[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 104 (Monday, June 1, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29882-29891]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-14364]
[[Page 29881]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part XI
Department of Housing and Urban Development
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice of Funding Availability for Research to Improve the Evaluation
and Control of Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazards; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 104 / Monday, June 1, 1998 /
Notices
[[Page 29882]]
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR-4368-N-01]
Notice of Funding Availability for Research to Improve the
Evaluation and Control of Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazards
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary--Office of Lead Hazard Control, HUD.
ACTION: Notice of funding availability (NOFA) for research to improve
the evaluation and control of residential lead-based paint hazards for
fiscal year 1998.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of funding of up to
approximately $2 million for grants or cooperative agreements for
research on specified topics related to the evaluation and control of
residential lead-based paint hazards. Approximately 5 to 10 grants or
cooperative agreements of approximately $100,000 to $600,000 each will
be awarded on a competitive basis. The application kit developed for
this NOFA provides details to guide and assist applicants. In the body
of this NOFA is information concerning: the purpose and background of
the NOFA and the available amounts; eligible applicants; specific
topics on which research grant applications will be accepted; selection
criteria; and the application requirements and steps involved in the
application process. An appendix to the NOFA identifies documents
referenced in the NOFA.
APPLICATION DUE DATES: Completed applications must be submitted no
later than 6:00 pm, local time, on July 21, 1998 to the addresses shown
below. See below for specific procedures governing the form of
application submissions (e.g., mailed applications, express mail,
overnight delivery, or hand carried).
Mailed applications. Mailed applications will be considered timely
filed if postmarked on or before 12:00 midnight on the application due
date and received by the Office of Lead Hazard Control on or within ten
(10) days of July 21, 1998.
Applications Sent by Overnight/Express Mail Delivery. Applications
sent by overnight delivery or express mail will be considered timely
filed if received before or on the application due date, or upon
submission of documentary evidence that they were placed in transit
with the overnight delivery service by no later than the specified
application due date.
Hand carried applications. Hand carried applications will be
accepted at the specified location and room number during normal
business hours on or before the application due date. On the
application due date, business hours will be extended to 6:00 PM.
All applications must include an original and two copies of the
completed application. Section III.(A) of this NOFA provides further
information on what constitutes proper submission of an application.
ADDRESSES AND APPLICATION SUBMISSION PROCEDURES: Address-Mailed
applications. The address for mailed applications is: Office of Lead
Hazard Control (LS), Department of Housing and Urban Development, Room
B-133, 451 7th Street, S.W., Washington, DC 20410. Address--Overnight/
Express Mail or Hand carried applications. Hand carried applications
should be delivered to Suite 3206, 490 L'Enfant Plaza, SW Washington,
DC 20024.
FOR APPLICATION KITS, FURTHER INFORMATION, AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE:
For Application Kits: Application kits may be obtained from the Office
of Lead Hazard Control, Department of Housing and Urban Development,
451 7th Street, SW, Room B-133, Washington, DC 20410, or by calling Ms.
Gail Ward at 202-755-1785, extension 111 (this is not a toll-free
number), or by making an e-mail request to: Gail__N.__Ward@hud.gov (use
underscore characters). The Department is also planning to make the
NOFA and application kit accessible via the Internet World Wide Web
(http://www.hud.gov/lea/leahome.html). Completed applications, however,
must be submitted in paper copy to the mailing address; faxed or
electronically transmitted applications will not be accepted. Hearing-
and speech-impaired persons may access the above telephone number via
TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Information Relay Service at 1-
800-877-8339.
For Further Information: Dr. Peter Ashley, Office of Lead Hazard
Control, at the address above; telephone (202) 755-1785, extension 115,
or Ms. Karen Williams, Grants Officer, extension 118 (these are not
toll-free numbers). Hearing- and speech-impaired persons may access the
above telephone numbers via TTY by calling the toll-free Federal
Information Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Authority; Purpose; Amounts Allocated; Background; Eligible
Applicants and Eligible Activities
(A) Authority
These grants are authorized under sections 1051 and 1052 of the
Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, which is
Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992.
(B) Purpose
Research grants or cooperative agreements will be awarded, at HUD's
discretion, to selected applicants in order to fund research activities
that address critical gaps in our knowledge of residential lead hazard
identification and control. The purposes of this program include:
(1) Funding research on topics identified in sections 1051 and 1052
of Title X.
(2) Funding research that will be used to update the HUD Guidelines
for the Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing
(Guidelines) and which is anticipated to:
(a) Increase the accuracy and cost-effectiveness of lead hazard
evaluation, and
(b) Increase the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of lead hazard
reduction.
(C) Amounts Allocated
Up to approximately $2 million will be available to fund research
proposals in FY 1998. Grants or cooperative agreements will be awarded
on a competitive basis following evaluation of all proposals according
to the Rating Factors described in section III.(B). HUD anticipates
that individual awards will range from approximately $100,000 to
approximately $600,000. HUD reserves the right to grant one or more
awards, or no awards, for research in a given topic area, depending on
the quality of applications received.
(D) Background
Lead is a potent toxicant that targets the central nervous system
and is particularly damaging to the neurological development of young
children and the developing fetus. Pregnant women can transfer lead
through the placenta to the developing fetus. Lead-based paint is the
most widespread and dangerous source of lead in the residential
environment. Children can be exposed directly to this source of lead by
ingesting paint chips or indirectly through exposure to paint-lead that
has entered house dust and soil from the deterioration of interior and/
or exterior lead-based paint. Studies have shown that the primary
source of lead exposure for most young children is through the contact
and subsequent incidental ingestion of house dust (i.e., through hand-
to-mouth activity). The amount of lead found in the ambient air, food
and public drinking water has decreased
[[Page 29883]]
significantly over the last two decades as a result of regulatory
action and voluntary process changes.
Of all occupied housing units built before the ban of lead-based
paint in 1978, approximately 83 percent, or 64 million housing units,
are estimated to have lead-based paint somewhere on the exterior or
interior of the building. Although intact lead-based paint poses little
immediate risk to occupants, non-intact paint which is chipping,
peeling, or otherwise deteriorating may present an immediate risk.
Therefore, of particular concern are the housing units that contain
deteriorated lead-based paint and/or lead-contaminated dust and are
occupied by young children.
HUD has been actively engaged in a number of activities relating to
lead-based paint as a result of the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning
Prevention Act (LBPPPA) of 1971, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4801-4846.
