Jump to main content.

FY 2008 Request for Proposals Electronics Standards Development Grant Solicitation

Sponsoring Agency and Office: Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

Funding Opportunity Title: Source Reduction - Electronics Standards Development Grant Program

Announcement Type: Initial Announcement for Fiscal Year 2008

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number: 66.717

Funding Opportunity Number: EPA-OPPT-07-02

Proposal Submission Deadlines: Dates: Proposals must be received by EPA (See Section IV of this RFP) by 4:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) December 5th, 2007, or by electronic submission through Grants.gov by 11:59 P.M. EDT, December 5th, 2007. Late proposals will not be considered for funding. Questions must be submitted in writing via e-mail and must be received by the Agency Contact identified in Section VII before November 20, 2007. Please refer to Section IV, Parts A and C for more information.

OVERVIEW

This competitive announcement is expected to result in the award of one cooperative agreement to support pollution prevention/source reduction and/or resource conservation in the procurement of electronic products, through the development of new environmental standards for electronic products. The award will provide up to $300,000 over a five year period for development of four environmental leadership standards to assist institutional purchasers in identifying and selecting environmentally preferable electronic products. This cooperative agreement will build on the work developed through the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEATTM) Project, a multi-stakeholder consensus decision-making process that was funded by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) as detailed in the program history section of this RFP. EPEAT is a registered trademark of the Green Electronics Council (GEC).

Eligible Applicants: Applicants eligible to apply under this announcement are the fifty States, the District of Columbia, the United States Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, any territory or possession of the United States, local governments, city or township governments, independent school district governments, state controlled institutions of higher education, Federally-recognized tribal governments, non-profits other than institutions of higher education, private institutions of higher education, and community-based grassroots organizations. For profit firms are not eligible to apply under this announcement. Nonprofit organizations must be able to demonstrate that they are eligible through documentation of nonprofit status provided the U.S. Internal Revenue Service or their state of incorporation. However, nonprofit organizations described in Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code that engage in lobbying activities as defined in Section 3 of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 are not eligible to apply.

This Request for proposals includes the following information:

FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

The purpose of this announcement is to request proposals for funding for development of four environmental leadership standards to assist institutional purchasers in identifying and selecting environmentally preferable electronic products. This cooperative agreement will build on the work developed through the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEATTM) Project, a multi-stakeholder consensus decision-making process that was funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) EPEAT resulted in the adoption of U.S. Standard Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., (IEEE) 1680, Standard for Environmental Assessment of Personal Computer Products, Including Laptop Personal Computers, Desktop Personal Computers, and Personal Computer Monitors. The goal of this Request for Proposal (RFP) is to select an organization that will help manage the public process to develop environmental standards for four additional electronic products.

A. Introduction

The development of EPEAT was prompted by a growing demand by institutional purchasers for an easy-to-use evaluation tool that allows the comparison and selection of electronic products based on environmental performance. Institutional purchasers are increasingly interested in using procurement policies to reward the design and manufacture of electronic products that pose fewer environmental risks. Until the development of EPEAT, these "green" procurement initiatives were largely uncoordinated and often did not take a life- cycle approach to the environmental impacts posed by electronic products. Manufacturers were frustrated by the proliferation of complex and conflicting policies. In addition, purchasers do not have the resources or technical expertise to develop and evaluate complex environmental information.

The electronics industry welcomed and actively participated in the development of EPEAT and envisioned EPEAT as a way to communicate relevant and meaningful information to institutional purchasers about the environmental impacts posed by electronic products. EPEAT has been a huge success: as of July 17, 2007, more than 20 manufacturers had registered nearly 577 products to the IEEE 1680 standard, and purchasers had referenced EPEAT registration in more than $42 billion in RFPs and contracts.

Based on the results of the previous EPEAT project, the U.S. EPA has determined that providing financial assistance to support developing standards for additional products is in the public interest.

B. Program History

EPEAT has been developed through a multi-stakeholder consensus decision-making process that was funded by U.S. EPA. The stakeholders worked in a Development Team for 18 months to balance competing interests. The result of this process was:

  1. A set of environmental criteria for computers (desktop and laptops) and monitors to evaluate electronic products; and
  2. A recommended approach for managing, registering, and verifying products that meet those criteria.

These two elements were codified by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) through the IEEE Standards Association (IEEE-SA). This involved convening a smaller group of stakeholders to put the EPEAT recommendations into the standard format, and submitting the standard to several rounds of balloting through an ANSI-accredited consensus process. This process was coordinated by the grantee and U.S. EPA, to ensure that it met the essential ANSI requirements of openness, stakeholder balance, and due process. The final IEEE Standard 1680 was published in April 2006.

IEEE 1680 establishes clear guidelines on how products are declared to meet the environmental criteria, and entered into a central online registry. It also lays out a clear verification process that ensures the claims made by manufacturers are accurate.

In January 2006, U.S. EPA awarded funding to the GEC to oversee the EPEAT system and implement the registry and verification functions outlined in IEEE 1680. GEC launched the EPEAT registry in July 2006, and as of July 2007 had already registered more than 400 products from 20 manufacturers. GEC is no longer funded by EPA and continues to run the EPEAT Product Registry and product verification system and conduct marketing of EPEAT to purchasers with funding received via EPEAT subscriber registration fees. All product registration and verification functions for existing and new EPEAT standards will be conducted as outlined in the IEEE 1680 Standard and will not be the responsibility of the recipient of this grant. GEC will coordinate expansion of the product registry and verification process to include any new products addressed by new EPEAT standards through fees and other sources of funding.

For more information about GEC and how the current EPEAT program is organized and run, see http://www.epeat.net. Exit EPA Disclaimer

Given the success of EPEAT since it was launched, stakeholders have expressed to EPA their interest in adding additional electronic products to the system. The EPEAT Standard Development Roadmap (SDR) project which was funded by EPA provides recommendations for development of environmental leadership standards for electronic products that are parallel and compatible with IEEE 1680. This project gathered input from interested stakeholders on:

The final recommendations from the Roadmap as of July 3, 2007 include the following (Note: the sequencing of the development of these standards may be subject to change based on stakeholder input and availability of funding.

