Fiscal Year 2023 Frequently Asked Questions for FY23 (k)(7) Brownfields Training,
Research, and Technical Assistance Grants RFA Outreach Webinar Grants (as of 12/07/22)
A. General Information
A.l. Are commitment letters required?
Answer: No, commitment letters are not required.
A.2. Can we include letters of support or commitment (e.g., to document leveraging) in the
attachments despite the fact that they are not required?
Answer: EPA will not review support or commitment letters even if you include them.
As per section IV.C. Attachments, the only attachments that will be reviewed are
Milestones schedule and Documentation of applicant eligibility, if applicable. Any
additional documentation submitted with your application will not be reviewed.
A.3. If support and partnering letters are not required, what type of documentation
regarding leveraging is required?
Answer: We do not require documentation regarding leveraging. Leveraging
commitments should be included in the Leveraged Resource Table (optional).
Applicants may present the information in a narrative format if they choose and will
not be penalized for using a narrative format instead of the optional table.
A.4. Is it OK to include leveraging commitments from states and communities we will be
working with who are EPA grantees?
Answer: The RFA does not require letters of commitment. As such, additional
information not required will not be considered in EPA's evaluation
A.5. Page 12 of the RFA states, "EPA reserves the right to reject all applications and make
no awards under this announcement, make less awards than expected, not to make
awards for each area, or make multiple awards in an area." Can one applicant apply for
multiple topic areas?
Answer: Yes, one applicant may apply for multiple topic areas. Applicants wishing to
apply for multiple topic areas must submit a separate application for each topic area
they plan to support. If an applicant submits applications for multiple topics under this
competition, and is selected for multiple awards, EPA may award a single cooperative
agreement that combines separate applications for the different topics.
A.6. Page 12 of the RFA states, "EPA reserves the right to reject all applications and make
no awards under this announcement, make less awards than expected, not to make
awards for each area, or make multiple awards in an area." I'm wondering if you can
provide some clarification on the final clause of this statement. If entity A and entity B
both apply to be the TAB provider for Region X but entity B makes a better case for
providing TA to a specific State in Region X, could the region be subdivided by state

-------
between entities A and B?
Answer- No. EPA does not intend to make awards that subdivide the geographic areas
listed on pages 7 and 8 of the solicitation among multiple technical assistance
providers. EPA anticipates making 11 awards, one for each geographical area including
all states in that area. As stated on page 8 of the RFA "Applicants must provide
technical assistance to communities throughout their entire geographic area. Please
note that the amount of funding provided to selected recipients will be commensurate
with the level and amount of technical support being proposed. Those recipients
proposing to provide less technical assistance may receive less funding than recipients
proposing to provide a greater amount of technical assistance or serving a larger
geographic area." And threshold criterion #3 on page 14 that states "Applications must
include technical assistance to communities within the entire geographical area that
the project addresses."
A.7. In the outreach webinar, it mentioned that graphics should not be included. Will
applicant be penalized if graphics are included?
Answer: No, as long as the application complies with the 15 page application narrative
limit. It's a tip that we are offering to not include photos or graphics in the 15-page
limit to ensure that applicants are able to fully describe their proposed project.
However, EPA will not reject applications that include graphics. Please use your best
judgment on the best way to present your responses to the ranking criteria in your
application.
A.8. Regarding graphics, will an applicant be penalized if a small number of simple graphics
that help illustrate points made in written sections are used, or organization logos on
letterhead/footers, if we stay within the specified page limits?
Answer: No, using an organization's logo on letterhead/footers will not penalize an
applicant. Applicants may choose to organize some information in a table, the RFA
includes a couple sample tables for various information if you want to use them. The
key take away is not to exceed the 15 page limit on narrative proposals.
A.9. If the title of the person responsible for submitting the application does not have
Executive Director as their official title, is some other designation ok?
Answer: Yes, another title is okay. What's most important is that the person who
submits the application is officially designated as an AOR in grants.gov. Only the E-
business point (as listed in sam.gov) can designate an AOR in grants.gov.
A.10. Who is considered a "cooperative partner"? Can for-profit entities be listed partners?
Answer A cooperative partner is an entity who will help you perform the technical
assistance to support communities. If you intend to provide EPA funding to the
cooperative partner, the transaction must comply with applicable requirements for
procurement contracts or subawards depending on the nature of the transaction. In
order for the EPA selection panel to consider the qualifications of consultants named