Sections 1051 and 1052 of Title X (42 U.S.C. 4854 and 4854a) call for
the Secretary of HUD, in cooperation with other Federal agencies, to
conduct research on specific topics related to the evaluation and
subsequent mitigation of residential lead hazards. This research
program also implements, in part, HUD's Departmental Strategy for
Achieving Environmental Justice pursuant to Executive Order 12898
(Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority
Populations and Low-Income Populations).
On November 27, 1996 (61 FR 60500), HUD published a NOFA announcing
the availability of funds to support research to improve the evaluation
and control of lead-based paint hazards. The Department made a total of
10 research grant awards to applicants to that NOFA, for a total of
approximately $3.5 million. Research topic areas that were funded
included: Cleaning leaded dust from smooth surfaces and carpets using
low phosphate detergents and household vacuums; sampling leaded dust in
carpets and upholstery; field validation of the approach to lead risk
assessment suggested in the HUD Guidelines; the distribution of and
exposure to dust in carpets; factors affecting the cleanability of
carpets; comparison of composite and single dust-wipe sampling for
clearance and risk assessment; analysis of lead-based paint inspection
data for multifamily housing to develop a statistically based sampling
scheme; penetration of fine particulate through household vacuum
cleaner collection bags; development of a protocol to assess the use of
portable XRF analyzers to test for lead in dust-wipe samples;
development of a protocol for evaluating the performance of chemical
spot-test-kits for detecting lead-based paint; and, the reaccumulation
of leaded dust following professional dust cleaning.
In June 1995, HUD published Guidelines for the Evaluation and
Control of Lead-Based Paint in Housing (Guidelines) (see Appendix A of
this NOFA). The Guidelines are a report on state-of-the-art procedures
for all aspects of lead-based paint hazard evaluation and control. The
Guidelines reflect the Title X framework for lead hazard control, which
distinguishes three types of control measures: Interim controls,
abatement of lead-based paint hazards, and complete abatement of all
lead-based paint. Interim controls are designed to address hazards
quickly, inexpensively, and temporarily, while abatement is intended to
produce a permanent solution. While the Guidelines recommend procedures
that are effective in identifying and controlling lead hazards while
protecting the health of abatement workers and occupants, HUD
recognizes that targeted research and field experience will result in
future changes to the Guidelines that will improve the accuracy of lead
hazard evaluation and increase the effectiveness, while possibly
reducing costs, of lead hazard control measures. HUD anticipates that
increasing the cost-effectiveness of procedures for lead hazard
evaluation and control will reduce barriers to the widespread adoption
of these measures.
In July 1995, the Task Force on Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction
and Financing, which was established pursuant to section 1015 of Title
X, presented its final report to HUD and the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA). The Task Force Report, entitled ``Putting the Pieces
Together: Controlling Lead Hazards in the Nation's Housing'' (see
Appendix A of this NOFA), recommended that research be conducted on a
number of key topics in order to address significant gaps in our
knowledge of lead exposure and hazard control.
(E) Eligible Applicants
Academic and not-for-profit institutions located in the U.S., and
State and local governments are eligible under all existing
authorizations. Non-profits must submit proof of their nonprofit
status. For-profit firms also are eligible; however, they are not
allowed to earn a fee (i.e., no profit can be made from the project).
Federal agencies and Federal employees are not eligible to submit
applications. All applicants must comply with all civil rights laws,
statutes, regulations, and executive orders. If an applicant has: (1)
An outstanding finding of civil rights violations by any Federal,
state, or local agency; or (2) is the defendant in a civil rights
lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice, the applicant is not
eligible to apply for funding under this NOFA until the applicant
resolves such charge, lawsuit, or letter of findings to the
satisfaction of the oversight Agency.
(F) Eligible Activities.
The following types of research are eligible activities under this
NOFA:
(1) General Goals and Objectives
The overall goal of this research is to gain knowledge that will
lead to improvements in the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of methods
used for lead-based paint hazard evaluation and control. It is
anticipated that this will eventually result in a reduction in the
magnitude of childhood lead exposure nationwide by reducing barriers to
the implementation of widespread lead-based paint hazard reduction
interventions and improving the effectiveness of such interventions.
Specific objectives for the individual research topics listed in
section I.(F)(1) are provided separately in the expanded discussion of
these individual topic areas that follows in section I.(F)(2). Although
HUD is soliciting proposals for research on these specific topics, the
Department will also consider funding applications for research on
topics which, although not specifically listed in section I.(F)(2), are
relevant under the overall goals and objectives of this research, as
described above. In such instances, the applicant should describe how
the proposed research activity addresses these overall goals and
objectives. Key research topics that are to be addressed through this
NOFA include the following (each of these topics is discussed in more
detail in section I.(F)(2) of this NOFA):
(a) Treatment of lead-contaminated residential soils;
(b) Friction surfaces as a lead-based paint hazard;
(c) Effectiveness of State and local laws requiring periodic
interventions to reduce lead hazards in rental housing;
(d) Efficacy of the current guidance on conducting risk assessments
of multifamily housing; and,
(e) Other areas of research that are consistent with the overall
goals of this NOFA.
(2) Background and Objectives for Specific Research Topic Areas
(a) Treatment of Lead-Contaminated Soils.
(i) General. Soils can become lead contaminated as a result of the
shedding
[[Page 29884]]
of leaded paint from the exterior of structures and by the deposition
of airborne particulate lead. Before the removal of lead from gasoline,
vehicular emissions were a significant source of airborne lead,
especially in urban areas. Children can be exposed to lead in soil and
exterior dust through direct contact and incidental ingestion, and
indirectly as a result of soil or dust being tracked or blown into the
home and becoming incorporated into house dust. The degree to which
soil-lead is a hazard depends upon the potential for contact and the
lead concentration of the soil.
The HUD Guidelines (Chapter 5) indicate that bare soils should be
considered hazardous if they exceed 400 ppm Pb in ``high contact''
areas (e.g., play areas) and if they exceed 2,000 ppm Pb in other areas
of the yard. The Guidelines further indicate that outside of high
contact areas, hazard control measures are not required unless the
surface area for bare soils exceeds 9 ft2. The Guidelines are generally
consistent with interim standards for lead in soil that have been
published by the U.S. EPA (Guidance on the Identification of Lead-Based
Paint Hazards, 60 FR 47247; September 11, 1995). The EPA is expected to
publish proposed health based standards for lead in residential soil in
1998, as required by section 403 of Title X. These standards may differ
from the current HUD and EPA guidance on lead-contaminated soils.