  1. Develop standards for four new sets of products in the following sequence: • Imaging Devices (printers, copiers and multifunction devices) and Televisions and Television Monitors (two separate standards) – Development of standards for these two product categories are proposed to be conducted first. Depending on resource availability and stakeholder interest, these standards development processes could begin simultaneously or on a staggered timeline. • Servers – Development of a standard for servers is proposed to begin following the completion of the ENERGY STAR® standard for servers, which is likely to occur in one to two years. • Mobile Devices (mobile phones, personal digital assistants, and SmartPhones) – Development of a standard for mobile devices is proposed to begin following the completion of the standards development process for imaging devices and/or televisions.
  2. Method of standard development: The future environmental standards should be developed through an ANSI accredited, voluntary consensus standard process using the IEEE as the Standard Development Organization. This will preserve continuity with EPEAT / IEEE 1680 and build on the successes to date.
  3. Timing of standards development: The standards should be developed in a staggered fashion over the next five years.

To see the full recommendations of the Roadmap Exit EPA Disclaimer, go to http://www.zerowaste.org/epeat/roadmap.htm.

U.S. EPA has already provided funding to hold two initial scoping meetings for the first two standards tentatively to be held in February and April of 2007.

C. Goals of Current Announcement

The goal of this announcement is to implement many of the recommendations in the Standards Development Roadmap. In particular, U.S. EPA is seeking proposals from eligible organizations to develop the four new environmental leadership standards for imaging devices, televisions, servers, and mobile devices.

The main goals of this announcement are to accomplish the following activities: The applicants are expected to prepare a detailed Program Implementation Plan (see Section IV, B3) that explains their approach for accomplishing these activities.

Coordinating standards development processes for multiple products. It is critical to stakeholders that the standards development processes be as efficient and well coordinated as possible. This could include, but is not limited to, identifying stakeholders, facilitating meetings, and tracking progress and milestones. This also includes working closely with the relevant standard setting organizations to make sure the stakeholders follow proper procedures.

Providing technical support for standards workgroups: The recipient must provide technical and research support throughout the standards development processes. This may include (but is not limited to) tasks such as background research on existing standards or identifying stakeholders to help solve specific technical issues.

Finalizing standards through the IEEE-SA: The recipient must ensure that any standards developed under this cooperative agreement get finalized and published by the IEEE-Standards Association.

Estimating potential impact of new standards: The recipient will be responsible for identifying and estimating project outputs and environmental outcomes, as required by EPA's Environmental Results Policy (see below).

Building upon and improving the approach developed by the SRD Roadmap: EPA is interested in alternative and innovative approaches to developing standards that may not be reflected in the SRD roadmap.

D. Alignment with U.S. EPA's Environmental Results Policy

Applicants are required to describe outcome and output efforts in their proposals. The term "outcome," as defined by the Agency, refers to the result, effect or consequence that will occur from carrying out an environmental program or activity that is related to an environmental or programmatic goal or objective. Outcomes may be environmental, behavioral, health-related or programmatic in nature and must be able to be quantified. The term "output," as defined by the Agency, refers to an environmental activity or effort and associated work product related to an environmental goal or objective that will be produced or provided over a period of time or by a specified date. Outputs may be quantitative or qualitative, but must be measurable during the assistance agreement funding period.

Examples of output measures expected to be achieved under the agreement awarded through this announcement include, but are not limited to:

Examples of outcome measures expected to be achieved under the agreement awarded through this announcement include, but are not limited to:

Grant proposals must include project milestones specifying the outcomes and outputs that will result, and a clear description of the method(s) the grantee will use to track and measure progress in achieving the expected outcomes and outputs associated with each project milestone.

E. Agency Strategic Plan

Proposals must commit to and work towards the following four long-term strategic targets of U.S. EPA's Pollution Prevention Program. The program based the numeric targets for these goals on the anticipated cumulative results from all program areas by 2011. Baseline amounts count reductions achieved by the program by the baseline year. For hazardous materials, the program had counted reductions of 44 million pounds by 2000. It aims to reduce 4.46 billion more pounds cumulatively by 2011, totaling 4.5 billion pounds cumulatively reduced by 2011. For British Thermal Units (BTUs), the program had counted reductions of zero by 2002, and aims to reduce 31.5 trillion BTUs cumulatively by 2011.

The Pollution Prevention Program's goals and strategic targets in the Agency's 2006-2011 Strategic Plan are located in Goal 5: Objective 5.2: Improve Environmental Performance Through Pollution Prevention and the Adoption of Other Stewardship Practices that Lead to Sustainable Outcomes, Sub-Objective 5.2.1 Prevent Pollution and Promote Environmental Stewardship by Business, Government and the Public:

Strategic Targets

For more information, go to http://www.epa.gov/ocfopage/plan/2006/goal_5.pdf (PDF) (20 pp, 1.4MB, About PDF) and scroll down to page 129 to Objective 5.2.

F. Statutory Authority

The Electronics Standards Grants Program will award one cooperative agreement under this announcement based on the following statutory authorities: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Section 8001(a), as amended; and Toxic Substances Control Act, Section 10, as amended.

Please note: Projects under these U.S. EPA grant authorities must involve: "research, investigations, experiments, training, demonstration of new or innovative techniques, surveys and studies." These activities relate generally to the gathering or transferring of information or advancing awareness. Applicants should emphasize in their grant proposals this "learning" concept, as opposed to implementing known approaches. Proposals should indicate how the project will develop new and innovative environmental leadership standards that do not replicate existing and widely used programs and processes.

Top of page

II. Award Information

U.S. EPA Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Pollution Prevention Division, and the Office of Solid Waste, intend to award approximately $300,000 to one applicant under this announcement through a cooperative assistance agreement. It is expected that the agreement will be incrementally funded. The first phase (Phase 1) of funding will be approximately $100,000 for the first year to support the development of at least two new standards. Additional funding (Phase 2) up to a total of approximately $200,000 may be available in following years depending on performance of Phase 1, the availability of funding, and other applicable considerations. Applicants should submit a work plan and budget encompassing both Phase 1 and 2, for the full $300,000 amount. One award will be made under this announcement. The anticipated award date will be March 2008. The duration of the project shall be no longer than five years.

