98-5854. Notice of Availability of Regional Pesticide Environmental Stewardship Program Grants

[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 44 (Friday, March 6, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11235-11237]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-5854]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[OPP-00524; FRL-5769-5]


Notice of Availability of Regional Pesticide Environmental 
Stewardship Program Grants

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability of regional Pesticide Environmental 
Stewardship Program (PESP) Grants.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is announcing the availability of approximately $498 
thousand in fiscal year 1998 grant/cooperative agreement funds under 
section 20 of the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 
(FIFRA) as amended, (the Act), for grants to States and all Federally 
recognized Native American Tribes. The grant dollars are targeted at 
State and Tribal programs that address reduction of the risks 
associated with pesticide use in agricultural and non-agricultural 
settings in the United States. EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs is 
offering the following grant opportunities to interested and qualified 
parties.

DATES: In order to be considered for funding during the FY'98 award 
cycle, all applications must be received by the appropriate EPA 
regional office on or before May 20, 1998. EPA will make its award 
decisions by June 19, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Your EPA Regional PESP Coordinator. 
Contact names for the coordinators are listed under Unit IV. of this 
document.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Availability of FY'98 Funds

    With this publication, EPA is announcing the availability of 
approximately $498 thousand in grant/cooperative agreement funds for 
FY'98. The Agency has delegated grant making authority to the EPA 
Regional Offices. Regional offices are responsible for the solicitation 
of interest, the screening of proposals, and the selection of projects. 
Grant guidance will be provided to all applicants along with any 
supplementary information the Regions may wish to provide. All 
applicants must address the criteria listed under Unit III.B. of this 
document. In addition, applicants may be required to meet any 
supplemental Regional criteria. Interested applicants should contact 
their Regional PESP coordinator listed under Unit IV. of this document 
for more information.

[[Page 11236]]

II. Eligible Applicants

    In accordance with the Act ``. . . Federal agencies, universities, 
or others as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of the act, . . 
.'' are eligible to receive a grant; however, because of restrictions 
associated with the funds appropriated for this program, the eligible 
applicants are limited. Eligible applicants for purposes of funding 
under this grant program include the 50 States, the District of 
Columbia, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, any 
territory or possession of the United States, any agency or 
instrumentality of a State including State universities, and all 
Federally recognized Native American tribes. For convenience, the term 
``State'' in this notice refers to all eligible applicants. Local 
governments, private universities, private nonprofit entities, private 
businesses, and individuals are not eligible. The organizations 
excluded from applying directly are encouraged to work with eligible 
applicants in developing proposals that include them as participants in 
the projects. Contact your EPA Regional PESP coordinator for assistance 
in identifying and contacting eligible applicants. EPA strongly 
encourages this type of cooperative arrangement.

III. Activities and Criteria

A. General

    The goal of PESP is to reduce the risks associated with pesticide 
use in agricultural and non-agricultural settings in the United States. 
The purpose of the grant program is to support the establishment and 
expansion of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) as a tool to be used to 
accomplish the goals of PESP. The grant program is also designed to 
research alternative pest management practices, research and publish/
demonstrate unique application techniques, research control methods for 
pest complexes, research and produce educational materials for better 
pest identification or management, and other activities that further 
the goals of PESP. EPA specifically seeks to build State and local IPM 
capacities or to evaluate the economic feasibility of new IPM 
approaches at the State level (i.e., innovative approaches and 
methodologies that use application or other strategies to reduce the 
risks associated with pesticide use). Funds awarded under the grant 
program should be used to support the Environmental Stewardship Program 
and its goal of reducing the risk/use of pesticides. State projects 
might focus on, for example:
     Researching the effectiveness of multimedia communication 
activities for, including but not limited to: promoting local IPM 
activities, user-community awareness of new innovative techniques for 
using pesticides, providing technical assistance to pesticide users; 
collecting and analyzing data to target outreach and technical 
assistance opportunities; conducting outreach activities; developing 
measures to determine and document progress in pollution prevention; 
and identifying regulatory and non-regulatory barriers or incentives to 
pollution prevention and developing plans to implement solutions, where 
possible.
     Researching methods for establishing IPM as an 
environmental management priority, establishing prevention goals, 
developing strategies to meet those goals, and integrating the ethic 
within both governmental and nongovernmental institutions of the State 
or region.
     Initiating research or other projects that test and 
support: innovative techniques for reducing pesticide risk or using 
pesticides in a way to reduce risk, innovative application techniques 
to reduce worker and environmental exposure, various approaches and 
methodologies to measure progress towards meeting the goal of 75% 
implementation of IPM by the year 2000. Examples of projects funded in 
FY'97 include:
    A Massachusetts project evaluated sterilizing nematode to control 
western flower thrips in greenhouse crops. The goal of this project is 
to optimize spray application protocols for the effective use of 
insect-killing fungi on greenhouse ornamentals and encourage their use, 
along with other IPM technologies.
    A New Jersey project evaluated the effectiveness of non-woven 
obstructive barriers for control of insect pests. This project 
researched the abilities of this new (non-chemical) technology to 
control insects.
    An Indiana project evaluated the reduction of herbicides in corn 
and soybeans by site-specific chemical application technologies.
    A Missouri project quantified the reduction in herbicide use on 
corn with herbicide-tolerant hybrids.
    A California project evaluated the effectiveness of establishing 
native, non-crop farm scape vegetation for erosion control and 
pesticide use reduction in strawberries in California's Monterey Bay 
Area.
    A Florida project proposed to develop, test, evaluate, and deliver 
a model IPM contract available for use by any school district, city or 
county government to control pest in schools.