Soil-lead hazards can be mitigated using approaches that can be
described as either temporary, interim controls, or long term abatement
measures (i.e., interventions that remain effective for at least 20
years). Interim controls include various means of covering bare soil,
such as with grass, gravel, or mulch. Land use controls can also be
employed and include measures such as fencing and changing the location
of play equipment. Interim controls are generally low cost and
relatively easy to employ; however, they require frequent monitoring
following implementation to ensure that they remain effective.
Current EPA and HUD guidance calls for residential soils to be
abated if soil-lead levels exceed 5,000 ppm. Soil abatement includes
such measures as covering soil with impervious materials like concrete
or asphalt, or removing contaminated soils for off-site disposal.
Another, more experimental approach, includes removing soil for on-site
treatment that removes lead, followed by replacing the ``cleaned''
soil. Because of the high cost of soil abatement methods, in
conjunction with other barriers to their implementation (e.g.,
disposing of lead-contaminated soils), these methods are impractical
for widespread adoption.
Other approaches to reducing soil-lead hazards cannot be readily
characterized as either interim controls or soil abatement. An example
of such an approach, that has not been evaluated scientifically, is
tilling the soil to reduce the lead concentration at the soil surface.
Another example is the untested concept of treating soil with a
substance (e.g., ground phosphate rock) that would reduce the
biological availability (i.e., the degree to which the lead is absorbed
into the bloodstream following ingestion) of the soil-lead to humans.
Relatively little research has been reported on the effectiveness
of residential soil treatments in reducing children's lead exposures.
There is at least one report of a study in which the use of interim
soil hazard reduction measures combined with interior dust controls
resulted in statistically significant reductions in the blood-lead
(PbB) of children in the intervention group as compared to those in the
control group (Mielke et al. 1992). The EPA-funded ``Three City Study''
assessed the impact of residential or neighborhood soil and dust
abatement on children's blood lead levels (USEPA 1996). A small effect
(a decline) on the mean blood lead of children was observed following
soil abatement at one study site. The lack of an observed intervention-
related effect at the other two study sites could have been related to
a number of factors associated with the specific locations and study
designs, and should not be considered conclusive regarding the relative
importance of exterior dust and soil as lead exposure sources.
The major goals of this research are to improve methods for
assessing potential risks from soil-lead exposure, to determine the
long-term effectiveness of various methods of reducing residential
soil-lead hazards, and to identify novel, cost-effective approaches to
reducing or eliminating residential soil-lead hazards.
(ii) Specific Research Objectives. Specific research objectives
include the following:
(1) Assess selected existing methods, and identify and assess
novel, cost-effective methods for reducing or eliminating residential
soil-lead hazards;
(2) Assess the adequacy of the current EPA (1994 interim guidelines
and 1998 proposed rule) and HUD (1995) guidelines for estimating
residential soil-lead hazards (e.g., area of bare soil for a hazardous
condition, soil sampling guidelines); and
(3) Improve knowledge regarding the relative importance of exterior
dust and soil as lead exposure sources for children in various
residential environments.
(b) Friction Surfaces as a Lead-Based Paint Hazard.
(i) General. Friction surfaces are those surfaces covered with
lead-based paint that are subject to abrasion, which may result in the
generation of leaded dust. Because of this, friction surfaces are
included in the definition of lead-based paint hazard in the
Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 (Title X).
The portions of a window that rub together when the window is operated
are generally considered the most critical of the friction surfaces
within a residence, in terms of their ability to generate leaded dust.
Other common residential friction surfaces include tight-fitting doors,
cabinet doors and drawers, stairway treads, and floors painted with
lead-based paint.
Addressing the hazard caused by windows and doors that generate
leaded dust can represent the highest costs associated with a
residential lead hazard control intervention. Because of this, it is
important that we improve our understanding of the circumstances under
which these friction surfaces pose an actual hazard because of leaded
dust generation. It may generally be the case that windows and doors in
good working condition and with intact lead-based paint, create
relatively little leaded dust and thus can be managed in place with
limited intervention.
Because there are often a number of different potential lead
hazards in and around a dwelling (e.g., lead in exterior dust and soil,
interior and exterior surfaces with deteriorated lead-based paint), it
is often not possible to attribute dust-lead on a particular surface to
the presence of a nearby friction surface painted with lead-based
paint. For example, it has been reported by some researchers and lead
hazard control practitioners that the lead loadings on window troughs
are occasionally found to exceed the HUD/EPA standard of 800 g
Pb/ft\2\ when sampled at various intervals following window treatment
(e.g., wet-scraping and repainting surfaces, installing a trough
liner). In such situations it is often difficult to determine the
primary source (e.g., friction between window surfaces, exterior dust
accumulation) of the reaccumulated dust-lead with reasonable certainty.
Research is needed to help improve our understanding of the
situations in which friction surfaces are significant sources of the
leaded dust that
[[Page 29885]]
accumulates on accessible surfaces within a dwelling. This knowledge is
needed to improve existing guidance for evaluating and controlling
lead-based paint hazards associated with friction surfaces, which would
help to ensure the most cost effective use of scarce lead hazard
control resources.
(ii) Specific Research Objectives. The primary goal of this
research is improve our understanding of the situations in which
friction between painted components is a significant source of dust-
lead on accessible surfaces within a residence. Specific research
objectives include:
(1) Identify circumstances under which painted friction surfaces
(e.g., windows and doors) generate significant amounts of leaded dust
within dwellings;
(2) Develop a cost effective method for identifying the likely
source(s) of dust-lead on surfaces within a dwelling; and
(3) Identify and characterize situations in which it is preferable
to replace friction-generating components, such as windows, because of
the continued generation of leaded dust, and those situations in which
it is preferable to manage these components in place.
(c) The Effectiveness of Laws Requiring Periodic Interventions to
Reduce Lead Hazards in Rental Housing
(i) General. The Task Force on Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction
and Financing was mandated by Title X for the purpose of providing
consensus recommendations on methods to deal with the multifaceted
problem of lead hazards in housing. One suggestion for preventing lead
hazards in rental housing was that property owners perform ``essential
maintenance practices'' on pre-1978 properties at regular intervals.
Essential maintenance practices (EMPs) are relatively inexpensive
actions intended to reduce the chance that lead hazards will develop
and to prevent the inadvertent creation of lead hazards. EMPs can be
completed by trained maintenance workers during the performance of
standard maintenance. EMPs that were identified by the Task Force
include the use of ``safe work practices'' when disturbing LBP,
periodic inspection for and safe repair of deteriorated paint,
providing LBP hazard information to tenants, and training maintenance
staff.