As a cooperative agreement, U.S. EPA will have a "substantial involvement" in the project. This will include (but is not limited to) working closely with the recipient on overall coordination of the standards development processes. The terms of EPA's substantial involvement will be negotiated with the recipient and reflected in the terms and conditions of the cooperative agreement. Please note that the recipient will not be providing services or products for EPA's direct use or benefit and, consequently, the recipient will make the final decisions on the content of the standards subject to the requirements of the ANSI process.

In appropriate circumstances, EPA reserves the right to partially fund proposals by funding discrete portions or phases of proposed projects. If EPA decides to partially fund a proposal, it will do so in a manner that does not prejudice any applicants or affect the basis upon which the proposal, or portion thereof, was evaluated and selected for award, and therefore maintains the integrity of the competition and selection process.

In order to be considered for partial funding, proposals must have clearly delineated activities or phases with separate budget estimates for each activity/phase of the project. All awards will be consistent with the applicable U.S. EPA regulations and policies.

U.S. EPA reserves the right to reject any or all proposals and issue no awards under this announcement.

EPA will hold an informational question and answer meeting with potential applicants and interested stakeholders about this announcement. The meeting will be held on November 5th, 2007, 1:00 PM – 3:00 PM EST, via call in line 866-299-3188, pass code 206-553-1060. To participate, please RSVP to Holly Elwood at elwood.holly@epa.gov.

Top of page

III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants:

Applicants eligible to apply under this announcement are the fifty States, the District of Columbia, the United States Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, any territory or possession of the United States, local governments, city or township governments, independent school district governments, state controlled institutions of higher education, Federally-recognized tribal governments, non-profits other than institutions of higher education, private institutions of higher education, and community-based grassroots organizations. For profit firms are not eligible to apply under this announcement. Nonprofit organizations must be able to demonstrate that they are eligible through documentation of nonprofit status provided the U.S. Internal Revenue Service or their state of incorporation. However, nonprofit organizations described in Section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code that engage in lobbying activities as defined in Section 3 of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 are not eligible to apply.

B. Cost Sharing and Matching Requirements

U.S. EPA will not require cost sharing under this announcement. However; EPA will evaluate the applicant's plan to leverage additional resources as part of the evaluation criteria, and proposal contents. See Section IV and Section V below for more details on leveraged funding.

C. Threshold Requirements for Proposals

Proposals from eligible applicants (see Section III, Part A) will be required to meet all of the following threshold criteria by the time of proposal submission in order to be evaluated for funding. Applicants deemed ineligible for funding consideration as a result of the threshold eligibility review will be notified within 15 calendar days of the ineligibility determination.

  1. Program Requirements
    • Proposals must address the key goals outlined in Section I, Part C above.
      1. Proposals must substantially comply with the proposal submission instructions and requirements set forth in Section IV of this announcement or else they will be rejected. However, where a page limit is expressed in Section IV with respect to parts of the proposal package, pages in excess of the page limitation will not be reviewed.

      2. In addition, proposals must be received by the EPA or received through www.grants.gov, as specified in Section IV of this announcement, on or before the proposal submission deadline published in Section IV of this announcement. Applicants are responsible for ensuring that their proposal reaches the designated person/office specified in Section IV of the announcement by the submission deadline.

        Proposals received after the submission deadline will be considered late and returned to the sender without further consideration unless the applicant can clearly demonstrate that it was late due to EPA mishandling. For hard copy submissions, where Section IV requires proposal receipt by a specific person/office by the submission deadline, receipt by an agency mailroom is not sufficient. Applicants should confirm receipt of their proposal with Holly Elwood at 202-564-8854 as soon as possible after the submission deadline—failure to do so may result in your proposal not being reviewed.

    • Total U.S. EPA funding requested must not exceed $300,000.

D. Funding Restrictions

U.S. EPA assistance agreement funds may only be used for the purposes set forth in the assistance agreement and must be consistent with the designated statutory authorities for this solicitation (RCRA Section 8001 and TSCA Section 10 listed above in Section I, Part F). Assistance agreement funds may not be used for matching funds for other Federal grants, lobbying, or intervention in Federal regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings. In addition, Federal funds may not be used to sue the Federal government or any other government entity. All costs identified in the budget must conform to applicable Federal cost principles contained in Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-87; A-122; and A-21, as appropriate. U.S. EPA will subtract proposed ineligible costs from the final approved budget if a grant or cooperative agreement is awarded.

Top of page

IV. Application Submission Information

Applicants are advised to carefully read through these instructions.

A. How to Submit a Proposal

Applicants must send proposals by hard copy to the contact listed below or submit the proposal electronically through http://www.grants.gov. U.S. EPA will no longer consider proposals sent by e-mail. Applicants must prepare their proposal package as described below in Section IV, Part B.

A final (full) grant application will be requested only from the applicant whose proposal has been tentatively selected for award. Additional instructions for the final application package will be provided when the applicant is notified of the tentative selection.

  1. Hard Copy Proposal Submission:

    1. How to Send Proposals Via Overnight Delivery or Courier Service

      U.S. EPA strongly recommends that applicants use overnight delivery service or courier service, as regular mail may be subject to unforeseeable delays. For courier or overnight delivery, send proposals to:

      Holly Elwood
      Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
      US Environmental Protection Agency
      EPA East Building , MC 7409
      1201 Constitution Ave., N.W , Rm # 5213
      Washington, DC 20004

    2. How to Send Proposals via Regular Mail

      If using Regular (U.S.) mail, applicants must send proposals to:

      Holly Elwood
      Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
      US Environmental Protection Agency, MC 7409-M
      EPA East Building
      1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
      Washington, D.C. 20460

  2. How to Send Proposals Electronically through http://www.grants.gov

    Applicants choosing to send their proposal electronically must do so through http://www.grants.gov. Please refer to Attachment A at the end of this announcement for instructions on sending a proposal electronically through http://www.grants.gov.