B. Criteria

    Proposals will be evaluated based on the following criteria.
    1. Qualifications and experience of the applicant relative to the 
proposed project.
     Does the applicant demonstrate experience in the field of 
the proposed activity?
     Does the applicant have the properly trained staff, 
facilities, or infrastructure in place to conduct the project?
    2. Consistency of applicant's proposed project with the risk 
reduction goals of the PESP.
    3. Provision for a quantitative or qualitative evaluation of the 
project's success at achieving the stated goals.
     Is the project designed in such a way that it is possible 
to measure and document the results quantitatively and qualitatively?
     Does the applicant identify the method that will be used 
to measure and document the project's results quantitatively and 
qualitatively?
     Will the project assess or suggest a means for measuring 
progress in reducing risk/use of pesticides in the United States?
    4. Likelihood the project can be replicated to benefit other 
communities or the product may have broad utility to a widespread 
audience. Can this project, taking into account typical staff and 
financial restraints, be replicated by similar organizations in 
different locations to address the same or similar problem?

C. Program Management

    Awards of FY'98 funds will be managed through the EPA Regional 
Offices.

D. Contacts

    A generic request for proposal will be available on EPA's PESP 
website on or before March 20, 1998 at http: //www.epa.gov/oppbppd1/
PESP/. Interested applicants must also contact the appropriate EPA 
Regional PESP coordinator listed under Unit IV. of this document to 
obtain specific instructions, Regional criteria and guidance for 
submitting proposals.

IV. Regional Pesticide Environmental Stewardship Program Contacts

Region I: (Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode 
Island, Vermont), Robert Koethe, (CPT), 1 Congress St., Boston, MA 
02203, Telephone: [phone], [e-mail]

[[Page 11237]]

Region II: (New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands), Fred 
Kozak, (MS-240), 2890 Woodbridge Ave., Edison, NJ 08837, Telephone: 
[phone], [e-mail]
Region III: (Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, 
District of Columbia), Lisa Donahue, (3WC32), 841 Chestnut Bldg., 
Philadelphia, PA 19107, Telephone: [phone], 
[e-mail]
Region IV: (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North 
Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee), Cheryl Prinster, 12th Floor, 
Atlanta Federal Center, 61 Forsyth St., SW., Atlanta, GA 30303-3104, 
Telephone: [phone], [e-mail]
Region V: (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin), 
David Macarus, (DRT-8J), 77 West Jackson Blvd., Chicago, IL 60604, 
Telephone [phone], [e-mail]
Region VI: (Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas), Jerry 
Collins, (6PD-P), 1445 Ross Ave., 6th Floor, Suite 600, Dallas, TX 
75202, Telephone: [phone], [e-mail]
Region VII: (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska), Glen Yager, 726 
Minnesota Ave., Kansas City, KS 66101, Telephone: [phone], 
[e-mail]
Region VIII: (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, 
Wyoming), John Larson, (8P2-TX), 999 18th St., Suite 500, Denver, CO 
80202-2466, Telephone: [phone], [e-mail]
Region IX: (Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, American Samoa, Guam), 
Roccena Lawatch, (CMD4-3), 75 Hawthorne St., San Francisoco, CA 94105, 
Telephone: [phone], [e-mail]
Region X: (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington), Karl Arne, (ECO-084), 
1200 Sixth Ave., Seattle, WA 98101. Telephone: [phone], 
[e-mail]

List of Subjects

    Environmental protection.

    Dated: February 26, 1998.
Janet L. Andersen,
Director, Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division, Office of 
Pesticide Programs.

[FR Doc. 98-5854 Filed 3-5-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F