The Task Force also identified ``standard treatments'' that can be
implemented by property owners for the purpose of controlling lead
hazards in high priority (e.g., pre-1950) housing. Standard treatments
are routine interventions that can be performed by a trained
maintenance crew, and include such practices as repair of deteriorated
paint, creating smooth and cleanable horizontal surfaces, treating
friction surfaces, preventing exposure to bare lead-contaminated soil,
and conducting specialized cleaning upon completion of treatments.
Several states have passed, or are considering, legislation
requiring the owners of rental property of a given age to perform
specific actions (i.e., combinations of EMPs and/or standard
treatments) on their properties at unit turnover or at a specified
frequency. Vermont passed a law in 1996 (Act 165) that covers rental
properties built before 1978. The law requires property owners to adopt
a number of practices, including many of the EMPs identified by the
Title X Task Force, such as periodic inspection and repair of painted
surfaces and the periodic cleaning of window troughs and sills using
specialized cleaning methods. Rental property owners or their
representatives are also required to be trained in the proper
application of EMPs.
In 1994, Maryland passed a law (House Bill 760) that applies to all
privately owned rental housing built before 1950, and at the owner's
option, to rental housing built after 1949. The law requires risk
reduction treatments or lead dust tests in affected properties at
change of occupancy. The required treatments include, but are not
limited to, visual review and repair of painted surfaces, making floors
and window wells smooth and cleanable, and conducting specialized dust
cleaning of interior surfaces. Instead of conducting risk reduction
treatments, property owners can opt to show that a lead hazard does not
exist in a property by subjecting the unit to dust wipe testing.
Property owners who comply with all aspects of the Maryland law are
shielded from tort liability resulting from the lead poisoning of a
tenant.
The Vermont and Maryland laws do not require dust-lead testing
immediately following treatment of units or during the intervening
period between treatments. Research is needed to assess the degree to
which these or similar laws (e.g., requiring the implementation of EMPs
and/or standard treatments) succeed in creating and maintaining lead-
safe environments in the large variety of applicable rental housing
units to which they apply. Any research on the effectiveness of these
or similar (e.g., local) laws should also examine important
programmatic factors such as the degree of compliance with the laws,
costs and benefits of the legislation, public attitudes towards the
laws, etc. The results of this research will be important in the
identification of specific aspects of the laws (and implementing
programs) that are effective in reducing the prevalence and severity of
lead hazards in rental housing, as well as identifying those aspects
that may require modification.
(ii) Specific Research Objectives. The primary goal of this
research is to assess the effectiveness of current state or local laws
requiring periodic implementation of essential maintenance practices
and/or standard treatments in achieving and maintaining lead safe
environments in targeted rental property, such as those implemented in
Maryland and Vermont. Specific research objectives include:
(1) Identify the variables (e.g., housing characteristics) that are
significant predictors of the success/failure of the required
treatments in creating lead safe environments;
(2) Estimate the costs and benefits of the programs to various
stakeholders (e.g., property owners, tenants, general public); and
(3) Identify both effective aspects of the evaluated programs as
well as aspects where modifications are suggested.
(d) Lead Hazard Risk Assessment of Multifamily Housing.
(i) General. A lead-based paint hazard risk assessment is an on-
site investigation of a dwelling for the purpose of identifying any
lead-based paint hazards. Risk assessments include, but are not limited
to, a visual assessment and limited environmental sampling, and
creation of a written report with results and recommendations. It is
also suggested that a risk assessor, to the extent feasible, conduct an
investigation of the history and management of a dwelling and the age
of the residents. Chapter 5 of the HUD Guidelines provides guidance on
conducting risk assessments in single and multifamily housing. The
described approaches for conducting lead hazard risk assessments in
multifamily housing include methods that are based on targeted, worst
case, and random sampling.
Targeted sampling involves the selection of dwellings deemed most
likely to contain LBP hazards. These units are identified primarily
through information that is supplied by the owner (i.e., verbally and/
or through written records). Examples of criteria for selecting units
to be sampled include condition (e.g., select if ``poor''), the
presence of children under age 6, and recent preparation for
reoccupancy. A limitation of condition-based targeting is that most
owners have little knowledge of lead risk assessment, and may
unintentionally fail to identify the
[[Page 29886]]
units most likely to have LBP hazards. The Guidelines also provide a
minimum number of units to be sampled in conducting risk assessments of
similar multifamily units in developments of various sizes. The values
provided were in part derived from a public housing risk assessment/
insurance program.
The other approaches discussed in the Guidelines for choosing units
to be assessed, worst case and random sampling, are suggested for use
when there is not adequate information on which to select a target
sample. They would be more costly than the targeted approach in most
cases. The worst-case sampling approach requires an initial visual
inspection of all units with subsequent selection of those in poorest
condition, while the random sampling method requires the random
selection of a statistically based sample, as is required for
conducting lead-based paint inspections. The statistically based random
sample generally requires the selection of many more units than
targeted sampling.
A focused research effort is needed to assess the adequacy of the
current HUD guidance for conducting risk assessments of multifamily
developments. Research efforts could include the analysis of existing
data from past risk assessments of multifamily developments (e.g.,
public housing) and/or the generation and analysis of new data
generated from the assessment of a limited number of multifamily
developments. As part of an evaluation of multifamily risk assessment
guidance, consideration should be given as to how an assessor should
characterize the results of a multifamily risk assessment in a manner
that would maximize its utility to the client. If no lead hazards are
identified, or if a clear pattern in the occurrence of lead hazards
emerges, the reporting of results is straightforward. Other findings,
however, are more difficult to characterize, such as the situation in
which some lead hazards are detected with no apparent pattern of
occurrence.
(ii) Specific Research Objectives. The major objective is to assess
the utility of the current HUD guidance on conducting lead-based paint
hazard risk assessments in multifamily developments and to identify
changes that could be made to improve this guidance. Specific research
objectives include:
(1) Assess the utility of a ``targeted sampling'' approach in
identifying lead hazards in multifamily housing in contrast to other
approaches (e.g., random sampling); and
(2) Evaluate the current guidance on the minimum number of units to
be assessed in targeted risk assessments of multifamily housing.
(e) Other Relevant Research. HUD will also consider funding
applications for research on topics which, although not specifically
identified in this NOFA, are relevant under the overall objective of
improving the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of methods for the
evaluation and control of lead-based paint hazards. At this time, the
Department does not have an interest, however, in funding research on
the development or evaluation of analytical methods (i.e., standard
methods for processing and analyzing environmental lead samples) or the
development of commercial products for lead hazard evaluation and
control. All applications must comply with all requirements, including
sections II. and IV., of this NOFA.