B. Content of Proposals

Applicants must prepare their proposal packages as described below. Applicants submitting proposal packages by hard copy are required to submit two copies of their proposal package, preferably double-sided, to the contact listed in Section IV, Part A above. Applicants are strongly advised to submit proposal narratives which are clear and concise. Regardless of the mode of proposal submission, proposal packages must contain the following elements.

  1. Application for Federal Assistance Form (SF-424): Please note – This form is only required when submitting a grant proposal electronically through http://www.grants.gov. It is not required if you plan to submit a hard copy grant proposal. When filling out form SF-424, applicants are required to provide a Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number. Organizations may obtain a DUNS number by calling the toll-free DUNS number request line at 1-866-705-5711. Alternatively, applicants may also request a DUNS number online by going to http://fedgov.dnb.com/webform and following the instructions for grant applications. Please be sure to include organization fax number and email address in Block 5 of the Standard Form SF 424.

  2. Cover page: The cover page should contain the title, the funding opportunity number, and the applicant's contact information (name of applicant, name of the organization, mailing address, phone number, email address, and fax number). The cover page does not count toward any page limit requirements.

  3. Program implementation plan: (no more than 10 single spaced pages) providing detailed information on the following:

    • Clear program plan for implementation of the standards development process, indicating how the applicant will build on the work already completed and meet the goals of the program listed above in Section I, Part C.
    • Description of how the organization will work with multiple stakeholders, including government, manufacturers, environmental community, purchasing community and IEEE-SA to successfully complete the desired outcomes
    • A description of the commitments for the project(s) components and time frames for their accomplishment.
    • A discussion of roles and responsibilities of the recipient and U.S. EPA in carrying out the project(s) commitments.
    • A plan for tracking and measuring progress towards achieving the expected outputs/outcomes including those identified in Section I, Part D.
    • A discussion of any alternative and innovative approaches to developing standards that may not be reflected in the SDR Road Map that the applicant believes would build upon and improve the approach being taken by the SDR Road Map.

  4. Specific information responding to the Evaluation Criteria in Section V below (no more than 10 single spaced pages), including:

    • Demonstration of the applicant's organizational capacity to successfully perform and manage the proposed project including information on the following:
      • The applicant's organizational mission and goals
      • Current programs being performed
      • Office locations and staffing
      • Explanation of organizational and programmatic capacity to successfully perform the proposed project and implement the goals outlined in Section I, Part C of the RFP, including a list of federally funded assistance agreements (assistance agreements include Federal grants and cooperative agreements but not Federal contracts) similar in size, scope and relevance to the proposed project that your organization performed within the last three years (no more than 5, and preferably EPA agreements) and describe (i) whether, and how, you were able to successfully complete and manage those agreements and (ii) your history of meeting the reporting requirements under those agreements including submitting acceptable final technical reports.

        In addition, provide a description of how you documented and/or reported on whether you were making progress towards achieving the expected results (e.g., outputs and outcomes) under the agreements described above. If you were not making progress, please indicate whether, and how, you documented why not.

        In evaluating applicants under these factors in Section V, EPA will consider the information provided by the applicant and may also consider relevant information from other sources, including information from EPA files and from current and prior Federal agency grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information provided by the applicant). If you do not have any relevant or available past performance or reporting information, please indicate this in the proposal and you will receive a neutral score for these factors under Section V.

      • Organization's financial status, including summary of audited balance sheets for the past 3 years

    • A staffing proposal detailing the number and responsibilities of the personnel which the applicant anticipates providing and/or establishing for the development of the four standards.
    • Funding leveraging plan that outlines whether and how the recipient plans to identify and secure additional funds to successfully complete all the expected work, and what role EPA funding will play in the overall project.
    • Explanation of how the program implementation plan referenced above will clearly meet the goals of this announcement listed in Section I, Part C.

  5. Project budget: The budget must include estimates on the costs for labor (by labor and category), fringe benefits, travel, equipment, supplies, contractors, and for other direct costs and indirect costs. Your budget must itemize these costs under each task identified in the work plan as well as for the entire proposed project. The costs and revenues must include at a minimum the following items:

    • U.S. EPA seed funding
    • Cash or in kind contributions
    • Operating expenses (rent, phone, supplies, etc.)
    • Travel expenses
    • Staffing costs consistent with staffing proposal

    Please note that when formulating budgets for proposals, applicants must not include management fees or similar charges in excess of the direct costs and indirect costs at the rate approved by the applicants cognizant audit agency, or at the rate provided for by the terms of the agreement negotiated with EPA. The term "management fees or similar charges" refers to expenses added to the direct costs in order to accumulate and reserve funds for ongoing business expenses, unforeseen liabilities, or for other similar costs that are not allowable under EPA assistance agreements. Management fees or similar charges may not be used to improve or expand the project funded under this agreement, except to the extent authorized as a direct cost of carrying out the scope of work.

  6. References: A list of at least three references including but not limited to, those from organizations in the electronics industry, institutional purchasing community, standards development community, or electronics recycling.

    The format described above must be used for all proposals. Within the format guidelines, applicants must include information that relates to the ranking factors outlined in Section V. Where a page limit is specified for a section of this format, reviewers will only read up to the number of pages specified– any material exceeding the page limits will not be considered in the evaluation.

    Grant proposals must include project milestones specifying the outcomes and outputs that will result, and a clear description of the method(s) the grantee will use to track and measure progress in achieving the expected outcomes and outputs associated with each project milestone.

C. Questions on this Announcement

Administrative Questions:
U.S. EPA will respond directly to individual applicants who submit questions regarding threshold eligibility criteria, administrative issues related to the submission of the proposal, and requests for clarification about the announcement. If a request for a clarification results in a modification to the announcement, the modification will be posted at: http://www.epa.gov/p2/pubs/grants/, and on http://www.grants.gov/.

