conditions
under agency regulations implementing OMB Circular A-102.
Initial Proposals—Cleanup Grants
Page 28

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
STOP
This is the end of the Initial Proposal
Applicants will be notified if and when to
complete the Final Proposal
When EPA invites applicants to submit Final Proposals, EPA may provide additional
information about Final Proposal guidelines.
Page 29

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
5^nnan^ro£Osa^Guidelines
Final Proposals will be requested at the invitation of EPA, after review of Initial Proposals.
An invitation to submit a Final Proposal for one grant program is not indicative of an
invitation to submit a proposal for all grant programs.
Applicants must submit separate proposals for each grant program for which they receive an
invitation. Applicants should not resubmit their Initial Proposals. Generally, Final Proposals
should be between 7 and 10 pages in length, not including attachments. Final Proposal
attachments should be kept to a minimum. You should not resubmit attachments provided in the
Initial Proposal. EPA will not review or evaluate attachments such as strategies or plans
developed for other programs, newspaper articles, and videotapes. Information in these types of
attachments should be distilled and incorporated into the responses to criteria.
The final proposal for each type of grant funding should consist of the following:
Cover Letter (optional)
Proposal Title and Name of Applicant
Budget
Responses to Ranking Criteria
Attachments (if applicable)
Final Proposals
Page 30

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
5.1. Assessment Grants
Assessment Grant Proposal Budget (a maximum of 15 points may be received for this criterion)
Provide the proposed budget(s) for your proposal. Note that you must provide separate budgets
for funds intended for use on petroleum-contaminated sites andfunds intendedfor use on
sites contaminated by hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants (including
hazardous substances co-mingled with petroleum). The budgets should show the distribution of
funds, including cost estimates for each of the proposed activities.
A local government may use up to 10 percent of its grant funds for monitoring the health of
populations exposed to one or more hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants from a
brownfield site and monitoring and enforcement of any institutional control used to prevent
human exposure to any hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant from a brownfield site.
To effectively oversee assessments and cleanups, local governments may use grant funds
(subject to the 10 percent limit) for other related program development and implementation
activities.
Typical tasks might include "Phase I Assessments," "Community Outreach," and "Cleanup
Planning." Provide footnotes to the budget table describing each task.
Sample Format for Budget Description

Project Tasks
Budget Categories
Task 1
Task 2
Task 3
Task 4
Total
Personnel (programmatic
costs only)





Travel





Equipment1





Supplies





Contractual2





Other (specify)





Total





1	EPA defines equipment as items that cost $5,000 or more with a useful life of more than one
year. Items costing less than $5,000 are considered supplies.
2	Applicants must comply with the procurement procedures contained in 40 CFR 31.36, or for
nonprofits, with 40 CFR 30.40.
Final Proposals—Assessment Grants
Page 31

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Assessment Grant Criteria
Provide responses to the following assessment ranking criteria:
Note: Many of the criteria are common to all three types of grants. Applicants may copy
responses to common criteria and provide these responses in the appropriate place for each type
of grant requested. Final proposals will be submitted separately for each type of grant and will
be reviewed independently, so each proposal must stand on its own merits.
A.	Sustainable Reuse of Brownfields/Development Potential (a maximum of 15 points may
be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe your vision for promoting sustainable reuse of brownfields and
preventing the creation of future brownfields. Describe how you will implement
this vision and how it will protect and restore the quality of the natural
environment, improve the quality of life for the community, broaden prospects for
future generations, and help reduce resource consumption.
2.	Describe the redevelopment plans for the sites or targeted areas, and how those
plans fit into your community's master plan, economic development plan, or
economic development activities.
3.	Describe how this project will stimulate economic development, including the
creation of jobs, capital investment, and increases to the local tax base.
B.	Reduction of Threats to Human Health and the Environment (a maximum of 20 points
may be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe how the funds will be used to address/facilitate the identification and/or
reduction of threats to human health and the environment within the target area
(including cancer, asthma, or birth defects) that may be associated with exposure
to hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants, or petroleum.
2.	Describe how, by conducting the activities mentioned in B. 1. above, your actions
could affect the environment. If your actions could affect the environment,
describe the alternatives you would use to mitigate the environmental impacts of
your actions.
3.	Describe sensitive populations (e.g., children, pregnant women, minority or low-
income communities, etc.) in the community surrounding the target area or site(s)
and how you derived this information.
4.	Describe how the funds provided by this grant will be used to address/facilitate
the identification and/or reduction of threats to the health and welfare of these
sensitive populations.
5.	Describe whether you are working with your local public health department to
ensure that public health issues are considered during the redevelopment process.
Final Proposals—Assessment Grants
Page 32

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
C.	Reuse of Existing Infrastructure (a maximum of 15 points may be received for this
criterion)
1.	Describe whether the project will use existing infrastructure (e.g., public
transportation, utilities, buildings) or require its expansion.
2.	Describe whether the project will encourage the development or redevelopment of
properties with existing infrastructure and describe the infrastructure that may be
reused.
D.	Greenspace/Open Space (a maximum of 15 points may be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe the extent to which a grant would facilitate the creation, preservation, or
addition to a park, greenway, undeveloped property, recreational property, or
other property used for nonprofit purposes.
2.	Explain how this project integrates other efforts to improve/redevelop
brownfields, including ongoing project(s) proposed under this grant.
E.	Community Involvement (a maximum of 20 points may be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe how you involved the local community in the development of this
proposal. Provide a list of the community-based organizations involved and a
contact person, phone number, and a brief description of the organization's
activities and representation (these organizations may include, but are not limited
to, local citizen groups, environmental organizations, civic organizations, local
business groups and institutions, educational institutions, and local labor
organizations).
Note: EPA may conduct reference checks to ensure that organizations identified
are supportive and involved with the brownfields project.
2.	Describe your efforts and/or plans to develop partnerships at the local, state,
and/or tribal level with other stakeholders to ensure appropriate and sustainable
cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields.
3.	Discuss your plan for involving the local community (e.g., neighborhood
organizations, citizens' groups, borrowers, redevelopers, and other stakeholders)
in cleanup decisions or reuse planning.
4.	Describe the means by which you will communicate the progress of your project
to citizens, including plans for communicating in languages indigenous to the
community.
Final Proposals—Assessment Grants
Page 33

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
5.2. Revolving Loan Fund Grants
RLF Grant Proposal Budget (a maximum of 15 points may be received for this criterion)
Provide the proposed budget(s) for your proposal. It must reflect your cost share. Note that you
must provide separate budgets for funds intended for use on petroleum-contaminated sites and
funds intended for use on sites contaminated by hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants (including hazardous substances co-mingled with petroleum). The budget(s)
should show the distribution of funds, including cost estimates for each of the proposed
activities.
A local government may use up to 10 percent of its grant funds for monitoring the health of
populations exposed to one or more hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants from a
brownfield site and monitoring and enforcement of any institutional control used to prevent
human exposure to any hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant from a brownfield site.
To effectively oversee assessments and cleanups, local governments may use grant funds
(subject to the 10 percent limit) for other related program development and implementation
activities.
Typical tasks would include "Establishing the Revolving Fund," "Marketing the Revolving
Fund," "Operating the Revolving Fund," "Cleanup Planning," and "Overseeing Site Cleanup."
Provide footnotes to the budget table describing each task.
Sample Format for Budget Description

Project Tasks for Loans (at least 60 percent of amount requested)
Budget
Categories
Task 1
Task 2
Task 3
Task 4
Total
Personnel
(programmatic
costs only)





Travel





Equipment1





Supplies





Contractual2





Other (specify)





Subtotal:





Final Proposals—Revolving Loan Fund Grants
Page 34

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY

Project Tasks for Subgrants (no more than 40 percent of amount
requested)
Budget
Categories
Task 1
Task 2
Task 3
Task 4
Total
Personnel
(programmatic
costs only)





Travel





Equipment1





Supplies





Contractual2





Other





Subtotal:





Total





Cost share
(20 percent of total RLF federal funding award)
1	EPA defines equipment as items that cost $5,000 or more with a useful life of more than one
year. Items costing less than $5,000 are considered supplies.
2	Applicants must comply with the procurement procedures contained in 40 CFR 31.36, or for
nonprofits, with 40 CFR 30.40.
Revolving Loan Fund Grant Criteria
Provide responses to the following Revolving Loan Fund ranking criteria:
Note: Many of the criteria are common to all three types of grants. Applicants may copy
responses to common criteria and provide these responses in the appropriate place for each type
of grant requested. Final proposals will be submitted separately for each type of grant and will
be reviewed independently, so each proposal must stand on its own merits.
A. Business Plan (a maximum of 20 points may be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe your anticipated loan structure (amount, interest, time frame for
repayment).
2.	Describe your advertising plan and any other redevelopment incentives (for
example, TIFs, tax incentives, tax credits, state funding programs) that may be
offered as part of a package to assist with promoting the RLF program.
3.	Describe how your proposal will promote the long-term availability of funds from
a revolving loan fund. If you are planning to provide cleanup subgrants using
Final Proposals—Revolving Loan Fund Grants
Page 35

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
your RLF grant, describe how this will affect the long-term availability of your
revolving loan fund.
4. Describe how you will make full and effective use of the RLF within the grant
period. Include in your discussion an implementation schedule and time line for
your use of the RLF funds.
B.	Sustainable Reuse of Brownfields/Development Potential (a maximum of 15 points may
be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe your vision for promoting sustainable reuse of brownfields and
preventing the creation of future brownfields. Describe how you will implement
this vision and how it will protect and restore the quality of the natural
environment, improve the quality of life for the community, broaden prospects for
future generations, and help reduce resource consumption.
2.	Describe the redevelopment plans for the sites or targeted areas, and how those
plans fit into your community's master plan, economic development plan, or
economic development activities.
3.	Describe how this project will stimulate economic development, including the
creation of jobs, capital investment, and increases to the local tax base.
C.	Reduction of Threats to Human Health and the Environment (a maximum of 20 points
may be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe how the funds will be used to address/facilitate the identification and/or
reduction of threats to human health and the environment within the target area
(including cancer, asthma, or birth defects) that may be associated with exposure
to hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants, or petroleum.
2.	Describe how, by conducting the activities mentioned in C. 1. above, your actions
could affect the environment. If your actions could affect the environment,
describe the alternatives you would use to mitigate the environmental impacts of
your actions.
3.	Describe sensitive populations (e.g., children, pregnant women, minority or low-
income communities, etc.) in the community surrounding the target area or site(s)
and how you derived this information.
4.	Describe how the funds provided by this grant will be used to address/facilitate
the identification and/or reduction of threats to the health and welfare of these
sensitive populations.
5.	Describe whether you are working with your local public health department to
ensure that public health issues are considered during the redevelopment process.
Final Proposals—Revolving Loan Fund Grants
Page 36

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
D.	Reuse of Existing Infrastructure (a maximum of 15 points may be received for this
criterion)
1.	Describe whether the project will use existing infrastructure (e.g., public
transportation, utilities, buildings) or require its expansion.
2.	Describe whether the project will encourage the development or redevelopment of
properties with existing infrastructure and describe the infrastructure that may be
reused.
E.	Greenspace/Open Space (a maximum of 15 points may be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe the extent to which a grant would facilitate the creation, preservation, or
addition to a park, greenway, undeveloped property, recreational property, or
other property used for nonprofit purposes.
2.	Explain how this project integrates other efforts to improve/redevelop
brownfields, including ongoing project(s) proposed under this grant.
F.	Community Involvement (a maximum of 20 points may be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe how you involved the local community in the development of this
proposal. Provide a list of the community-based organizations involved and a
contact person, phone number, and a brief description of the organization's
activities and representation (these organizations may include, but are not limited
to, local citizen groups, environmental organizations, civic organizations, local
business groups and institutions, education institutions, and local labor
organizations).
Note: EPA may conduct reference checks to ensure that organizations identified
are supportive and involved with the brownfields project.
2.	Describe your efforts and/or plans to develop partnerships at the local, state,
and/or tribal level with other stakeholders to ensure appropriate and sustainable
cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields.
3.	Discuss your plan for involving the local community (e.g., neighborhood
organizations, citizens' groups, borrowers, redevelopers, and other stakeholders)
in cleanup decisions or reuse planning.
4.	Describe the means by which you will communicate the progress of your project
to citizens, including plans for communicating in languages indigenous to the
community.
Final Proposals—Revolving Loan Fund Grants
Page 37

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
5.3. Cleanup Grants
Cleanup Grant Budget (a maximum of 15 points may be received for this criterion)
Provide the proposed budget(s) for your proposal. It must reflect your cost share. Note that you
must provide separate budgets for funds intended for use on petroleum-contaminated sites and
funds intended for use on sites contaminated by hazardous substances, pollutants, or
contaminants (including hazardous substances co-mingled with petroleum). The budget(s)
should show the distribution of funds, including cost estimates for each of the proposed activities
A local government may use up to 10 percent of its grant funds for monitoring the health of
populations exposed to one or more hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants from a
brownfield site and monitoring and enforcement of any institutional control used to prevent
human exposure to any hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant from a brownfield site.
To effectively oversee assessments and cleanups, local governments may use grant funds
(subject to the 10 percent limit) for other related program development and implementation
activities.
Typical tasks would include "Site Cleanup" and "Cleanup Planning." Provide footnotes to the
budget table describing each task.
Sample Format for Budget Description

Project Tasks
Budget
Categories
Task 1
Task 2
Task 3
Task 4
Total
Personnel
(programmatic
costs only)





Travel





Equipment1





Supplies





Contractual2





Other (specify)





Total





Cost Share
(20 percent of total Cleanup Award)
1	EPA defines equipment as items that cost $5,000 or more with a useful life of more than one
year. Items costing less than $5,000 are considered supplies.
2	Applicants must comply with the procurement procedures contained in 40 CFR 31.36, or for
nonprofits, with 40 CFR 30.40.
Final Proposals—Cleanup Grants
Page 38

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Cleanup Grant Criteria
Provide responses to the following cleanup grant ranking criteria:
Note: Many of the criteria are common to all three types of grants. Applicants may copy
responses to common criteria and provide these responses in the appropriate place for each type
of grant requested. Final proposals will be submitted separately for each type of grant and will
be reviewed independently, so each proposal must stand on its own merits.
A.	Sustainable Reuse of Brownfields/Development Potential (a maximum of 15 points may
be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe your vision for promoting sustainable reuse of brownfields and
preventing the creation of future brownfields. Describe how you will implement
this vision and how it will protect and restore the quality of the natural
environment, improve the quality of life for the community, broaden prospects for
future generations, and help reduce resource consumption.
2.	Describe the redevelopment plans for the sites or targeted areas, and how those
plans fit into your community's master plan, economic development plan, or
economic development activities.
3.	Describe how this project will stimulate economic development, including the
creation of jobs, capital investment, and increases to the local tax base.
B.	Reduction of Threats to Human Health and the Environment (a maximum of 20 points
may be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe how the funds will be used to address/facilitate the identification and/or
reduction of threats to human health and the environment within the target area
(including cancer, asthma, or birth defects) that may be associated with exposure
to hazardous substances, pollutants, contaminants, or petroleum.
2.	Describe how, by conducting the activities mentioned in B. 1. above, your actions
could affect the environment. If your actions could affect the environment,
describe the alternatives you would use to mitigate the environmental impacts of
your actions.
3.	Describe sensitive populations (e.g., children, pregnant women, minority or low-
income communities, etc.) in the community surrounding the target area or site(s)
and how you derived this information.
4.	Describe how the funds provided by this grant will be used to address/facilitate
the identification and/or reduction of threats to the health and welfare of these
sensitive populations.
5.	Describe whether you are working with your local public health department to
ensure that public health issues are considered during the redevelopment process.
Final Proposals—Cleanup Grants
Page 39