Other research topics that are of interest to HUD include, but are
not limited to:
(i) Assessment of the level of worker protection required for
typical lead hazard abatement and control activities (i.e., as
determined by personal exposure monitoring) with respect to evaluations
of the type of work, properties of the work surfaces, training and
experience of workers and supervisors, etc.
(ii) The degree to which it is necessary to follow the approach
recommended in the HUD Guidelines (Chapter 14) for clean-up (e.g.,
washing walls and ceilings, use of a HEPA vacuum and high phosphate
detergents) following the completion of various lead hazard control
interventions.
(3) Future Research Solicitations. If funding for research to
improve the evaluation and control of residential lead-based paint
hazards is available to HUD in future fiscal years, HUD will republish
this NOFA and additional applications will be solicited under a new
competition and applications will be due 45 days from the publishing
date. Topic areas will include one or more of the following:
(a) Research on lead exposure from other sources. This research
will focus on strategies to reduce the risk of lead exposure from other
sources, including:
(i) Exterior soil as a source of lead contamination;
(ii) Interior lead dust as a source of lead contamination;
(iii) Lead contamination in carpets;
(iv) Lead contamination in furniture; and
(v) Lead contamination in forced air ducts.
(b) Research on lead testing technologies. This research will focus
on improving evaluation and control methods and their application,
including:
(i) Developing improved methods for evaluating lead-based paint
hazards in housing.
(ii) Developing improved methods for reducing lead-based paint
hazards in housing.
(iii) Developing improved methods for measuring lead in paint
films, dust, and soil samples.
(iv) Establishing performance standards for various detection
methods, including spot test kits.
(v) Establishing performance standards for lead-based paint hazard
reduction methods, including the use of encapsulants.
(c) Establishing appropriate cleanup standards.
(d) Evaluating the efficacy of interim controls in various hazard
situations.
(e) Evaluating the relative performance of various abatement
techniques.
(f) Evaluating the long-term cost-effectiveness of interim control
and abatement strategies.
(g) Assessing the effectiveness of hazard evaluation and reduction
activities funded by Title X.
II. Program Requirements
(A) Threshold Requirements.
(1) Compliance With Fair Housing and Civil Rights Laws
All applicants must comply with all applicable Fair Housing and
civil rights laws, statutes, regulations and executive orders as
enumerated in 24 CFR 5.105(a). If an applicant (1) has been charged
with a violation of the Fair Housing Act by the Secretary; (2) is the
defendant in a Fair Housing Act lawsuit filed by the Department of
Justice; or (3) has received a letter of noncompliance findings under
Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act, or Section 109 of the Housing and Community Development Act, the
applicant is not eligible to apply for funding under this NOFA until
the applicant resolves such charge, lawsuit, or letter of findings to
the satisfaction of the Department.
(2) Additional Nondiscrimination Requirements
Applicants must comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act,
and Title IX of the Education Amendments Act of 1972.
(B) Definitions
The following definitions apply to this grant program:
Abatement--Any set of measures designed to permanently eliminate
lead-
[[Page 29887]]
based paint or lead-based paint hazards. For the purposes of this
definition, ``permanent'' means at least 20 years effective life.
Abatement includes:
(1) The removal of lead-based paint and lead-contaminated dust, the
permanent enclosure or encapsulation of lead-based paint, the
replacement of components or fixtures painted with lead-based paint,
and the removal or permanent covering of soil; and
(2) All preparation, cleanup, disposal, and post-abatement
clearance testing activities associated with such measures.
Cleaning--The process of using a HEPA vacuum and/or wet cleaning
agents to remove leaded dust; the process includes the removing of bulk
debris from work area.
Clearance examination--The visual examination and collection of
environmental samples by an inspector or risk assessor upon completion
of an abatement project or an interim control intervention. The
clearance examination is conducted to ensure that lead exposure levels
do not exceed HUD-recommended clearance standards. These recommended
standards will be superseded by standards that are in the process of
being established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Administrator pursuant to Title IV of the Toxic Substances Control Act,
or other appropriate standards.
Encapsulation--The application of any covering or coating that acts
as a barrier between the lead-based paint and the environment and that
relies for its durability on adhesion between the encapsulant and the
painted surface, and on the integrity of the existing bonds between
paint layers, and between the paint and the substrate.
Friction surface--Any painted interior or exterior surface, such as
a window or stair tread, subject to abrasion or friction.
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint
Hazards in Housing (June 1995)--HUD's manual of lead hazard control
practices (commonly referred to as the Guidelines) which provide
detailed, comprehensive, technical information on how to identify lead-
based paint hazards in housing and how to control such hazards safely
and efficiently. (The Guidelines replace the HUD ``Lead-Based Paint:
Interim Guidelines for Hazard Identification and Abatement in Public
and Indian Housing.'')
HEPA Vacuum--(High Efficiency Particulate Air)--A vacuum cleaner
fitted with a filter capable of removing particles of 0.3 microns or
larger at 99.97 percent or greater efficiency from the exhaust air
stream.
Impact surface--An interior or exterior surface (such as surfaces
on doors) subject to damage by repeated impact or contact.
Interim Controls--A set of measures designed to temporarily reduce
human exposure or possible exposure to lead-based paint hazards. Such
measures include specialized cleaning, repairs, maintenance, painting,
temporary containment, and management and resident education programs.
Interim controls include dust removal; paint film stabilization;
treatment of friction and impact surfaces; installation of soil
coverings, such as grass or sod; and restricting access to lead-
contaminated soil.
Lead-Based Paint--Any paint, varnish, shellac, or other coating
that contains lead equal to or greater than 1.0 g/cm\2\ as
measured by XRF or laboratory analysis, or 0.5 percent by weight (5,000
g/g, 5,000 ppm, or 5,000 mg/kg) as measured by laboratory
analysis. (Local definitions may vary.)
Lead-Based Paint Hazard--Any condition which causes exposure to
lead from lead-contaminated dust, lead-contaminated soil, lead-based
paint that is deteriorated or present in accessible surfaces, friction
surfaces, or impact surfaces that would result in adverse human health
effects (as established by the EPA Administrator under Title IV of the
Toxic Substances Control Act).
Lead-Based Paint Hazard Control--Activities to control and
eliminate lead-based hazards, including interim controls and abatement
of lead-based paint hazards or lead-based paint.