Questions clarifying the RFP:
U.S. EPA will review questions regarding the announcement and will respond to those that may be pertinent to all potential applicants and modify the announcement if necessary. The questions must be submitted in writing by November 20, 2007 to Holly Elwood (see address above, or via email at elwood.holly@epa.gov). Those questions and U.S. EPA's responses will be posted on http://www.epa.gov/p2/pubs/grants/.

Pre-proposal/Application Assistance and Communications.
In accordance with EPA's Assistance Agreement Competition Policy (EPA Order 5700.5A1), EPA staff will not meet with individual applicants to discuss draft proposals, provide informal comments on draft proposals, or provide advice to applicants on how to respond to ranking criteria. Applicants are responsible for the contents of their applications/proposals. However, consistent with the provisions in the announcement, EPA will respond to questions from individual applicants regarding threshold eligibility criteria, administrative issues related to the submission of the proposal, and requests for clarification about the announcement.

D. Submission Dates

Dates: Hard copy proposals must be received by EPA (See Section IV.A above) by 4:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) December 5th, 2007; proposals submitted by electronic submission through Grants.gov must be received by 11:59 P.M. EDT December 5th, 2007. Late proposals will not be considered for funding. Questions must be submitted in writing via e-mail and must be received by the Agency Contact identified in Section VII before November 20, 2007. Please refer to Section IV, Parts A and C for more information.

E. Other Submission Requirements

  1. Intergovernmental Review

    Applicants must comply with the Intergovernmental Review Process and/or the consultation provisions of Section 204, of the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act, if applicable, which are contained in 40 Code of Federal Regulation (CFR) Part 29. All State applicants should consult with their U.S. EPA Regional office or official designated as the single point of contact in his or her State for more information on the process the State requires when applying for assistance; if the State has selected the program for review. If you do not know who your Single Point of Contact is, please call the U.S. EPA Headquarters Grant Policy Information and Training Branch at (202) 564-5325 or refer to the State Single Point of Contact website at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/spoc.html. Federally-recognized tribes and intertribal consortia are not required to comply with this procedure.

  2. Confidential Business Information

    In accordance with 40 CFR 2.203, applicants may claim all or a portion of their proposal as confidential business information. U.S. EPA will evaluate confidentiality claims in accordance with 40 CFR Part 2. Applicants must clearly mark proposals or portions of the proposal they claim as confidential. If no claim of confidentiality is made, U.S. EPA is not required to make the inquiry to the applicant otherwise required by 40 CFR 2.204(c) (2) prior to disclosure.

  3. Contracts and Sub-awards:

    a. Can funding be used for the applicant to make sub-awards, acquire contract services or fund partnerships?

    EPA awards funds to one eligible applicant as the recipient even if other eligible applicants are named as partners or co-applicants or members of a coalition or consortium. The recipient is accountable to EPA for the proper expenditure of funds.

    Funding may be used to provide sub-grants or sub-awards of financial assistance, which includes using sub-awards or sub-grants to fund partnerships , provided the recipient complies with applicable requirements for sub-awards or sub-grants including those contained in 40 CFR Parts 30 or 31, as appropriate. Applicants must compete contracts for services and products, including consultant contracts, and conduct cost and price analyses to the extent required by the procurement provisions of the regulations at 40 CFR Parts 30 or 31, as appropriate. The regulations also contain limitations on consultant compensation. Applicants are not required to identify sub-awardees/sub-grantees and/or contractors (including consultants) in their proposal/application. However, if they do, the fact that an applicant selected for award has named a specific sub-awardee/sub-grantee, contractor, or consultant in the proposal/application EPA selects for funding does not relieve the applicant of its obligations to comply with sub-award/sub-grant and/or competitive procurement requirements as appropriate. Please note that applicants may not award sole source contracts to consulting, engineering or other firms assisting applicants with the proposal solely based on the firm's role in preparing the proposal/application.

    Recipients cannot use sub-grants or sub-awards to avoid requirements in EPA grant regulations for competitive procurement by using these instruments to acquire commercial services or products from for-profit organizations to carry out its assistance agreement. The nature of the transaction between the recipient and the sub-awardee or sub-grantee must be consistent with the standards for distinguishing between vendor transactions and sub-recipient assistance under Subpart B Section .210 of OMB Circular A-133, and the definitions of sub-award at 40 CFR 30.2(ff) or sub-grant at 40 CFR 31.3, as applicable. EPA will not be a party to these transactions. Applicants acquiring commercial goods or services must comply with the competitive procurement standards in 40 CFR Part 30 or 40 CFR Part 31.36 and cannot use a sub-award/sub-grant as the funding mechanism.

    b. How will an applicant's proposed sub-awardees/sub-grantees and contractors be considered during the evaluation process described in Section V of the announcement?

    Section V of the announcement describes the evaluation criteria and evaluation process that will be used by EPA to make selections under this announcement. During this evaluation, except for those criteria that relate to the applicant's own qualifications, past performance, and reporting history, the review panel will consider, if appropriate and relevant, the qualifications, expertise, and experience of:

    1. an applicant's named sub-awardees/sub-grantees identified in the proposal/application if the applicant demonstrates in the proposal/application that if it receives an award that the sub-award/sub-grant will be properly awarded consistent with the applicable regulations in 40 CFR Parts 30 or 31. For example, applicants must not use sub-awards/sub-grants to obtain commercial services or products from for profit firms or individual consultants.
    2. an applicant's named contractor(s), including consultants, identified in the proposal/application if the applicant demonstrates in its proposal/application that the contractor(s) was selected in compliance with the competitive Procurement Standards in 40 CFR Part 30 or 40 CFR 31.36 as appropriate. For example, an applicant must demonstrate that it selected the contractor(s) competitively or that a proper non-competitive sole-source award consistent with the regulations will be made to the contractor(s), that efforts were made to provide small and disadvantaged businesses with opportunities to compete, and that some form of cost or price analysis was conducted. EPA may not accept sole source justifications for contracts for services or products that are otherwise readily available in the commercial marketplace.

    EPA will not consider the qualifications, experience, and expertise of named sub-awardees/sub-grantees and/or named contractor(s) during the proposal/application evaluation process unless the applicant complies with these requirements.