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
C.	Reuse of Existing Infrastructure (a maximum of 15 points may be received for this
criterion)
1.	Describe whether the project will use existing infrastructure (e.g., public
transportation, utilities, buildings) or require its expansion.
2.	Describe whether the project will encourage the development or redevelopment of
properties with existing infrastructure and describe the infrastructure that may be
reused.
D.	Greenspace/Open Space (a maximum of 15 points may be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe the extent to which a grant would facilitate the creation, preservation, or
addition to a park, greenway, undeveloped property, recreational property, or
other property used for nonprofit purposes.
2.	Explain how this project integrates other efforts to improve/redevelop
brownfields, including ongoing project(s) proposed under this grant.
E.	Community Involvement (a maximum of 20 points may be received for this criterion)
1.	Describe how you involved the local community in the development of this
proposal. Provide a list of the community-based organizations involved and a
contact person, phone number, and a brief description of the organization's
activities and representation (these organizations may include, but are not limited
to, local citizen groups, environmental organizations, civic organizations, local
business groups and institutions, education institutions, and local labor
organizations).
Note: EPA may conduct reference checks to ensure that organizations identified
are supportive and involved with the brownfields project.
2.	Describe your efforts and/or plans to develop partnerships at the local, state,
and/or tribal level with other stakeholders to ensure appropriate and sustainable
cleanup and redevelopment of brownfields.
3.	Discuss your plan for involving the local community (e.g., neighborhood
organizations, citizens' groups, borrowers, redevelopers, and other stakeholders)
in cleanup decisions or reuse planning.
4.	Describe the means by which you will communicate the progress of your project
to citizens, including plans for communicating in languages indigenous to the
community.
Final Proposals—Cleanup Grants
Page 40

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Appendix 1. EPA Regional and Headquarters
Contacts
Regions and States
Address and Phone Number
EPA Region 1
Lynne Jennings
CT, ME, MA,
NH, RI, VT
One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (Mailcode H10)
Boston, MA 02114-2023
Phone (617) 918-1210 Fax (617) 918-1291
jennings.lynne@epa.gov
EPA Region 2
Larry D'Andrea
NJ, NY, PR, VI
290 Broadway, 18th Floor
New York, NY 10007
Phone (212) 637-4314 Fax (212) 637-4360
dandrea.larry@epa.gov
EPA Region 3
Tom Stolle
DE, DC, MD,
PA, VA, WV
1650 Arch Street (3HS34)
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029
Phone (215) 814-3129 Fax (215) 814-5518
stolle.tom@epa.gov
EPA Region 4
Mickey Hartnett
AL, FL, GA, KY,
MS, NC, SC, TN
Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street
Atlanta, GA 30303
Phone (404) 562-8661 Fax (404) 562-8628
hartnett.mickey@epa.gov
EPA Region 5
Deborah Orr
IL, IN, MI, MN,
OH, WI
77 West Jackson Boulevard (SE-4J)
Chicago, IL 60604-3507
Phone (312) 886-7576 Fax (312) 886- 6741
orr.deborah@epa.gov
EPA Region 6
Stan Hitt
AR, LA, NM,
OK, TX
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200 (6SF-PB)
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
Phone (214) 665-6736 Fax (214) 665-6660
hitt.stan@epa.gov
EPA Region 7
Susan Klein
IA, KS, MO, NE
901 N. 5th Street
Kansas City, KS 66101
Phone (913) 551-7786 Fax (913) 551-8688
klein.susan@epa.gov
EPA Region 8
Kathie Atencio
CO, MT, ND,
SD, UT, WY
999 18th Street, Suite 300 (EPR)
Denver, CO 80202- 2466
Phone (303) 312-6803 Fax (303) 312-6067
atencio.kathie@epa.gov
EPA Region 9
Jim Hanson
AZ, CA, HI, NV,
AS, GU
75 Hawthorne Street, SFD 1-1
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone (415) 972-3188 Fax (415) 947-3528
hanson.jim@epa.gov
EPA Region 10
Tim Brincefield
AK, ID, OR, WA
1200 Sixth Avenue (ECL-112)
Seattle, WA98101
Phone (206) 553-2100 Fax (206) 553-0124
brincefield.timothy@epa.gov
Appendix 1. Contacts
Page 41

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Regions and States
Address and Phone Number
EPA
Headquarters
Myra Blakely

U.S. Postal Service mailing address:
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, MC 5105(T)
Washington, DC 20005
Overnight Delivery mailing address:
EPA West Building
1301 Constitution Avenue, Room 2402
Washington, DC 20460
Phone (202) 566-2777 Fax (202) 566-2757
blakely.myra@epa.gov
Appendix 1. Contacts
Page 42

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
A|)j)endi^^rohibition^i^s^^unch
Grant funds may not be used for the payment of:
A penalty or fine.
A federal cost-share requirement (for example, a cost share required by other federal
funds).
An administrative cost (see below).
A response cost at a brownfield site for which the recipient of the grant or loan is
potentially liable under CERCLA §107.
A cost of compliance with any federal law, excluding the cost of compliance with laws
applicable to the cleanup.
Unallowable costs (e.g. lobbying and fund raising) under OMB Circulars A-21, A-87, or
A-122, as applicable.
Administrative Cost Prohibition
The Brownfields Law prohibits the use of any "part of a grant or loan" for the payment of an
administrative cost. In implementing this prohibition, EPA has made a distinction between
prohibited administrative costs and eligible programmatic costs.
A.	Administrative Costs. Prohibited administrative costs are direct costs, including those in
the form of salaries, benefits, contractual costs, supplies, and data processing charges,
incurred to comply with most provisions of the Uniform Administrative Requirements for
Grants contained in 40 CFR Part 30 or 40 CFR Part 31. Direct costs for grant
administration are ineligible even if the grantee or subgrantee is required to carry out the
activity under the grant agreement. Prohibited administrative costs also are all indirect
costs under OMB Circulars A-21, A-87, and A-122, and Subpart 31.2 of the Federal
Acquisition Regulation.
B.	Statutory Exclusions. The Brownfields Law provides that the administrative cost
prohibition does not apply to:
1.	Investigation and identification of the extent of contamination;
2.	Design and performance of a response action; or
3.	Monitoring of a natural resource.
C.	Programmatic Costs. EPA has determined that the administrative cost prohibition does
not apply to "programmatic" costs, i.e., costs for activities that are integral to achieving
the purpose of the grant, even if EPA considered the costs to be "administrative" under
the prior brownfields program. For example, the prohibition does not apply, under a
revolving loan fund grant, to costs incurred in making loans (such as the costs of loan
processing, legal fees, and professional services) or overseeing the borrower's activities
to ensure compliance with relevant and appropriate requirements of the National
Appendix 2. Prohibitions on Use of Funds
Page 43

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Contingency Plan (see 40 CFR §300.700 et seq.). These costs are programmatic, not
administrative. Direct costs, as defined in the applicable OMB Cost Principle Circular,
for the following programmatic activities are not subject to the administrative cost
prohibition:
1.	In the case of grants for site characterization and assessment, expenses for
inventorying, characterizing, assessing, and conducting planning related to brownfield
sites.
2.	In the case of grants for capitalization of revolving loan funds:
(a)	expenses for making and managing loans,
(b)	expenses, including financial management expenses, for operating the
revolving fund, and
(c)	expenses for making and managing subgrants under CERCLA
§104(k)(3)(B)(ii).
3.	In the case of grants for direct use by eligible entities and nonprofit organizations in
remediation of brownfield sites under CERCLA §104(k)(3)(A)(ii), expenses for site
remediation activities.
4.	In the case of grants for implementation of brownfields programs under CERCLA
§104(k)(6), expenses for providing training, research, and technical assistance.
5.	Costs incurred for complying with procurement provisions of 40 CFR Part 30 and 31
are considered eligible programmatic costs only if the procurement contract is for
services or products that are direct costs for performing activities specified above in
Section B, "Statutory Exclusions," or Section C, "Programmatic Costs."
6.	Costs for performance and financial reporting required under 40 CFR 30.51 and 30.52,
and 40 CFR 31.40 and 31.41 are eligible programmatic costs. Performance and financial
reporting are essential programmatic tools for both the recipient and EPA to ensure that
grants are carried out in accordance with statutory and regulatory requirements.
Eligible programmatic costs can include expenses for travel, training, equipment, supplies,
reference materials, and contractual support if those costs are reasonable and allocable to tasks
specified in a grantee's approved scope of work for carrying out the activities described in
Section B, "Statutory Exclusions," or Section C, "Programmatic Costs."
Eligible programmatic costs may be used to help meet the RLF capitalization grant and direct
cleanup grant recipients' 20 percent cost share. Prohibited administrative costs may not be used
to meet recipients' cost share.
For further information on these prohibitions, contact your Regional Brownfields Contact listed
in Appendix 1.
Appendix 2. Prohibitions on Use of Funds
Page 44