-------
as "cooperative partners" the applicant must demonstrate in its application that the
consultants have been selected in compliance with the competitive procurement
procedures in 2 CFR Part 200. If the cooperative partner will receive a non-competitive
subaward the arrangement must be consistent with EPA's interpretation of 2 CFR
200.331 as reflected in Appendix A of the EPA Subaward Policy. For profit firms and
individual consultants are not eligible for subawards under this RFA. Our RFAs contain
explicit language advising applicants of these requirements on pages 21.
A.ll. On cooperative partners listed in the narrative information sheet: should this include
communities we will definitely be supporting (mentioned in the narrative) or will this
be limited to entities helping to perform/deliver technical assistance?
Answer: Entities who will be helping you perform the technical assistance to support
communities.
A.12. Can additional partners be added after award? How does that work with competition
requirements?
Answer: Yes, depending on the relationship of the grant recipient and the new partner,
the grant recipient may need to comply with the relevant grant regulations and EPA
policies.
A.13. Can you reclarify who can apply? Does the applicant organization need to be a non-
profit?
Answer: Who can apply is listed in section III of the RFA. The eligible applicant list is
broader than non-profits. However, for-profit entities are not eligible to apply.
A.M. In section III, which does an academic institution fall under?
Answer: An academic institution may fall under the non-profit category. However,
each applicant must properly designate themselves and provide the required
documentation.
A. 15. Is a 501(c)(6) that does hire lobbyists, but the organization itself does not lobby,
considered eligible?
Answer: Yes. Nonprofits exempt from taxations under section 501(c)(6) of the Internal
Revenue Code (which also include ATSWMO) meet the definition of Nonprofit
organization in 2 CFR 200.1. The only tax exempt organizations that are ineligible per
se from receiving grants are those with 501(c)(4) tax exempt status that lobby. This
ineligibility stems from the Lobbying Disclosure Act.
A.16. Not all communities have an EPA Brownfield Assessment Grant to pay for the
REQUIRED Analysis of Brownfield Cleanup Alternatives (ABCA) for an EPA Cleanup
Grant Proposal. It seems reasonable to have the TAB grantees be allowed to develop
ABCAs as "Technical Assistance" to these communities. Will EPA allow TAB providers to
develop ABCAs as part of their Cooperative Agreement?

-------
Answer: The TAB providers may be able to assist a community in what should be
considered in an ABCA
A.17. Do we need to fill out separate federal forms (424, 424a, Key Contacts, etc.) for each
regional application?
Answer: Yes, As stated in Section I.B. of the RFA, "Applicants wishing to provide
technical assistance in multiple geographical areas must submit a separate application
for each geographic area they plan to serve." Therefore, if you are planning to submit
two applications, you will need to submit each application separately in grants.gov and
obtain two gants.gov tracking numbers. For each grants.gov submission, you will be
required to upload a SF-424, SF-424 A, Key Contacts Form, and EPA Form 4700.
A.18. Can Consultants and other Contractors providing technical assistance funded under
this grant receive sole source contracts?
Answer: No. The recipient must ensure that eligible technical assistance services
provided under this award are performed in a manner that prevents conflicts of
interest from tainting procurements financed with EPA funding. For example, if a
consultant hired by the recipient provides technical assistance in the development of
specifications for procurements of services that consultant may not submit a bid or
offer on that procurement. Consultants and other contractors providing technical
assistance funded under this grant may not receive sole source contracts based on
their role in providing technical assistance. Recipients must include restrictions in their
contracts that prevent consultants or other contractors from marketing their services
or those of affiliated firms while providing EPA funded technical assistance.
A.19. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST - Can a TAB grant recipient (and/or its partners and
subawardees) provide technical assistance to potential applicants on a funding
competition (Federal, state, local or private foundation) and also apply for funding
under THAT competition or be identified as a funded partner on another organization's
application for funding under that same competition?
Answer: Generally, no, absent an approved Conflict of Interest mitigation Plan or
measures that neutralize conflicts of interest. Such situations would be a conflict of
interest (COI), or at a minimum create the appearance of a COI, and also create unfair
competitive advantage concerns. EPA intends to add terms and conditions to the TAB
grants requiring the grantees to provide, for EPA approval, a COI
Management/Mitigation Plan within a specified period after the award addressing
certain conflict of interest situations and how the grantee will respond to them and
proposed mitigation strategies for potential situations. EPA believes that there may be
possible mitigation measures for specific situations and that is something that will be
addressed post-award. The term and condition will also indicate that to the extent the
grantee's Conflict of Interest Management/Mitigation Plan does not address specific
cases that may arise during grant performance the grantee will notify the EPA Project
Officer of the issue and propose a mitigation strategy for resolving it subject to EPA
Project Officer approval.