Lead-Contaminated Dust--Surface dust in residences that contains an
area or mass concentration of lead in excess of the standard to be
established by the EPA Administrator, pursuant to Title IV of the Toxic
Substances Control Act. Until the EPA standards are established, the
HUD-recommended clearance and risk assessment standards for leaded dust
are 100 g/ft\2\ on floors, 500 g/ft\2\ on interior
window sills, and 800 g/ft\2\ on window troughs (wells),
exterior concrete or other rough surfaces.
Lead-Contaminated Soil--Bare soil on residential property that
contains lead in excess of the standard established by the EPA
Administrator, pursuant to Title IV of the Toxic Substances Control
Act. The HUD-recommended standard and interim EPA guidance is 400
g/g for high-contact play areas and 2,000 g/g in
other bare areas of the yard. Soil contaminated with lead at levels
greater than or equal to 5,000 g/g should be abated by removal
or paving.
Lead hazard screen--A means of determining whether a residence in
relatively good condition should have a full risk assessment.
Replacement--A strategy of abatement that entails the removal of
building components coated with lead-based paint (such as windows,
doors, and trim) and the installation of new components free of lead-
based paint.
Residential Dwelling--This term means either:
(1) A single-family dwelling, including attached structures, such
as porches and stoops; or
(2) A single-family dwelling unit in a structure that contains more
than one separate residential dwelling unit and in which each unit is,
or is intended to be used or occupied, in whole or in part, as the home
or residence of one or more persons.
Risk Assessment--An on-site investigation of a residential dwelling
to discover any lead-based paint hazards. Risk assessments include an
investigation of the age, history, management, maintenance of the
dwelling, and the number of children under age 6 and women of child-
bearing age who are residents; a visual assessment; limited
environmental sampling (i.e., collection of dust wipe samples, soil
samples, and deteriorated paint samples); and preparation of a report
identifying acceptable abatement and interim control strategies based
on specific conditions.
Substrate--A surface on which paint, varnish, or other coating has
been applied or may be applied. Examples of substrates include wood,
plaster, metal, and drywall.
Title X--The Residential Lead-Based Hazard Reduction Act of 1992
(Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992, Pub. L.
102-550).
Window trough--For a typical double-hung window, the portion of the
exterior window sill between the interior window sill (or stool) and
the frame of the storm window. If there is no storm window, the window
trough is the area that receives both the upper and lower window sashes
when they are both lowered. Sometimes (incorrectly) called the window
``well''.
Wipe Sampling for Settled Lead-Contaminated Dust--The collection of
settled dust samples from surfaces to measure for the presence of lead.
Samples must be analyzed by a laboratory recognized by the EPA's
National Lead Laboratory Accreditation Program (NLLAP).
III. Application Selection Process
(A) Submitting Applications for Grants
To be considered for a research grant award, an original and two
copies of the
[[Page 29888]]
application must be postmarked on or before the due date specified at
the front of this NOFA. Electronic (fax or Internet) transmittal of the
application is not an acceptable transmittal mode.
Applications must conform to the formatting guidelines specified in
the application kit. The kit specifies the sections to be included in
the application and provides related formatting and content guidelines.
The above-stated application deadline is firm. In the interest of
fairness to all competing applicants, the Department will treat as
ineligible for consideration any application that is received after the
deadline. Applicants should take this factor into account and make
early submission of their materials to avoid any risk of loss of
eligibility brought about by unanticipated delays.
HUD will review each application to determine whether it meets the
threshold criteria provided in section II.(A) of this NOFA.
Applications that meet all of the threshold criteria will be eligible
to be scored and ranked, based on the total number of points allocated
for each of the rating factors described below in section III.(B). For
an application to remain in consideration for funding, it must receive
a total score of at least 65 points (out of a total of 100).
HUD intends to make awards to qualifying applications in the
following order:
STEP 1 An award will be made to the highest ranked application in
each of the four topic areas listed at sections I.(F)(1)(a) through (d)
of this NOFA, within the limits of funding availability. If there are
insufficient funds to award in all topic areas, HUD will make awards in
topics (a) through (d) in rank order;
STEP 2 If funding remains available, an award will be made to the
highest rank application in the ``other'' topic category listed at
section I.(F)(1)(e) of this NOFA;
STEP 3 If funding remains available, an award will be made to the
second highest ranked application in each of the four topic areas
listed at sections I.(F)(1) (a) through (e) of this NOFA in rank order,
within the limits of funding availability;
STEP 4 If funding remains available, awards will be made in rank
order regardless of topic area.
Applicants may address more than one of the research topic areas
within their proposal; however, each topic area will be rated and
ranked separately. Also, projects need not address all of the
objectives within a given topic area. While applicants will not be
penalized for not addressing all of the specific objectives for a given
topic area, if two applications for research in a given topic have
equal scores, HUD will select the applicant whose project addresses the
most objectives.
HUD encourages applicants to plan projects that can be completed
over a relatively short time period (e.g., 12 to 18 months from the
date of award) so that any useful information that is generated from
the research can be available for policy or program decisions and be
disseminated to the public as quickly as possible.
(B) Rating Factors
Rating Factor 1: Capacity of the Applicant and Relevant Organizational
Experience (35 Points)
This factor addresses the extent to which the applicant has the
ability and organizational resources necessary to successfully
implement the proposed activities in a timely manner. The rating of the
``applicant'' will include any sub-grantees, consultants, sub-
recipients, and members of consortia which are firmly committed to the
project (generally, ``subordinate organizations''). In rating this
factor HUD will consider the extent to which the application
demonstrates:
(1) The capability and qualifications of the principal investigator
and key personnel (20 points). Qualifications to carry out the proposed
study as evidenced by academic background, relevant publications, and
recent (within the past 10 years), relevant research experience.
Publications and research experience are considered relevant if they
required the acquisition and use of knowledge and skills that can be
applied in the planning and execution of the research that is proposed
under this NOFA.
(2) Past performance of the research team in managing similar
research (15 points). Demonstrated ability to successfully manage the
various aspects of a complex research study in such areas as logistics,
research personnel management, data management, quality control,
community research involvement (if applicable), and report writing, as
well as overall success in project completion (i.e., on time and within
budget). Applicants should also demonstrate that the project would have
adequate administrative support, including clerical and specialized
support in areas such as accounting and equipment maintenance.
Rating Factor 2: Need/Extent of the Problem (10 Points)
(1) The applicant must demonstrate responsiveness to solicitation
objectives. The applicant should explain in detail the likelihood that
the research would make a significant contribution towards achieving
some or all of HUD's stated goals and objectives for one or more of the
topic areas described in sections I.(F)(2)(a)-(d) of this NOFA.