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Appendix 3. Guidance on Sites Eligible for
Bro\^ifield^^undin|^ndei^ERCL^^104(k)
Contents	Page
3.1	Introduction	46
3.2	General Definition of Brownfield Site	46
3.3	Additional Areas Specifically Eligible for Funding 	46
3.3.1	Contamination by Controlled Substance	47
3.3.2	Contamination by Petroleum or Petroleum Product 	47
3.3.3	Mine-scarred Lands	48
3.4	Particular Classes of Sites Not Eligible for Funding or Eligible Only Under Property-
specific Determinations	49
3.4.1	Facilities Subject to CERCLA Removal Actions 	51
3.4.2	Facilities Subject to Unilateral Administrative Orders, Court Orders,
Administrative Orders on Consent, or Judicial Consent Decrees Issued to or
Entered into by Parties Under CERCLA 	51
3.4.3	Facilities Listed (or Proposed for Listing) on the National Priorities List 	51
3.4.4	Facilities to which a permit has been issued by the United States or an authorized
state under the Solid Waste Disposal Act (RCRA), the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, or the Safe Drinking Water Act 52
3.4.5	RCRA Sites 	53
3.4.6	Land disposal units that have filed a closure notification under Subtitle C of
RCRA and to which closure requirements have been specified in a closure plan or
permit	54
3.4.7	Facilities that are subject to the jurisdiction, custody, or control of the United
States government	54
3.4.8	Sites Contaminated with PCBs 	54
3.4.9	Exclusion of LUST Trust Fund Sites	55
Appendix 3. Guidance on Sites Eligible for Brownfields Funding
Page 45

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
3.1 Introduction
The information provided in this appendix should be used by applicants as a guide in
determining the eligibility of any property for brownfields funding. The following guidance
provides the EPA's preliminary views on the types of sites that may be appropriate for funding.
EPA is providing this information as guidance to applicants to assist you in developing your
proposals for funding under CERCLA §104(k). This guidance provides preliminary
interpretations and policy guidance that EPA intends to use as a guide when we exercise our
authority to award funds under §104(k). However, we believe that further development may
impact our view of these provisions, and we will reevaluate our preliminary views in light of the
factual information we receive with each proposal, as well as over the course of implementing
the §104(k) grant program.
This guidance does not impose legally-binding requirements. Applicants are free to raise
questions about the appropriateness of these preliminary views, and EPA will consider whether
these preliminary views are appropriate at that time. Any decision by EPA to apply this
preliminary guidance will be made based on the applicable statutory provisions.
3.2 General Definition of Brownfield Site
The new Brownfields Law defines a "Brownfield Site" to mean:
"...real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated
by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or
contaminant."
Brownfield sites include all "real property," including residential, as well as commercial and
industrial properties. Brownfields funding may be provided for the assessment and/or cleanup
of the presence or potential presence of indoor and outdoor contaminants at a brownfield sites.
3.3 Additional Areas Specifically Eligible for Funding
The Brownfields Law identifies three types of properties that are specifically eligible for
funding:
1.	Sites contaminated by controlled substances.
2.	Sites contaminated by petroleum or a petroleum product.
3.	Mine-scarred lands.
See below for guidance on determining the scope of each of these three types of sites. Applicants
should identify properties included within their funding proposals that fall within the scope of
any of the following three areas.
Appendix 3. Guidance on Sites Eligible for Brownfields Funding
Page 46

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
3.3.1	Contamination by Controlled Substance
Sites eligible for funding include real property, including residential property, that is
contaminated by a controlled substance. A "controlled substance" is defined under the
Controlled Substances Act as "a drug or other substance, or immediate precursor, included in
schedule I, II, III, IV, or V of part B of this title (21 USC Section 812). The term does not
include distilled spirits, wine, malt beverages, or tobacco..."
For example, sites eligible for brownfields funding may include private residences, formerly
used for the manufacture and/or distribution of methamphetamines or other illegal drugs where
there is a presence or potential presence of controlled substances or pollutants, contaminants, or
hazardous substances (e.g., red phosphorous, kerosene, acids).
3.3.2	Contamination by Petroleum or Petroleum Product
Petroleum-contaminated sites (except those sites receiving LUST trust fund monies) are eligible
for brownfields funding. Petroleum-contaminated sites (or portions of properties contaminated
with petroleum) that are eligible for brownfields funding include certain sites that are not
underground storage tank (UST) sites, as described below. Petroleum is defined under CERCLA
as "crude oil or any fraction thereof which is not otherwise specifically listed or designated as a
hazardous substance under that section."
Applicants should note that the Brownfields Law restricts eligibility for brownfields funding to
petroleum contaminated sites that EPA or the state determines:
1.	Are of "relatively low risk" compared with other "petroleum-only" sites in the state; and
2.	For which there is no viable responsible party and will be assessed, investigated, or
cleaned up by a person that is not potentially liable for cleaning up the site; and
3.	Are not subject to a corrective action order under the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA §9003(h) order).
In the case of proposals that include requests for an assessment or direct cleanup grant, or a grant
for a revolving loan fund, to address petroleum-contaminated sites, applicants are encouraged to
indicate whether the site meets each of the criteria listed above. An explanation of each of these
three criteria is provided below.
Relatively Low Risk:
Applicants whose brownfield site(s) include properties or portions of properties contaminated
with petroleum or petroleum products are encouraged to provide information in their proposal
indicating that the property represents a relatively low risk (compared to other petroleum-only
sites). Our preliminary view is that the following types of petroleum-contaminated sites are high
risk sites, or are not of "relatively low risk." Our preliminary view is that petroleum-
contaminated sites that do not fall within scope of high risk sites, will be considered to be
"relatively low-risk" sites.
• "High risk" sites currently being cleaned up using LUST trust fund monies.
Appendix 3. Guidance on Sites Eligible for Brownfields Funding
Page 47

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
• Any petroleum-contaminated site that currently is subject to a response under the Oil
Pollution Act (OPA).
Note: Any site that does not fall under any of the provisions listed above would be considered to
be of relatively low risk for purposes of determining eligibility for a brownfields grant.
"No Viable Responsible Partv"and "Cleaned Up by a Person Not Potentially Liable":
Brownfields funding may be awarded to eligible entities for the assessment and cleanup of
petroleum-contaminated sites in those instances where the eligible entity has not caused or
contributed to the petroleum contamination. When responding to the threshold criteria in their
funding proposals, applicants are asked to indicate whether or not the applicant owns the site or
sites for which funding is requested and describe whether the applicant is responsible for any of
the environmental concerns at the site(s).
Please note that eligibility for a brownfields grant DOES NOT waive liability under RCRA
Subtitle I, OP A, or any applicable state underground storage tank regulations.
"Not Subject to any Order Issued under RCRA §9003(11)":
Any site that is under a RCRA Subtitle I corrective action order (RCRA §9003(h)) is not eligible
for a grant.
Applicants should note that any determination that a site is of "relatively low risk" has meaning
solely for the purposes of determining eligibility for a brownfields grant and has no effect on
potential liability under RCRA §9003(h) (for the costs of corrective action and enforcement) or
liability under other federal statutes such as under §311(c) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) and
§1002 of OP A (for removal costs and damages that result from the discharge of oil into
navigable waters).
3.3.3 Mine-scarred Lands
Under the new Brownfields Law, mine-scarred lands are eligible for brownfields funding.
Applicants for brownfields funding that include properties within their proposal that they believe
fall within the following definition of mine-scarred lands are encouraged to provide in the site
description section of their proposals information identifying and describing such properties.
EPA's preliminary view is that "mine scarred lands" are those lands, associated waters, and
surrounding watersheds where extraction, beneficiation, or processing of ores and minerals
(including coal) has occurred. For the purposes of this section, the definition of extraction,
beneficiation, and processing is the definition found at 40 CFR 261.4(b)(7).
Mine-scarred lands include abandoned coal mines and lands scarred by strip mining.
Appendix 3. Guidance on Sites Eligible for Brownfields Funding
Page 48