-------
It is understood that each TAB will likely operate as a hub and spoke with multiple
organizations playing key roles in the TAB to deliver Eligible Services to program
participants. The key point is that no organization should be competing for funds under
a competition or otherwise for which they provided technical assistance to another
entity competing under that same competition absent some mitigation plan or
measures that would effectively neutralize the actual and/or potential conflicts of
interest this situation creates. Notwithstanding this, as a general matter, if an
organization within the TAB did not provide direct technical assistance to another
organization competing under a competition, then that member of the TAB would
likely be allowed to apply under that competition.
A.20. Can you explain the review process? More specifically, considering Threshold is pass
or fail, will this be reviewed by HQ only, Geographic Region only, or both? The same
question applies to the narrative/ranking criteria. Will any sections be solely reviewed
by HQ or the Regions (e.g., Past Performance)?
Answer: Threshold is pass/fail and will be completed nationally. Applications that pass
threshold will be reviewed by EPA staff in both the regions and HQ.
A.21. Are there any sample applications to reference?
Answer: Unfortunately, we do not have any sample applications on our website to
share.
B. Information on Submitting the Application on Grants.gov
B.l. What is the deadline for submitting an application for the FY23 Brownfields
Training, Research and Technical Assistance Grant Competition?
Answer: Applications are due February 14, 2023. Applications received after 11:59
p.m. Eastern Time on February 14, 2023, will not be considered for funding
B.2. How do I submit my application?
Answer: Applications must be submitted electronically through www.grants.gov by
the organization's Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) and be
successfully received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on February 14, 2023. This is the
only method EPA will accept applications; unless the applicant has an approved
waiver to submit the application by mail under the Limited Exception Procedure
policy (outlined in Appendix 1 of the Guidelines). Occasionally, technical and other
issues arise when using www.grants.gov. EPA encourages applicants to submit their
application early. Refer to Appendix 1 in the Guidelines for specific instructions on
the use of www.grants.gov and guidance on how to navigate common difficulties
experienced when transmitting the application(s) through www.grants.gov
B.3.
How do I submit an application if I have limited access to the Internet?

-------
Answer: As stated in Appendix 1 of the Guidelines, an applicant may request to
submit a hardcopy of the application if the applicant lacks the technical capability
to apply electronically through www.grants.gov because of limited Internet access
or no Internet access which prevents them from being able to upload the required
application materials through www.grants.gov. The applicant must follow the
procedures outlined at https://www.epa.gov/grants/exceptions-grantsgov-
submission-requirement. Please note that your request must be received at least
15 calendar days before the application due date to allow enough time to
negotiate alternative submission methods.
B.4. Are there flexibilities available to organizations impacted by COVID-19 when
submitting the application?
Answer: Every effort must be made to complete the registration process in order
to apply through www.grants.gov. However, if you are experiencing technical
difficulties in applying through www.grants.gov because of operational or other
issues related to COVID-19, you may request to submit the application by email.
See EPA's Solicitation Clauses for examples for when flexibilities can be offered to
organizations impacted by COVID-19.
Email your request to Sahar Rana (rana.sahargepa.gov} by February 14, 2023, at
11:59 PM ET. Your request must include:
•	an explanation of the COVID-19 related issue you are experiencing;
•	the specific reason you are unable to submit the application through
http://www.grants.gov; and
•	the complete application.
Requests will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. There is no guarantee EPA
will accept the submission outside ofwww.grants.gov. Requests received after
February 14, 2023, at 11:59 PM ET will not be reviewed or considered. Note,
selected applicants must have an active sam.gov account for EPA to issue an
award.
B.5. How should I upload the Narrative Information Sheet, the Narrative, and associated
attachments in www.grants.gov?
Answer: EPA recommends combining the Narrative Information Sheet, the
Narrative, and associated attachments into a single file and uploading the single file
to the "Project Narrative Attachment Form". This ensures that EPA receives your
entire submission and the submission is in the order that you intended.
B.6. How do I know if my grant application was received by the deadline?
Answer: If submitted successfully, the Authorized Organization Representative
(AOR) will receive a Submission Receipt email confirming the application package
was initially received. You can track the status of your application package anytime
by using the link provided at the bottom of the email. Next, www.grants.gov will