(b) If the applicant is seeking funding for ``other'' research, as
is described in section I.(F)(2)(e), the applicant must provide an
explanation which demonstrates the importance and need for the research
with respect to addressing the overall goal of this NOFA (see section
I.(F)(1)).
Rating Factor 3: Soundness of Approach (45 Points)
This factor addresses the quality of the applicant's proposed
research plan. Specific components include the following:
(1) Soundness of the study design (24 points). The study design
must be thorough and feasible, and reflect the applicant's knowledge of
the relevant scientific literature. Applicants should include a plan
for analyzing and archiving data.
(2) Project management plan (7 points). The proposal should include
a management plan that provides a schedule for the completion of major
tasks and deliverables, with an indication that there will be adequate
resources (e.g., personnel, financial) to successfully meet the
proposed schedule.
(3) Quality assurance mechanisms (10 points). The applicant must
describe the quality assurance mechanisms which will be integrated into
the research design to ensure the validity and quality of the results.
Areas to be addressed include acceptance criteria for data quality,
procedures for selection of samples/sample sites, sample handling,
measurement and analysis, and any standard/nonstandard quality
assurance/control procedures to be followed. Refereed documents (e.g.,
government reports, peer-reviewed academic literature) which provide
the basis for the quality assurance mechanisms should be cited.
(d) Budget Proposal (4 Points). The budget proposal should be
thorough in the estimation of all applicable direct and indirect costs,
and should be presented in a clear and coherent format (see application
kit for required budget components).
The application will not be rated on the proposed cost; however, if
two applications for a given topic area have equal scores, HUD will
select the lowest cost application.
[[Page 29889]]
Rating Factor 4: Leveraging Resources (5 Points)
The extent to which the applicant can demonstrate that the
effectiveness of the HUD research grant funds is being increased by
securing other public and/or private resources or by structuring the
research in a cost-effective manner, such as integrating the project
into an existing research effort. Resources may include funding or in-
kind contributions (such as services, facilities or equipment)
allocated to the purpose(s) of the research. Staff in-kind
contributions should be given a monetary value.
Applicants must provide evidence of leveraging/partnerships by
including in the application letters of firm commitment, memoranda of
understanding, or agreements to participate from those entities
identified as partners in the application. Each letter of commitment,
memorandum of understanding, or agreement to participate should include
the organization's name, proposed level of commitment and
responsibilities as they relate to the proposed program. The commitment
must also be signed by an official of the organization legally able to
make commitments on behalf of the organization.
Rating Factor 5: Comprehensiveness and Coordination (5 Points)
The applicant should describe how the results of the proposed
research efforts can be applied by HUD or other programs to support
planning, policy development, and/or public education in the area of
residential lead hazard control.
(C) Court-Ordered Consideration
Due to an order of the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Texas, Dallas Division, with respect to any application by
the City of Dallas, Texas, for HUD funds, HUD shall consider the extent
to which the strategies or plans in an application or applications
submitted by the City of Dallas will be used to eradicate the vestiges
of racial segregation in the Dallas Housing Authority's low income
housing programs. The City of Dallas should address the effect, if any,
that vestiges of racial segregation in Dallas Housing Authority's low
income housing programs have on potential participants in the program
covered by this NOFA, and identify proposed actions for remedying those
vestiges. HUD may add up to 2 points to the score for any program based
on this consideration. (This requirement is limited to applications
submitted by the City of Dallas).
IV. Application Submission Requirements
(A) Applicant Data
Applications must be submitted in accordance with the format and
instructions contained in the application kit. Informal, incomplete, or
unsigned applications will not be considered. The following is a
checklist of the application contents that will be included in the
application kit:
(1) Completed Forms HUD-2880, Applicant/Recipient Disclosure/Update
Report; Certification Regarding Lobbying; and SF-LLL, Disclosure of
Lobbying Activities, where applicable.
(2) Standard Forms SF-424, 424A, 424B, and other certifications and
assurances listed in this NOFA.
(3) A detailed total budget with supporting cost justification for
all budget categories of the Federal grant request (see application kit
for details).
(4) An abstract containing the following information: The project
title, the names and affiliations of all investigators, and a summary
of the objectives, expected results, and study design described in the
proposal. (See application kit for formatting instructions.)
(5) A description of the project. This description must not exceed
fifteen (15) pages for each research topic area, including visual
materials such as charts and graphs. A completed HUD Form 441.1 should
also be submitted. (See application kit for format and required
elements.)
(6) Any important attachments, appendices, references, or other
relevant information may accompany the project description, but must
not exceed ten (10) pages for the entire application.
(7) The resumes of the principal investigator and other key
personnel. Resumes should be concise (i.e., no more than three pages)
and limited to information that is relevant in assessing the
qualifications of key personnel to conduct and/or manage the proposed
research.
(8) Copy of State Clearing House Approval Notification (see
application kit to determine if applicable).
(B) Certifications and Assurances
The following certifications and assurances are to be included in
all applications:
(1) Compliance with all relevant State and Federal regulations
regarding exposure to and proper disposal of hazardous materials .
(2) Compliance with relevant Federal civil rights laws and
requirements (24 CFR 5.105(a)).
(3) Compliance with the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 and section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973;
(4) Assurance that financial management system meets the standards
for fund control and accountability (24 CFR 84.21 or 24 CFR 85.20, as
applicable);
(5) Assurance, to the extent possible and applicable, that any
blood lead testing, blood lead level test results, and medical referral
and follow-up will be conducted for children under six years of age
according to the recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC). (See Appendix A of this NOFA--Preventing Lead
Poisoning in Young Children);
(6) Assurance that HUD research grant funds will not replace
existing resources dedicated to any ongoing project; and
(7) Certification of compliance with the Drug-Free Workplace Act of
1988 in accordance with the requirements set forth at 24 CFR part 24.
(8) Assurance that laboratory analysis is conducted by a laboratory
accredited through the National Lead Laboratory Accreditation Program
(NLLAP).
(9) Assurance that human research subjects will be protected from
research risks in conformance with the Common Rule (Federal Policy for
the Protection of Human Subjects, codified by HUD at 24 CFR part 60).
V. Corrections to Deficient Applications
After the application due date, HUD may not, consistent with 24 CFR
part 4, subpart B, consider unsolicited information from an applicant.