Top of page

V. Application Review Information

A. Review and Selection Process

Proposals that pass the threshold eligibility and screening review described in Section III will then be evaluated against the ranking criteria identified in Section B.1 below by a review panel composed of US EPA staff and external (non-EPA) reviewers. US EPA staff reviewing the proposals will include members from the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Office of Solid Waste, and at least two regional offices. The external reviewers may include representatives from the electronics, purchasing, and environmental fields. All of the reviewers will be required to certify that they have no conflicts of interest with respect to any proposal or applicant.

Based on the initial evaluation results, the top ranked applicants (no more than three) will proceed to the next evaluation phase—the oral presentation. These applicants will then be asked to develop and deliver a presentation for a teleconference meeting with U.S. EPA and external reviewers which will be evaluated against the oral presentation criteria identified below in section B.2.

The purpose of the oral presentation will be to provide reviewers with more depth and detail on the applicant's areas of expertise, the applicant's plan for maintaining continuity with the EPEAT efforts to date and a plan for working with stakeholders, and information to evaluate overall quality and ability to manage a complex project. Each of the finalists will be asked a set of identical questions based on the evaluation criterion below in section B.2. These questions will be supplied to the finalists in advance. After the presentations, the review panel will combine the scores from the evaluation of the oral presentation with the scores from the initial evaluation of the proposals to make a funding recommendation to EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, who will make the final funding recommendation. The final funding recommendation will be based on the review panel recommendations and may also take into account program priorities.

B. Criteria and Ranking Factors

  1. Initial Review of Proposals

    All eligible proposals will be scored and ranked based on the following criteria:

    1. Organizational Capacity (35 Points): The applicant will be evaluated based on the extent it demonstrates that it has the ability to successfully manage and perform a project with the complexity and scope of EPEAT. Factors that will be considered include:

      • Programmatic Capability and Reporting ( 15 points)
        Under this criterion, applicants will be evaluated based on their ability to successfully complete and manage the proposed project taking into account the applicant's: (i) past performance in successfully completing and managing federally funded assistance agreements (assistance agreements include Federal grants and cooperative agreements but not Federal contracts) similar in size, scope, and relevance to the proposed project performed within the last 3 years, (5 points) (ii) history of meeting reporting requirements under federally funded assistance agreements (assistance agreements include Federal grants and cooperative agreements but not Federal contracts) similar in size, scope, and relevance to the proposed project performed within the last 3 years and submitting acceptable final technical reports under those agreements ( 5 points) and (iii) extent and quality to which they adequately documented and/or reported on their progress towards achieving the expected results (e.g., outcomes and outputs) under Federal agency assistance agreements (assistance agreements include Federal grants and cooperative agreements but not Federal contracts) performed within the last three years, and if such progress was not being made whether the applicant adequately documented and/or reported why not (5 points). Note: In evaluating applicants under this criterion, the Agency will consider the information provided by the applicant and may also consider relevant information from other sources including agency files and prior/current grantors (e.g., to verify and/or supplement the information supplied by the applicant). Applicants with no relevant or available past performance or reporting history will receive a neutral score for those elements of this criterion (a neutral is 2.5/5 points).

      • Demonstrated ability to work with multiple stakeholders (10 points)

      • Adequate financial, management, and operational capabilities to complete tasks outlined in the project plan. (10 points)

    2. Staff Capacity (15 points): Applicants will be evaluated based on the extent they demonstrate that the project participants are well qualified to conduct the proposed project, have a demonstrated record of success in their previous work in areas related to environmental performance standards development, and whether the applicant demonstrates ability to ensure accountability by key personnel. One indication of staff capacity will be whether staff has experience in one or more of the following subject areas:

      • Electronic products and design
      • Participation or leadership in standards development processes
      • Successfully facilitating complex multi-stakeholders processes and maintaining credibility and independence from key stakeholder groups

    3. Clear and Feasible Program Implementation Plan (40 points): Applicants will be evaluated based on the extent they provide a clear description of a strategy to achieve the program goals focusing on the following factors:

      • Clear and well crafted description of how applicant will manage and coordinate multiple standards development processes, reflecting understanding of, and integration with, the work conducted under IEEE 1680 and the recommendations of the EPEAT Standards Development Roadmap project. (30 points)
      • Well crafted approach for gaining input from, and participation of, multiple stakeholders, and for effectively managing the stakeholder process, (10 points)

    4. Leveraging additional funds (20 points): Under this criterion, applicants will be evaluated based on the extent they demonstrate (i) how they will coordinate the use of EPA funding with other Federal and/or non Federal sources of funds to leverage additional resources to carry out the proposed project(s) and/or (ii) that EPA funding will compliment activities relevant to the proposed project(s) carried out by the applicant with other sources of funds or resources. Leveraged funding or other resources need not be for eligible and allowable project costs under the EPA assistance agreement unless the Applicant proposes to provide a voluntary cost share or match. If EPA accepts an offer for a voluntary cost share or match, applicants must meet their matching or cost sharing commitment as a condition of receiving EPA funding. Applicants may use their own funds or other resources for voluntary match or cost shares if the standards at 40 CFR 30.23 or 40 CFR 31.24, as applicable, are met. Only eligible and allowable costs may be used for voluntary matches or cost shares. Other Federal grants may not be used as voluntary matches or cost shares without specific statutory authority (e.g. HUD's Community Development Block Grants).

    5. Tracking and Measuring Progress (5 points): Applicants will be evaluated based on the extent to which their proposal clearly indicates how they will track and measure their progress toward accomplishing the expected outputs and outcomes expected under the agreement including those identified in Section I, Part D of this announcement.

    6. Budget (10 points – 5 points for each sub-factor): (a) The extent to which the applicant presents a proposal narrative which explains the project(s) budget by category; and (b) the extent to which the applicant demonstrates they will make effective and judicious use of Federal funds. Please note: The use of U.S. EPA financial assistance compensation for consultants is limited to the daily equivalent of the rate paid to Federal employees at the ES-IV level (see 40 CFR §§ 0.27 B (b) and 31.36 (j)).