-------
process the application package to ensure it is error-free. If the application package
passes this step, the AOR will receive a Submission Validation Receipt for
Application email. Alternatively, if the application package has an error, the AOR
will receive an email indicating the application package was "rejected with errors"
and what the error is. This gives you the opportunity to resolve the error and for
the AOR to re-submit the application package before the submission deadline. If
you did not receive a confirmation email, need assistance with submitting your
application package, or have questions, contact the http://www.grants.gov Help
Desk at 1-800-518-4726 or supportggraiits.gov. The Support Center is open 24
hours a day, 7 days a week; closed on federal holidays. For more information on
how to submit an application, see Section IV. Application Submission Information
and Appendix 1 http://www.grants.gov Application Submission Instructions in the
Guidelines, and the Tips of Summiting Applications Through http://www.grants.gov
at FY2023 Appl ication Resources for Brownfields Technical Assistance (TA) 1 US
EPA. Additionally, the www.grants.gov website has training documents and videos
to assist applicants at www.grants.gov/web/grants/applicants/applicant-
training.html
B.7. My organization is registered in www.sam.gov. Should I check to make sure the
account is active?
Answer: Yes! You can only successfully submit an application package if your
organization has an active account in www.sam.gov. The registration must be
renewed annually by the E-Business Point of Contact, so make sure the account is
active and will not expire before the application submission deadline.
B.8. Can I apply for grant funding if the www.sam.gov account is not active, or is in the
process of being updated or re-activated?
Answer: No. Your organization must have an active account in
http://www.sam.gov in order to apply for funding.
B.9. Can someone other than the Authorized Organization Representative submit the
application package in www.grants.gov?
Answer: No. The Authorized Organization Representative, designated by the E-
Business Point of Contact, must have an account in www.grants.gov, sign and
submit the application package.
B.10. Why is the E-Business Point of Contact important to the application submission
process?
Answer: The E-Business Point of Contact (EBiz POC) is the individual in your
organization who oversees all activities within www.grants.gov and grants
permissions to Authorized Organization Representatives (AOR). If your organization
is already registered in www.sam.gov, take note of who is listed as the EBiz POC. If
you are not registered yet, it is the EBiz POC within your organization who must

-------
register your organization with www.sam.gov. The EBiz POC is issued a Marketing
Personal Identification Number (MPIN) by www.sam.gov. which gives the EBiz POC
the authority to designate a person(s) in your organization that can submit
applications through http://www.grants.gov (i.e., the Authorized Organization
Representative). The EBiz POC is also responsible for approving role requests in
www.grants.gov. Upon creating an account in www.grants.gov, the AOR role
request is automatically sent to your organization's EBiz POC for approval. 15 Note:
There can only be one EBiz POC per UEI number.
B.ll. My organization has several departments and corresponding UEI numbers. Can I
use a different department's UEI number to submit the application package?
Answer: No. You must use the UEI number assigned to the department that is
submitting the application package.
B.12. Can I use another organization's UEI number to submit the application package?
Answer: No. You must use the UEI number assigned to the organization that is
submitting the application package.
B.13. Per the "Application for Federal Assistance" (SF-424), what is the "Catalog of
Federal 2 Domestic Assistance Number" and the "CFDA Title"?
Answer: The "Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number" is 66.814
and the "CFDA Title" is Brownfields Training, Research, and Technical Assistance
Grants and Cooperative Agreement.
C. Administrative Costs
C.l. Are there limits on administrative costs for Brownfield Grants?
Answer: Yes. Under CERCLA § 104(k)(5)(E), recipients may use only use up to 5% of the
amounts of EPA funds made available under a Brownfields Grant to pay an administrative cost.
C.2. My organization's federally negotiated rate that is greater than 5%. Can we charge more
than 5% for indirect costs?
Answer: No. We understand that many entities have negotiated indirect rates. However, the
statutory authority for the Brownfields competitive grants caps the amount of grant funds
that can be spent on administrative costs to 5%. The 5% cap of administrative costs is for all
administrative costs, including indirect rates and other administrative expenses. For
example, if an entity wants to charge their indirect rate to the grant, and their negotiated
indirect rate is more than 5%, then they may charge their full negotiated rate but the total
amount of allowable indirect costs is limited to 5% of the amount of the EPA grant. No other
administrative expenses may be charged to the grant.