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Examples of coal mine scarred lands may include, but are not limited to:
abandoned surface coal mine areas,
abandoned deep coal mines,
abandoned coal processing areas,
abandoned coal refuse areas,
acid or alkaline mine drainage, and
associated waters affected by abandoned coal mine (or acid mine) drainage or runoff,
including stream beds and adjacent watersheds.
Examples of non-coal hard rock mine scarred lands may include, but are not limited to:
abandoned surface and deep mines,
abandoned waste rock or spent ore piles,
abandoned roads constructed wholly or partially of waste rock or spent ore,
abandoned tailings, disposal ponds, or piles,
abandoned ore concentration mills,
abandoned smelters,
abandoned cyanide heap leach piles,
abandoned dams constructed wholly or partially or waste rock, tailings, or spent ore,
abandoned dumps or dump areas used for the disposal of waste rock or spent ore,
acid or alkaline rock drainage, and
waters affected by abandoned metal mine drainage or runoff, including stream beds and
adjacent watersheds.
3.4 Particular Classes of Sites Not Eligible for Funding or Eligible Only Under
Property-specific Determinations
EPA excludes the following types of facilities from funding eligibility unless the applicant
fulfills the requirements for demonstrating that the site meets the criteria for a property-specific
determination for funding (see Appendix 4 Guidance for Requests for Property-Specific
Determinations for Funding). Applicants are encouraged to indicate within the site description
section of their proposal if any site or property included within the scope of their funding
proposal falls within the scope of any of the categories of sites listed below. When requesting a
property-specific determination for funding, applicants should follow the instructions provided
in Appendix 4 for indicating that brownfields funding at such sites will ensure protection of
human health and the environment and promote economic development or the creation or
preservation of greenspace or recreational areas. (Note: The following discusses limitations on
funding particular classes of sites. Many of these limitations reflect policy decisions. Where the
limitations are based on statutory provisions, we have noted that.)
Also, please note that in providing funding for brownfield sites, EPA wants to ensure that limited
monies are not provided to a site where EPA has a planned or ongoing enforcement action.
While EPA does not intend that the existence of a planned or ongoing enforcement action will
necessarily disqualify a site from receipt of brownfields funding, EPA does believe it is
necessary that EPA be aware of the existence of any such action in making funding decisions. As
a result, EPA will conduct an investigation to evaluate whether a site is, or will be, subject to an
Appendix 3. Guidance on Sites Eligible for Brownfields Funding
Page 49

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
enforcement action under CERCLA or other federal environmental statutes. EPA is requesting
that applicants identify ongoing or anticipated environmental enforcement actions related to the
brownfield site for which funding is sought.
Sites Not Eligible for Funding Without a Property-Specific Determination
Facilities subject to planned or ongoing CERCLA removal actions.
Facilities listed (or proposed for listing) on the National Priorities List (NPL).
Facilities subject to unilateral administrative orders, court orders, administrative orders on
consent, or judicial consent decrees issued to or entered into by parties under CERCLA.
Facilities that are subject to unilateral administrative orders, court orders, administrative orders
on consent, or judicial consent decrees or to which a permit has been issued by the United
States or an authorized state under the Solid Waste Disposal Act (as amended by the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act), the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA), the
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), or the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
Facilities subject to corrective action orders under RCRA (§3004(u) or §3008(h)) and to which
a corrective action permit or order has been issued or modified to require the implementation
of corrective measures.
Facilities that are land disposal units that have filed a closure notification under Subtitle C of
RCRA and to which closure requirements have been specified in a closure plan or permit.
Facilities that are subject to the jurisdiction, custody or control of the United States
&
government.
NOTE: Land held in trust by the United States government for an Indian tribe is eligible for brownfield
funding.
Facilities where there has been a release of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and are subject
to remediation under TSCA.
Portions of facilities for which funding for remediation has been obtained from the LUST trust
fund.
* Sites not eligible for property-specific funding determinations.
Guidance regarding the scope of each of the funding restrictions listed above is
provided below.
Appendix 3. Guidance on Sites Eligible for Brownfields Funding
Page 50

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
3.4.1 Facilities Subject to CERCLA Removal Actions
Properties (including parcels of properties) where there are removal actions may not receive
funding, unless EPA makes a property-specific determination of funding eligibility.
EPA's preliminary view is that a removal may be identified by the occurrence of one of the
following events, whichever occurs first in time: EPA issues an action memo, EPA issues an
EE/CA approval memo; EPA mobilizes onsite; or EPA issues a notice of federal interest to one
or more potentially responsible parties (PRP(s)), which in emergencies may be made verbally.
Our preliminary view is that, for the purposes of eligibility to receive brownfields funding, and
for no other reason, a removal is complete, i.e., when the actions specified in the action
memorandum are met, or when the contractor has demobilized and left the site (as documented
in the "pollution report" or POLREP). Applicants applying for brownfields funding for sites at
which removal actions are complete must include documentation of the action being complete
with their funding proposal.
Parcels of facilities not affected by removal action at the same property may apply for
brownfields funding and may be eligible for brownfields funding on a property-specific basis.
Property-specific funding decisions will be made in coordination with the on-scene coordinator
(OSC) to ensure that all removals and cleanup activities at the property are conducted in safe and
protective manners and to ensure that the OSC retains the ability to address all risks and
contamination.
Please note that if a federal brownfields-funded site assessment results in identifying the need for
a new removal action, the grantee may continue to expend assessment grant funds on additional
assessment activities. However, any additional expenditure of federal brownfield funds and any
additional site assessment activities should be conducted in coordination with the OSC for the
site.
3.4.2	Facilities Subject to Unilateral Administrative Orders, Court Orders,
Administrative Orders on Consent, or Judicial Consent Decrees Issued to or
Entered into by Parties Under CERCLA
Sites subject to administrative orders, court orders, and consent or judicial consent decrees
issued or entered into by parties under the provisions of CERCLA are not eligible for funding,
even on a property-specific basis. Therefore, applicants should not include such sites within the
scope of their brownfields funding proposals.
3.4.3	Facilities Listed (or Proposed for Listing) on the National Priorities List
CERCLA sites listed on the NPL and sites proposed to be listed on the NPL are not eligible for
brownfields funding. In addition, these sites are not eligible for funding on a property-specific
basis. Therefore, applicants should not include proposed or listed NPL sites within the scope of
brownfields funding proposals.
Appendix 3. Guidance on Sites Eligible for Brownfields Funding
Page 51

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
3.4.4 Facilities to which a permit has been issued by the United States or an authorized
state under the Solid Waste Disposal Act (RCRA), the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, or the Safe Drinking Water Act
Generally, in cases where a property or a portion of a property is permitted under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, Section §1321 of the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water
Act, and/or the Toxic Substances and Control Act, the property, or portion of the property, may
not receive funding, without a property-specific determination. Therefore, applicants should
review the following guidance regarding which types of permitted facilities may not receive
funding unless EPA makes a property-specific determination to provide funding. Applicants
should note that the exclusion for permitted facilities does not extend to facilities with National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits issued under the authorities of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, but is limited to facilities issued permits under the
authorities of the Oil Pollution Act (i.e., §1321 of FWPCA).
In cases where one or more portions of a property are not eligible for funding, the applicant
should identify the specific permit and situation that causes the property to be excluded. In
addition, the applicant must include, within the proposal, documentation that federal brownfields
funding for the assessment or cleanup of the property will further the goals established for
property-specific funding determinations (see attached guidance on property-specific funding
determinations).
Any property or site that has been issued a permit under the federal environmental statutes listed
above (and in accordance with any additional guidelines provided below) may be eligible for
brownfields funding if a grant or loan applicant can demonstrate that brownfields funding will
ensure protection of human health and the environment and promote economic development, or
the preservation of greenspace. EPA will consider providing funding to an eligible entity for
assessment or cleanup activities at the site, on a property-specific basis (see guidance on
documenting eligibility for property-specific funding determinations provided below).
In some cases, a facility may not have a permit or order because they are not in compliance with
federal or state environmental laws requiring that they obtain a permit or the facility has failed to
notify EPA of their regulatory status. Such facilities are not eligible for brownfields funding. For
example, a RCRA treatment unit operator is required to obtain a permit and/or notify EPA of its
operation. An operator that fails to fulfill those obligations will likely not have a permit or order
as EPA will be unaware of their existence. Therefore, it is EPA's preliminary view that such
facilities are ineligible to receive brownfields funds as a result of their failure to comply with a
basic regulatory requirement. Additional guidance on the eligibility of RCRA-permitted
facilities, including facilities under administrative or court orders, including corrective action
orders is provided below.
Appendix 3. Guidance on Sites Eligible for Brownfields Funding
Page 52