  2. Evaluation of Oral Presentation

    The following criteria worth a total of 40 points (10 points each) will be used to evaluate those high ranking applicants (based on the initial proposal review described above) selected to make the oral presentation. The applicant's presentation will be evaluated based on the extent they clearly demonstrate the applicant's:

    • Ability to manage a complex project similar in scope and size,
    • Depth of technical and organizational expertise,
    • Ability to convene and involve diverse stakeholders, and
    • Plan for managing multiple workgroups and tracking progress toward milestones.

Top of page

VI. Award Administration Information

A. Award Notices

U.S. EPA anticipates that awards will be announced by February 2008 and award notices will be issued by March 2008. Non-profit applicants that are recommended for funding under this announcement are subject to pre-award administrative capability reviews consistent with Section 8b, 8c and 9d of EPA Order 5700.8 - Policy on Assessing Capabilities of Non-Profit Applicants for Managing Assistance Awards (PDF) (9 pp, 31.4KB, About PDF) (http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/award/5700_8.pdf ). In addition, non-profit applicants that qualify for funding may, depending on the size of the award, be required to fill out and submit to the Grants Management Office the Administrative Capabilities Form with supporting documents contained in Appendix A of EPA Order 5700.8.

B. Dispute Resolution Process

Assistance agreement competition-related disputes will be resolved in accordance with the dispute resolution procedures published in 70 Federal Register (FR) 3629, 3630 (January 26, 2005) which can be found at http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20051800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2005/05-1371.htm. Copies of these procedures may be requested by contacting the agency contact listed in Section VII.

C. Administrative Requirements

  1. Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC)

    Certain quality assurance and/or quality control (QA/QC) and peer review requirements are applicable to the collection of environmental data. Environmental data are any measurements or information that describe environmental processes, location, or condition; ecological or health effects and consequences; or the performance of environmental technology. Environmental data also include information collected directly from measurements, produced from models, and obtained from other sources such as data bases or published literature. Regulations pertaining to QA/QC requirements can be found in 40 CFR Parts 30.54 and 31.45. According to 40 CFR Part 30.54, projects that involve environmentally related measurements or data generation must develop and implement quality assurance practices to meet the projects' objectives. Additional guidance can be found at http://www.epa.gov/quality/qa_docs.html#noeparqt.

    Applicants for the Electronics Standards Grant Solicitation are not required to submit quality assurance documentation as part of the application package, but may be required at time of award. Each grant award will contain a condition establishing a deadline for the grantee to submit acceptable quality assurance documentation to U.S. EPA.

  2. Audits

    Periodic audits should be made as part of the recipient's system of financial management and internal control to meet the terms and conditions of grants and other assistance agreements. In accordance with the provisions of OMB Circular No. A 133, "Audits of States, Local Governments, and Nonprofit Organizations," non-federal entities that receive financial assistance of $500,000 or more within the State's fiscal year shall have an audit made for that year. The OMB Circular No. A 133, "Audits of States, Local Governments, and Nonprofit Organizations," was published in the Federal Register on June 30, 1997. The Circular implements the Single Audit Act amendments of 1996. State agencies that receive less than $500,000 within the State's fiscal year shall have an audit made in accordance with Federal laws and regulations governing the programs in which they participate.

  3. Records

    Financial records, including all documents to support entries on accounting records to substantiate charges to each assistance agreement, must be kept available to personnel authorized to examine U.S. EPA assistance agreement accounts. All records must be maintained for three years from the date of submission of the annual financial status report. If questions still remain, such as those posed as a result of an audit, related records should be retained until the matter is completely resolved.

D. Reporting

  1. Uniform reporting requirements for institutions of higher education and other non-profit organizations

    The recipient, along with the Project Officer, will develop a process for jointly evaluating and reporting progress and accomplishments under the work plan. The work plans and reporting must be consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR Part 30, subpart C. A description of the evaluation process and a reporting schedule must be included in the work plan (see sections 30.51 through 30.53). Under this grant program, U.S. EPA will require the grant recipient to submit semi-annual progress reports during the life of the project to the Project Officer. Recipients should provide discussion of accomplishments as measured against work plan commitments; a discussion of cumulative effectiveness of the work performed under all work plan components; a discussion of existing and potential problem areas; and suggestions for improvement, including where feasible, schedules for making improvements. If evaluation reveals the recipient has not made sufficient progress under the work plan, the Project Officer and the recipient will negotiate a resolution. The recipient may request a review of the Project Officer's decision under the dispute resolution process under 40 CFR 30.63. Upon completing the grant project, the recipient will be required to submit a final technical report to the Project Officer.

  2. Uniform reporting requirement for State, local and tribal governments

    The recipient, along with the Project Officer, will develop a process for jointly evaluating and reporting progress and accomplishments under the work plan. The work plans and reporting must be consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR 31, subpart C. A description of the evaluation process and a reporting schedule must be included in the work plan (see sections 31.40 through 30.42). Under this grant program, U.S. EPA will require the grant recipient to submit semi-annual progress reports during the life of the project to the Project Officer. Recipients should provide discussion of accomplishments as measured against work plan commitments; a discussion of cumulative effectiveness of the work performed under all work plan components; a discussion of existing and potential problem areas; and suggestions for improvement, including where feasible, schedules for making improvements. If evaluation reveals the recipient has not made sufficient progress under the work plan, the Project Officer and the recipient will negotiate a resolution that addresses the issues. If issues cannot be resolved through negotiation, the Project Officer may take appropriate action (see sections 31.43 through 31.44.) The recipient may request a review of the Project Officer's decision under the dispute resolution process under 40 CFR, Part 31, subpart F. Upon completing the grant project, the recipient will be required to submit a final technical report to the Project Officer.

Top of page

VII. Agency Contact

For more information about this announcement, please contact:

Holly Elwood
U.S. EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
elwood.holly@epa.gov
202-564-8854

ATTACHMENT A

I. Instructions for Applying Through Grants.gov

The electronic submission of your proposal, as described in Section IV.B of the announcement, must be made by an official representative (AOR) of your institution who is registered with Grants.gov and is authorized to sign applications for Federal assistance. For more information, go to http://www.grants.gov and click on "Get Registered" on the left side of the page. Note that the registration process may take a week or longer to complete. If your organization is not currently registered with Grants.gov, please encourage your office to designate an AOR and ask that individual to begin the registration process as soon as possible.