-------
C.3. Does the term "administrative cost" include both direct and indirect costs?
Answer: Yes. Administrative costs include certain direct costs of grants administration and all
indirect costs. Direct Administrative Costs, including those in the form of salaries, benefits,
contractual costs, supplies, and data processing charges, are costs that are not included in
the recipient's indirect cost pool and are necessary to comply with the provisions of the
Uniform Administrative Requirements for Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal
Awards at 2 CFR Parts 200. Indirect Costs are those that are not specifically related to
implementing the EPA award and are not readily identified with a specific project or
organizational activity but incurred for the joint benefit of both projects and other activities.
Overhead costs are a typical example of an indirect cost. Indirect costs are usually grouped
into common pools and charged to benefiting objectives through an allocation
process/indirect cost rate; 2 CFR § 200.414 and other provisions of the Uniform Guidance.
EPA's interpretation of the term "Administrative Cost" in CERCLA § 104(k)(5)(B) is based on
similar limitations on administrative costs contained in sections 119(a)(1), (d)(4) and (d) and
319(h)(12) on the Clean Water Act.
C.4. Does the limit on administrative costs for Brownfield Grants conflict with the requirement in
2 CFR § 200.414(c) for EPA to accept recipients' negotiated indirect cost rate?
Answer: No. The regulation states that "[A] Federal awarding agency may use a rate different
from the negotiated rate for a class of Federal awards or a single Federal award only when
required by Federal statute . . . By statute, administrative costs for Brownfield Grants are
limited to 5% of the amount of EPA funds made available under a Brownfields Grant.
C.5. What is the difference between an administrative cost and a programmatic cost?
Administrative Costs.
Answer: 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, Cost Principles, And Audit
Requirements For Federal Awards contained in 2 CFR Part 200 and 2 CFR Part 200, Subpart E.
Administrative costs include indirect costs the recipient incurs under the OMB Cost 51
Principles found at 2 CFR Part 200. Please note that prohibited administrative costs include
application preparation costs. Programmatic Costs. EPA has determined that costs for
activities that are integral to achieving the purpose of the cooperative agreement are
considered as "programmatic" costs; not administrative costs. Direct costs are defined in the
applicable OMB Cost Principles Circular. As required by 2 CFR § 200.403(d), recipients must
classify administrative costs as direct or indirect consistently and may not classify the same
types of cost in both categories. Please review 2 CFR § 200.412, Classifications of Costs, for
more information.
C.6. How much of the grant funds can be used for administrative costs?
Answer: CERCLA, as amended by the 2018 BUILD Act, allows recipients to charge up to 5% of
the total award grant funds for the payment of administrative costs. There is no similar cap
on the amount that may be charged for the payment of programmatic costs.