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
3.4.5 RCRA Sites
Excluded RCRA Facilities
EPA's preliminary view is that the following types of RCRA facilities may not receive funding
without a property-specific determination .
• RCRA-permittedfacilities.
RCRA interim status facilities with administrative orders requiring the facility to conduct
corrective action or otherwise address contamination, including facilities with orders
issued under the authorities of RCRA §3008(a), §3008(h), §3013, and §7003.
Facilities under court order or under an administrative order on consent or judicial
consent decree under RCRA or CERCLA that require the facility to conduct corrective
action or otherwise address contamination at the facility.
Land disposal units that have notified EPA or an authorized state of their intent to close
and have closure requirements specified in closure plans or permits.
However, if a grant or loan applicant is requesting a grant for property that is excluded, the
applicant may still be eligible for a brownfields grant, if the applicant can demonstrate that
funding will ensure protection of human health and the environment and promote economic
development, or the preservation of greenspace. EPA will consider providing funding to an
applicant for assessment or cleanup activities at such a site on a property-specific basis (see
guidance on documenting eligibility for property-specific funding determinations below).
RCRA Facilities that are Eligible for Funding
EPA's preliminary view is that the following types of RCRA facilities would not fall within the
scope of the exclusion and would be eligible for funding:
RCRA interim status facilities that are not subject to any administrative or judicial order
or consent decree;
RCRA interim status facilities that are subject to administrative or judicial orders that do
not include corrective action requirements or any other cleanup provisions (e.g., RCRA
§3008(a) orders without provisions requiring the owner/operator to address
contamination); and
Parcels of RCRA facilities that are not under the scope of a RCRA permit or
administrative or judicial order.
Appendix 3. Guidance on Sites Eligible for Brownfields Funding
Page 53

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
3.4.6 Land disposal units that have filed a closure notification under Subtitle C of RCRA
and to which closure requirements have been specified in a closure plan or permit.
RCRA hazardous waste landfills that have submitted closure notifications, as required under 40
CFR 264.112(d) or 265.112(d) generally will not be funded. This may include permitted
facilities that have filed notification of closure and for which EPA and/or an authorized state is
proceeding with final closure requirements for the facility. For interim status facilities, this is
done through approval of a closure plan submitted with closure notification; for permitted
facilities, this is routinely done as a modification to the permit, requested by the facility at the
time of closure notification.
3.4.7	Facilities that are subject to the jurisdiction, custody, or control of the United States
government.
Facilities owned by, or under the custody or control of the federal government are not eligible
for brownfields funding, even on a property-specific basis. EPA's preliminary view is that this
exclusion may not extend to:
Privately-owned, Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS)
Privately-owned, Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP)
properties
Other former federal properties that have been disposed of by the U.S. government
Also note that land held in trust by the United States government for an Indian tribe is not
excluded from funding eligibility.
Also note that eligibility for brownfields funding does not alter a private owner's ability to cost
recover from the federal government in cases where the previous federal government owner
remains liable for environmental damages.
3.4.8	Sites Contaminated with PCBs
The Brownfields Law excludes from funding eligibility portions of facilities where there has
been a release of PCBs that are subject to remediation under TSCA.
EPA's preliminary view is that all portions of properties are eligible for brownfields site
assessment grants, except where EPA has initiated an involuntary action with any person to
address PCB contamination. Also, it is our preliminary view that all portions of properties are
eligible for cleanup and RLF grants, except where EPA has an ongoing action against a disposer
to address PCB contamination.
Therefore, portions of properties that are excluded from funding eligibility include those portions
of properties where:
• There is a release (or disposal) of any waste meeting the definition of "PCB
remediation waste" at 40 CFR 761.3; and
Appendix 3. Guidance on Sites Eligible for Brownfields Funding
Page 54

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
• At which EPA has an initiated an involuntary action with any person to address
the PCB contamination. Such involuntary actions could include:
•	Enforcement action for illegal disposal,
•	Regional Administrator's order to characterize or remediate a spill or old
disposal (40 CFR 761.50(b)(3)),
•	Penalty for violation of TSCA remediation requirements,
•	Superfund removal action, or
•	Remediation required under RCRA §3004(u) or §3004(v).
PCBs may be remediated under any one of the following provisions under TSCA:
Section 761.50(b)(3), the directed characterization, remediation, or disposal action.
Section 761.61(a), the self-implementing provision.
An approval issued under §761.61(c), the risk-based provision.
Section 761.61(b) to the level of PCB quantification (i.e., 1 ppm in soil).
An approval issued under §761.77, the coordinated approval provision.
Section 761.79, the decontamination provision.
An existing EPA PCB Spill Cleanup Policy.
Any future policy or guidance addressing PCB spill cleanup or remediation specifically
addressing the remediation of PCBs at brownfield sites.
3.4.9 Exclusion of LUST Trust Fund Sites
The Brownfields Law excludes from eligibility for funding (unless EPA makes a property-
specific determination for funding) those sites (or portions of properties) for which assistance for
response activity has been obtained under Subtitle I of RCRA from the LUST trust fund. EPA's
preliminary view is that this provision may exclude:
UST sites where money is being spent on actual assessment and/or cleanup of
UST/petroleum contamination.
However, in cases where an UST site is located in a state where the state agency has used LUST
trust fund money for state program oversight activities but has not expended LUST trust funds
for specific assessment and/or cleanup activities at the site, the site would not necessarily be
excluded from eligibility for brownfields funding.
Such sites may receive brownfields funding on a property-specific basis, if it is determined that
brownfields funding will protect human health and the environment and the funding will
promote economic development or enable the creation of, preservation of, or addition to
greenspace (see guidance on documenting eligibility for property-specific funding
determinations provided below).
Appendix 3. Guidance on Sites Eligible for Brownfields Funding
Page 55

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Examples of "excluded" sites (i.e., sites receiving LUST trust fund monies) we would consider
to be good candidates to receive brownfields grants or loans.
All USTfields pilots (50 pilots)
Sites (or portions of properties) where an assessment was completed using LUST trust
fund monies and the state has determined that the site is a low-priority UST site and
therefore additional LUST money cannot be provided for the cleanup of petroleum
contamination, but the site still needs some cleanup and otherwise is a good candidate for
economic revitalization.
Sites (or portions of properties) where LUST money was spent for emergency activities,
but then the site was determined to be ineligible for further expenditures of LUST trust
funds, yet the site needs additional funding for continued assessment and/or cleanup that
will contribute to economic revitalization of the site.
Appendix 3. Guidance on Sites Eligible for Brownfields Funding
Page 56

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Appendix 4. Guidance for Requests for Propertv-
^^^^Sjiecific^eterm^nationsJoi^inidmCT^^^^
Contents	Page
4.1	Overview	58
4.2	Funding Limitations	58
4.3	Criteria for Determining Eligibility for Funding on a Property-Specific Basis 	59
4.3.1	Protection of Human Health and the Environment	60
4.3.2	Promote Economic Development 	61
4.3.3	Creation of, Preservation of, or Addition to Parks, Greenways, Undeveloped
Property, other Recreational Property, or Other Property Used for Nonprofit
Purposes	61
4.3.4	Other Documentation	62
4.4	Properties Not Eligible for Brownfields Funding 	62
4.5	Additional Information on Potential for Continual Funding at Sites Subject to Removal
Actions	63
4.6	Additional Information on Potential Funding for Petroleum-contaminated Sites	64
4.7	Eligible Response Sites/Enforcement Limits 	64
Appendix 4. Guidance for Requests for Property-Specific Determinations
Page 57