To begin the proposal process go to http://www.grants.gov and click on the "Apply for Grants" tab on the left side of the page. Then click on "Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Instructions" to download the PureEdge Viewer and obtain the proposal package for the announcement. To download the PureEdge Viewer click on the PureEdge Viewer Link. Once you have downloaded the viewer, you may retrieve the application package by entering the Funding Opportunity Number, EPA-OPPT-07-02 or the CFDA number (CFDA 66.717) in the appropriate field. You will find both of these numbers at the beginning of this announcement.

You may also access the proposal package by clicking on the button "How To Apply" at the top right of the synopsis page for this announcement on http://www.grants.gov (to find the synopsis page, go to http://www.grants.gov and click on the "Find Grant Opportunities" button on the left side of the page and then go to Search Opportunities and use the Browse by Agency feature to find U.S. EPA opportunities).

II. Proposal Submission Deadline

Your organization's AOR must submit your complete proposal package as described below and in Section IV.B of the announcement electronically to U.S. EPA through Grants.gov (http://www.grants.gov) no later than December 5th, 2007.

Please submit all of the proposal materials described below. To view the full funding announcement, go to http://www.epa.gov/p2/pubs/grants/ or go to http://www.grants.gov and click on "Find Grant Opportunities" on the left side of the page and then click on Search Opportunities/Browse by Agency and select Environmental Protection Agency.

III. Proposal Materials

The following forms and documents are required to be submitted under this announcement as specified in Section IV, Part B, of the announcement:

IV. Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

Documents listed under Proposal Materials above should appear, as described below, in the "Mandatory Documents" box on the Grants.gov Grant Application Package page.

For the Application for Federal Assistance, click on the appropriate form and then click "Open Form" below the box. The fields that must be completed will be highlighted in yellow. Optional fields and completed fields will be displayed in white. If you enter an invalid response or incomplete information in a field, you will receive an error message. When you have finished filling out each form, click "Save." When you return to the electronic Grant Application Package page, click on the form you just completed, and then click on the box that says, "Move Form to Submission List." This action will move the document over to the box that says, "Mandatory Completed Documents for Submission."

For all other documents listed under Proposed Materials above, you will need to attach electronic files. Prepare these documents as explained in Section IV of the announcement and save the documents to your computer as an MS Word, PDF or WordPerfect file. When you are ready to attach the documents to the application package, click on "Project Narrative Attachment Form," and open the form. Click "Add Mandatory Project Narrative File," and then attach the documents (previously saved to your computer) using the browse window that appears. You may then click "View Mandatory Project Narrative File" to view it. Enter a brief descriptive title of your project in the space beside "Mandatory Project Narrative File Filename;" the filename should be no more than 40 characters long. For other attachments you need to click "Add Optional Project Narrative File" and proceed as before. When you have finished attaching the necessary documents, click "Close Form." When you return to the "Grant Application Package" page, select the "Project Narrative Attachment Form" and click "Move Form to Submission List." The form should now appear in the box that says, "Mandatory Completed Documents for Submission."

V. Saving Your Work

Once you have finished filling out all of the forms/attachments and they appear in one of the "Completed Documents for Submission" boxes, click the "Save" button that appears at the top of the Web page. It is suggested that you save the document a second time, using a different name, since this will make it easier to submit an amended package later if necessary. Please use the following format when saving your file: "Applicant Name – FY08 – Assoc Prog Supp – 1st Submission" or "Applicant Name – FY 08 Assoc Prog Supp – Back-up Submission." If it becomes necessary to submit an amended package at a later date, then the name of the 2nd submission should be changed to "Applicant Name – FY08 Assoc Prog Supp – 2nd Submission."

Once your proposal package has been completed and saved, send it to your AOR for submission to U.S. EPA through Grants.gov. Please advise your AOR to close all other software programs before attempting to submit the proposal package through Grants.gov.

In the "Application Filing Name" box, your AOR should enter your organization's name (abbreviate where possible), the fiscal year (e.g., FY08), and the grant category (e.g., Assoc Prog Supp). The filing name should not exceed 40 characters. From the "Grant Application Package" page, your AOR may submit the application package by clicking the "Submit" button that appears at the top of the page. The AOR will then be asked to verify the agency and funding opportunity number for which the application package is being submitted. If problems are encountered during the submission process, the AOR should reboot his/her computer before trying to submit the application package again. [It may be necessary to turn off the computer (not just restart it) before attempting to submit the package again.] If the AOR continues to experience submission problems, he/she may contact Grants.gov for assistance by phone at 1-800-518-4726 or email at http://www.grants.gov/help/help.jsp or contact the agency contact listed in Section VII of the announcement.

Proposal packages submitted through Grants.gov will be time/date stamped electronically.

If you have not received a confirmation of receipt from U.S. EPA (not from Grants.gov) within 30 days of the proposal deadline, please contact the agency contact listed in Section VII of the announcement. Failure to do so may result in your proposal not being reviewed. Grants.gov is a new system, thus, applicants are strongly advised to send an e-mail notification to the program contact noting that an Electronics Standards Grant proposal was submitted via Grants.gov.

ATTENTION – Microsoft Vista and Word 2007 Users

Please note that Grants.gov does not currently support the new Microsoft Vista Operating system. The PureEdge software used by Grants.gov for forms is not compatible with Vista. Grants.gov will be reviewing this new product to determine if it can be supported in the future.

In addition, the new version of Microsoft Word saves documents with the extension .DOCX. The Grants.gov system does not process Microsoft Word documents with the extension .DOCX. When submitting Microsoft Word attachments toGrants.gov, please use the version of Microsoft Word that ends in DOC. If you have any questions regarding this matter please email the Grants.gov Contact Center at support@grants.gov or call 1-800-518-4726.

Top of page

Pollution Prevention Home | OPPT Home

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.