-------
C.7. What are examples of eligible direct administrative costs?
Answer: Eligible administrative costs subject to the 5% limitation include direct costs for:
Costs incurred to comply with the following provisions of the Uniform Administrative
Requirements for Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards at 2 CFR Parts
200 and 1500 other than those identified as programmatic, i. Record-keeping associated with
equipment purchases required under 2 CFR § 200.313; ii. Preparing revisions and changes in
the budgets, scopes of work, program plans, and other activities required under 2 CFR §
200.308; iii. Maintaining and operating financial management systems required under 2 CFR
§ 200.302; iv. Preparing payment requests and handling payments under 2 CFR § 200.305; v.
Financial reporting under 2 CFR § 200.327; vi. Non-federal audits required under 2 CFR 200
Subpart F; and vii. Closeout under 2 CFR § 200.343 with the exception of preparing the
recipient's final performance report. (Costs for preparing this report are programmatic and
are not subject to the 5% limitation on direct administrative costs.)
C.8. Can unrecovered indirect costs in excess of the 5% limit on administrative costs be used for
voluntary cost share?
Answer: No. Consistent with 2 CFR 200.306(b)(4) and the definition of Voluntary committed
cost sharing in 2 CFR 200.1, Section III B. of the TAB Request for Proposals advises that
voluntary cost shares may only be met with allowable costs. Unrecovered indirect costs
normally may be used to meet cost share requirements, mandatory or voluntary, with prior
approval of EPA's Award Official (or GMO post-award) as provided at 2 CFR 200.306(c) and
sections 6.0 and 6.5 of EPA's Indirect Cost Rate Policy and implementing Guidance. However,
for costs to be allowable as cost share they must conform to any statutory limitations on the
allowability of costs as provided in 2 CFR 200.306(b)(4) and 2 CFR 200.408. Indirect costs in
excess of the CERCLA 104(k)(5)(E)(i) 5% administrative cost limitation are unallowable.
C.9. Can unrecovered indirect costs in excess of the 5% limit on administrative costs be counted
towards leveraged funding other than voluntary cost share?
Answer: Yes. As stated in Section III B. of the TAB Request for Proposals:
Other leveraged funding/resources that are not identified as a voluntary cost share. This form
of leveraging may be met by funding from another federal cooperative agreement, from an
applicant's own resources, or resources from other third-party sources. This form of leveraging
should not be included in the budget and the costs need not be eligible and allowable project
costs under the EPA assistance agreement. While this form of leveraging should not be
included in the budget, the cooperative agreement workplan should include a statement
indicating that the applicant is expected to produce the proposed leveraging consistent with
the terms of the announcement and the applicant's application. If applicants propose to
provide this form of leveraging, EPA expects them to make the effort to secure the leveraged
resources described in their applications. If the proposed leveraging does not materialize
during cooperative agreement performance, then EPA may reconsider the legitimacy of the
award and/or take other appropriate action as authorized by 2 CFR Parts 200 and 1500 as
applicable.

-------
Note, however, that the weight EPA gives to proposed leveraged funding from unrecovered
indirect costs may be minimal given that all applicants with indirect cost rates that exceed 5%
will have unrecovered indirect costs.
C.10. What are examples of allowable programmatic costs that are not subject to the 5%
administrative cap?
Answer: EPA has determined that direct costs for activities that are integral to achieving the
purpose of the cooperative agreement are considered as "programmatic" costs; not
administrative costs. Direct costs are defined at 2 CFR § 200.413. As required by 2 CFR §
200.403(d), recipients must classify administrative costs as direct or indirect consistently and
may not classify the same types of cost in both categories.
Please review 2 CFR § 200.412, Classifications of Costs, for more information. The following
are examples of eligible programmatic costs:
•	In the case of cooperative agreements for site characterization and assessment,
expenses for inventorying, characterizing, assessing, and conducting planning
related to brownfield sites.
•	In the case Revolving Loan Fund Grants: • expenses for making and managing
loans; • expenses, including financial management expenses, for operating the
revolving loan fund; and • expenses for making and managing subgrants under
CERCLA § 104(k)(3)(B)(ii).
•	In the case of cooperative agreements for remediation of brownfield sites under
CERCLA § 104(k)(3)(A)(ii), expenses for site remediation activities. In the case of a
cooperative agreement for the implementation of Brownfields Programs under
CERCLA §104(k)(7), expenses for providing training, research, and technical
assistance.
•	Costs incurred for complying with the procurement standards of 2 CFR §§
200.317 through 200.326 are considered eligible programmatic costs only if the
procurement contract is for services or products that are direct costs for
performing eligible programmatic activities under the cooperative agreement.
•	Costs for performance and financial reporting required under 2 CFR § 200.328
and 2 CFR § 200.328 are eligible programmatic costs. Performance and financial
reporting are essential programmatic tools for both the recipient and EPA to
ensure that cooperative agreements are carried out in accordance with statutory
and regulatory requirements. Other examples of programmatic costs include: •
Expenses for travel, training, equipment, supplies, reference materials, and
contractual support if those costs are reasonable and allocable to tasks specified
in a grant recipient's EPA-approved workplan. • Salaries and fringe benefits of
employees working on eligible activities under the EPA award. • Operation of a
public repository associated with the remediation of a site. • Maintenance of the
brownfields project website. (This is an allowable community involvement cost.)
• Title search. For example, in an RLF Grant, post-award costs for title searches
the recipient incurs in connection with making a loan or a subaward. • Legal
services. For example, post-award legal services such as reviewing contracts
under all types of grants, or subaward agreements (loans or subgrants) or

-------
CERCLA § 107 (hazardous substances)/petroleum liability analyses in the RLF
Grants. For further information on these prohibitions, contact your Regional
Brownfields Contact.

-------