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
4.1	Overview
Grant applicants must determine if any of the properties, or facilities, included in their proposal
only are eligible for funding as the result of a property-specific determination. A list of the
categories of facilities that only are eligible for funding via a property-specific determination is
provided below.
If an applicant includes within the scope of a grant proposal a facility that requires a property-
specific funding determination, the proposal must include, on a separate page, the following
information (to the extent this information replicates information requested elsewhere in the
proposal, the applicant may directly copy the text to this page):
1.	Basic site identification information and eligible entity identification information.
2.	The specific circumstance that requires the grantee to request a property-specific
determination (from the list in Section 3.4 of Appendix 3).
3.	A short explanation of why the site falls within the identified circumstance requiring the
property-specific funding determination.
4.	An explanation of how providing brownfields funding for the site will meet the criteria
necessary for making a property-specific funding determination (see below).
5.	The degree to which other funding is or is not available for the assessment or cleanup of
the site.
6.	A explanation of whether or not the applicant is responsible for the contamination at a
site.
The information provided will be used in making a property-specific determination for funding
purposes, which will take place during the proposal evaluation process.
4.2	Funding Limitations
Although the statutory definition of "brownfield site" is broad, Congress limited the extent to
which brownfields funding may be provided to eligible entities to assess and clean up sites that
are being addressed under other federal programs. In addition, the Brownfields Law prohibits the
use of grant and loan funds for the payment of response costs at sites for which the funding
recipient of the grant or loan is potentially liable under §107 of CERCLA.7 (See Appendix 2 for
additional prohibitions on the use of brownfields funding.)
The types of facilities that Congress excludedfrom funding eligibility are listed below.
However, certain facilities listed below as excluded from funding eligibility, may still qualify for
brownfields funding. The types of facilities marked with an asterisk (*) below are eligible for
brownfields funding if a property-specific determination is made that funding for assessment or
cleanup activities will meet the criteria set forth in the statute and meet the goals and criteria of
the brownfields program.
7 Applicants also should note that the Brownfields Law contains other prohibitions on the
use of grant and loan monies, including the use of grant and loan monies for paying penalties,
administrative costs, federal cost-share requirements, and the cost of complying with any federal
law (see §101(k)(4)(B)).
Appendix 4. Guidance for Requests for Property-Specific Determinations
Page 58

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
Facilities subject to planned or ongoing removal actions under CERCLA*
Facilities currently listed, or proposed to be listed, on the NPL.
Facilities subject to a unilateral administrative order, a court order, an administrative
order on consent, or a judicial consent decree under CERCLA.
Facilities that have been issued or entered into a unilateral administrative order, a court
order, an administrative order on consent, or judicial consent decree or to which a permit
has been issued by the U.S. or an authorized state under RCRA, FWPCA, TSCA, or
SDWA*
Facilities subject to RCRA corrective action (§3004(u) or §3008(h)) to which a corrective
action permit or order has been issued or modified to require the implementation of
corrective measures.*
Land disposal units that have submitted a RCRA closure notification or that are subject to
closure requirements specified in a closure plan or permit.*
Facilities subject to the jurisdiction, custody, or control of a department, agency, or
instrumentality of the U.S., except for land held in trust for an Indian tribe.
Portions of facilities where there has been a release of PCBs and is subject to TSCA
remediation.*
Facilities receiving monies for cleanup from the LUST trust fund.*
* Sites eligible for property-specific funding determinations.
The types of facilities marked with an asterisk above may qualify for brownfields funding if EPA
makes a property-specific determination that brownfields funding will protect human health and
the environment and will either promote economic development or the creation, preservation, or
addition to parks, greenways, undeveloped property, other recreational property, or other
property used for nonprofit purposes. A determination of eligibility for funding will be made by
EPA at the time of proposal evaluation.
Grant applicants must determine whether the property or properties that are the subject of their
proposal fall within the scope of one or more of the funding exclusions listed above. Actual
determinations of eligibility or exclusion will be made by EPA. However, if one or more sites
that are the subject of a grant proposal fall within the scope of any of the facility types listed
above, the grant proposal should specifically identify the site or sites, identify the applicable
funding exclusion from the list above, and describe why each site falls within the exclusion.
Descriptions summarizing the scope of each of the funding exclusions listed above are provided
in Appendix 3 of these guidelines.
4.3 Criteria for Determining Eligibility for Funding on a Property-Specific Basis
Certain sites that are excluded from funding eligibility because the sites fall within the scope of
the statutory exclusions from the definition of "brownfield site" may qualify for brownfields
funding if a property-specific determination is made that the sites meet the goals and criteria of
the brownfields program and the criteria set forth in the statute. The following types of facilities,
although excluded from the definition of brownfield site above, are eligible for property-specific
determinations for brownfields funding.
Appendix 4. Guidance for Requests for Property-Specific Determinations
Page 59

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
1.	Facilities subject to planned or ongoing removal action under CERCLA.
2.	Facilities to which a permit has been issued by U.S. or authorized state under RCRA,
FWPCA, TSCA, or SDWA.
3.	Facilities subject to RCRA orders requiring corrective action (§3004(u) or §3008(h)).
4.	Land disposal units that have submitted a RCRA closure notification or that are subject to
closure requirements specified in a closure plan or permit.
5.	Portions of facilities where there has been a release of PCBs and is subject to TSCA
remediation.
6.	Facilities receiving monies for cleanup from the LUST trust fund.
In the case of each type of facility listed above, the new legislation allows EPA to award
financial assistance to an eligible entity for assessment or cleanup activities at the site, if it is
found that financial assistance will:
1.	Protect human health and the environment, and
2.	Either:
-	promote economic development, or
-	enable the creation of, preservation of, or addition to parks, greenways,
undeveloped property, other recreational property, or other property used for
nonprofit purposes.
Grant proposals for brownfields funding that include, within the scope of planned assessment or
cleanup activities, sites, properties, or facilities that potentially fall within any of the funding
exclusions listed above, should specifically identify such sites and explain, in as much detail as
possible, why the availability of brownfields funding will protect human health and the
environment and promote economic development or the creation or preservation of greenspace
(or other listed objectives). Information provided by the applicant in addressing these criteria
will be used in documenting EPA's decision in making property-specific determinations for
funding eligibility.
4.3.1 Protection of Human Health and the Environment
Grant applicants must provide a detailed discussion of how financial assistance for brownfields
assessment or cleanup activities at each site for which a property-specific determination for
funding eligibility must be made will result in the allocation of funding in accordance with
legislative intent. Each proposal for financial assistance, including a recipient of a revolving loan
fund grant seeking EPA approval of loans, whose proposal includes one or more sites for which
a property-specific determination must be made must include a discussion of how brownfields
funding will ensure protection of human health and the environment. Documentation supporting
a determination that brownfields funding will ensure protection of human health and the
environment should include documentation of one or more of the following:
Appendix 4. Guidance for Requests for Property-Specific Determinations
Page 60

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
•	Specific examples of human health risks that will be mitigated by activities funded under
a brownfields grant.
•	Specific environmental improvements that can reasonably be expected to result from
activities funded under a brownfields grant.
•	Specific examples of contamination that will be addressed, including the specific
hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants of concern and the environmental
media that will be addressed.
•	Description of how the proposed cleanup and redevelopment of the property will ensure
that the property will be protective of human health and the environment and that the
remedy will be both protective and consistent with the planned reuse of the property.
4.3.2	Promote Economic Development
Applicants also must provide detail on how financial assistance will promote economic
development or the creation of, preservation of, or addition to parks, greenways, undeveloped
property, other recreational property, or other property used for nonprofit purposes.
Documentation of economic development activities should include information such as the
following:
•	A description of economic development activities that can reasonably be expected to
occur as a result of brownfields funding (e.g., number of jobs created, estimated increase
in the property and/or profits/sales tax base to community, additional business expansion
or new business relocation that may occur within the community).
•	A description of how the redevelopment of the brownfields property will contribute to
community-wide redevelopment and revitalization plans with a specific emphasis on how
funding for the brownfields redevelopment is integral to the success of the community-
wide plan.
•	A description of new businesses or business expansions that are planned for the
brownfields property.
4.3.3	Creation of, Preservation of, or Addition to Parks, Greenways, Undeveloped
Property, other Recreational Property, or Other Property Used for Nonprofit
Purposes
If brownfields funding will be used by the applicant to preserve or create greenspace,
recreational areas, undeveloped property, or property to be used for nonprofit purposes, the
applicant should provide specific documentation of these activities in the proposal. Grant
proposals should provide specific information documenting how brownfields funding will result
in the creation of, preservation of, or addition to parks, greenways, undeveloped property, other
recreational property, or other property used for nonprofit purposes should include information
such as:
•	A description of the proposed park, recreational property, greenspace, undeveloped
space, or other type of property to be used for nonprofit purposes, including size, use, and
surrounding environment that will be preserved or created as a result of brownfields
funding.
Appendix 4. Guidance for Requests for Property-Specific Determinations
Page 61

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
•	An assessment of how the property will be used and by whom.
•	A description of how the property will be integrated with surrounding properties or
environments.
•	A description of how the property will be maintained or preserved for its continued use
as a greenspace, recreational area, etc.
When documenting compliance with these criteria, applicants may copy information provided
elsewhere in their proposal, if such information directly addresses the criteria. However, all
documentation must be comprehensive and specific to actual events that will be mitigated or can
reasonably be expected to occur as a result of federal brownfields funding, should the applicant
receive brownfields funding.
4.3.4 Other Documentation
Property-specific brownfields funding determinations will be made based upon the availability
of funding and the extent to which applicants can provide documentation that funding for
particular sites offers opportunities to protect human health and the environment and enhance
economic development or create or preserve greenspace (as the criteria is described above).
However, at the same time, Congress explicitly prohibited the use of federal brownfields funding
to reimburse liable parties for response costs. The statute prohibits grant and loan monies from
being used for the payment of response costs at brownfield sites for which the recipient of a
grant or loan is potentially liable (§101(k)(4)(B)(i)(IV)). Applicants are encouraged to address,
in the body of the proposal, why federal funding is appropriate for brownfields assessment
and/or cleanup at the site, given that brownfields funding cannot be used to reimburse liable
property owners for response activity costs.
4.4 Properties Not Eligible for Brownfields Funding
Grant applicants must keep in mind that the legislation excludes certain types offacilities from
qualifying for the property-specific funding determinations and therefore from federal
brownfields financial assistance. Sites or facilities that may not be included within the scope of a
grant proposal and for which brownfields grants and loans cannot be made available regardless
of property-specific circumstances include the following types of sites or facilities:
•	Facilities listed or proposed for listing on the NPL.
•	Facilities subject to a unilateral administrative order, an administrative order, a court
order, an administrative order on consent, or a judicial consent decree issued or entered
into by parties under CERCLA.
•	Facilities that are subject to the jurisdiction, custody, or control of the United States
government, except for land held in trust by the U.S. for an Indian Tribe.
Applicants should note that the discussion of property-specific determinations for funding sites
that are otherwise excluded from funding eligibility that is provided here only applies to funding
determinations. This discussion does not apply to, or have bearing on, any other property-
specific determinations or other aspects of the brownfields program. For example, a property-
Appendix 4. Guidance for Requests for Property-Specific Determinations
Page 62

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
specific determination for funding purposes in no way affects a facility's or an entity's status
with regard to EPA's enforcement and cost recovery authorities.
4.5 Additional Information on Potential for Continual Funding at Sites Subject to
Removal Actions
Some brownfield sites that receive federal brownfields assessments grants may, as a result of the
federally-funded site assessment require a CERCLA removal action. Under the Brownfields Law
(§ 101(39)(B)(i)), sites that are subject to planned or on-going removal actions under CERCLA
are excluded from funding eligibility. However, such sites may receive federal brownfields
funding if a property-specific determination is made that such funding will meet the property-
specific determination criteria. Applicants should follow the procedures listed in the previous
section to request a property-specific determination. )Note: If a removal action is required at a
site where an assessment grant exists, the grantee does not need to obtain the property-specific
determination noted above. However, grant recipients must obtain approval from the EPA
removal OSC prior to any onsite work commencing.)
Grant applicants requesting federal brownfields funding and recipients of revolving loan fund
grants seeking EPA approval of loans for sites at which a CERCLA removal action is planned or
on-going must document in their proposals (or loan approval requests) that the requested funding
will be used in accordance with legislative intent. Therefore, proposals must include a discussion
of how brownfields grant or loan funds will ensure protection of human health and the
environment and provide detail on how financial assistance will promote economic development
or the creation of, preservation or, or addition to parks, greenways, undeveloped property, other
recreational property, or other property used for nonprofit purposes. Requests for property-
specific determinations for funding for the assessment or cleanup of properties where there is a
planned or ongoing removal action will be considered in the following circumstances: 1) when it
is clear a follow-on response action will be required to address long-term threats at a site; and 2)
in cases where portions of a site are not under the current scope of a planned or ongoing removal
action.
In addition to the specific criteria listed above, applicants also should explain in their proposal
the extent to which other funding sources are not available for the assessment and/or cleanup of
the site or property. Federal brownfields funding cannot be used to reimburse liable parties for
response costs. In addition, federal brownfields funding may not be used for an ensuing removal
action. Applicants should specifically address, in the body of the proposal, why federal funding
is appropriate for brownfields assessment and/or cleanup at the site, given the Congressional
intent not to reimburse liable property owners for response activity costs.
Appendix 4. Guidance for Requests for Property-Specific Determinations
Page 63

-------
DRAFT 9/18/02
FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY-NOT EPA POLICY
4.6 Additional Information on Potential Funding for Petroleum-contaminated Sites
As noted above, portions of facilities receiving assistance for response activities from the LUST
trust fund are excluded from eligibility for brownfields funding. However, these facilities are
eligible for funding on a property-specific basis. To assist applicants in determining whether
their sites are good candidates for property-specific funding determinations, below are examples
of "ineligible" sites {i.e., sites receiving LUST trust fund monies) EPA considers to be
potentially good candidates to receive brownfields grants or loans under the property-specific
determination provisions of the Brownfields Law (i.e., CERCLA §101(39)(C)).
All USTfields pilots.
Sites (or portions of properties) where an assessment was completed using LUST trust
fund monies and the state has not determined the site to be a "high risk" site and,
although an assessment was completed using LUST trust fund monies, the site needs
further assistance to conduct a cleanup. Although the site is otherwise a good candidate
for economic revitalization, additional LUST money cannot be provided for the cleanup
of petroleum contamination.
Sites (or portions of properties) where LUST money was spent for emergency activities,
and are otherwise determined to be ineligible for further LUST trust funds, yet the site
needs additional funding for continued assessment and/or cleanup that will contribute to
economic revitalization of the site.
4.7 Eligible Response Sites/Enforcement Limits
The Brownfields Law limits EPA's enforcement and cost recovery authorities at "eligible
response sites" where a response action is conducted in compliance with a state response
program. Section 101(40) defines an "eligible response site" by referencing the general
definition of a "brownfield site" in §101(39)(A) and incorporating the exclusions at §101(39)(B).
The law places further limitations on the types of sites included within the definition of an
eligible response site, but grants EPA the authority to include within the definition of eligible
response site, and on a property-specific basis, some facilities that are otherwise excluded from
the definition. Such property-specific determinations must be based upon a finding that limits on
enforcement will be appropriate, after consultation with state authorities, and will protect human
health and the environment and promote economic development or facilitate the creation of,
preservation, or addition to a park, a greenway, undeveloped property, recreational property, or
other property used for nonprofit purposes. While the criteria appear similar to those for
determining eligibility for funding on a property-specific basis, the determinations are distinct,
will be made through a separate process, and may not be based on the same information
requested in this document for property-specific funding determinations.
For additional information on the definition of "eligible response site," the limitations of EPA's
enforcement and cost recovery authorities at these sites, and how to apply for a property-specific
determination for inclusion within the definition of eligible response site, contact Kenneth
Schefski of EPA's Office of Site Remediation and Enforcement at (202) 564-8213.
Appendix 4. Guidance for Requests for Property-Specific Determinations
Page 64

-------