HUD may contact an applicant, however, to clarify an item in the
application or to correct technical deficiencies. Applicants should
note, however, that HUD may not seek clarification of items or
responses that improve the substantive quality of the applicant's
response to any eligibility or selection criterion. Examples of curable
technical deficiencies include failure to submit the proper
certifications or failure to submit an application containing an
original signature by an authorized official. In each case, HUD will
notify the applicant in writing by describing the clarification or
technical deficiency. HUD will notify applicants by facsimile or by
return receipt requested. Applicants must submit clarifications or
corrections of technical deficiencies in accordance with the
information provided by HUD within 14 calendar days of the date of
receipt of the HUD notification. If the deficiency is not
[[Page 29890]]
corrected within this time period, HUD will reject the application as
incomplete.
VI. Findings and Certifications
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
The information collection requirements contained in this NOFA have
been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) and assigned OMB
control number 2539-0011. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a
person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless the collection displays a valid control number.
Environmental Review
This NOFA does not direct, provide for assistance or loan and
mortgage insurance for, or otherwise govern or regulate, real property
acquisition, disposition, leasing, rehabilitation, alteration,
demolition, or new construction, or establish, revise or provide for
standards for construction or construction materials, manufactured
housing, or occupancy. Accordingly, under 24 CFR 50.19(c)(1), this NOFA
is excluded from environmental review under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321).
Federalism Executive Order
The General Counsel, as the Designated Official under section 8(a)
of Executive Order 12612, Federalism, has determined that the policies
and procedures contained in this NOFA will not have substantial direct
effects on States or their political subdivisions, or the relationship
between the Federal government and the States, or the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
Under this NOFA, grants or cooperative agreements will be made to
support research activities which are anticipated to result in
improvements in methods used to assess and mitigate residential lead
hazards. Although the Department encourages States and local
governments to conduct research in these areas, any such action by a
State or local government is voluntary. Because action is not
mandatory, the NOFA does not impinge upon the relationships between the
Federal government and State and local governments, and the notice is
not subject to review under the Order.
Section 102 of the HUD Reform Act; Documentation and Public Access
Requirements
Section 102 of the Department of Housing and Urban Development
Reform Act of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 3545) (HUD Reform Act) and the
regulations codified in 24 CFR part 4, subpart A, contain a number of
provisions that are designed to ensure greater accountability and
integrity in the provision of certain types of assistance administered
by HUD. On January 14, 1992 (57 FR 1942), HUD published a notice that
also provides information on the implementation of section 102. The
documentation, public access, and disclosure requirements of section
102 apply to assistance awarded under this NOFA as follows:
(1) Documentation and public access requirements. HUD will ensure
that documentation and other information regarding each application
submitted pursuant to this NOFA are sufficient to indicate the basis
upon which assistance was provided or denied. This material, including
any letters of support, will be made available for public inspection
for a 5-year period beginning not less than 30 days after the award of
the assistance. Material will be made available in accordance with the
Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and HUD's implementing
regulations in 24 CFR part 15.
(2) Disclosures. HUD will make available to the public for 5 years
all applicant disclosure reports (HUD Form 2880) submitted in
connection with this NOFA. Update reports (also Form 2880) will be made
available along with the applicant disclosure reports, but in no case
for a period less than 3 years. All reports--both applicant disclosures
and updates--will be made available in accordance with the Freedom of
Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552) and HUD's implementing regulations at 24
CFR part 15.
(3) Publication of Recipients of HUD Funding. HUD's regulations at
24 CFR 4.7 provide that HUD will publish a notice in the Federal
Register on at least a quarterly basis to notify the public of all
decisions made by the Department to provide:
(i) Assistance subject to section 102(a) of the HUD Reform Act; or
(ii) Assistance that is provided through grants or cooperative
agreements on a discretionary (non-formula, non-demand) basis, but that
is not provided on the basis of a competition.
Prohibition Against Lobbying Activities
Applicants for funding under this NOFA are subject to the
provisions of section 319 of the Department of Interior and Related
Agencies Appropriation Act for Fiscal Year 1991, 31 U.S.C. 1352 (the
Byrd Amendment), which prohibits recipients of Federal contracts,
grants, or loans from using appropriated funds for lobbying the
executive or legislative branches of the Federal Government in
connection with a specific contract, grant, or loan. Applicants are
required to certify, using the certification found at appendix A to 24
CFR part 87, that they will not, and have not, used appropriated funds
for any prohibited lobbying activities. In addition, applicants must
disclose, using Standard Form LLL, ``Disclosure of Lobbying
Activities,'' any funds, other than Federally appropriated funds, that
will be or have been used to influence Federal employees, members of
Congress, and congressional staff regarding specific grants or
contracts. Tribes and tribally designated housing entities (TDHEs)
established by an Indian tribe as a result of the exercise of the
tribe's sovereign power are excluded from coverage of the Byrd
Amendment, but tribes and TDHEs established under State law are not
excluded from the statute's coverage.
Procurement Standards
State and local government grantees are governed by and should
consult 24 CFR 85.36 and 85.37, which implement OMB Circular A-102 and
detail the procedures for subcontracts and sub-grants by States and
local governments. Non-profit organizations are governed by 24 CFR
84.40-84.48, which implement OMB Circular A-110. Under OMB A-102 and A-
110, small purchase procedures can be used for subcontracts up to
$100,000, and require price or rate quotations from several sources
(three is acceptable); above that threshold, more formal procedures are
required. If States or local governments have more restrictive
standards for contracts and grants, the State or local government
standards can be applied. All grantees should consult and become
familiar with either OMB A-102 or A-110, as appropriate, before issuing
subcontracts or sub-grants.
Davis-Bacon Act
The Davis-Bacon Act does not apply to this program. However, if
grant funds are used in conjunction with other Federal programs in
which Davis-Bacon prevailing wage rates apply, then Davis-Bacon
provisions would apply to the extent required under the other Federal
programs.
[[Page 29891]]
Prohibition Against Advance Information on Funding Decisions--Section
103 of the Reform Act
HUD's regulations implementing section 103 of the Department of
Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (42 U.S.C. 3537a),
codified in 24 CFR part 4, apply to this funding competition. The
regulations continue to apply until the announcement of the selection
of successful applicants. HUD employees involved in the review of
applications and in the making of funding decisions are limited by the
regulations from providing advance information to any person (other
than an authorized employee of HUD) concerning funding decisions, or
from otherwise giving any applicant an unfair competitive advantage.
Persons who apply for assistance in this competition should confine
their inquiries to the subject areas permitted under 24 CFR part 4.
Applicants or employees who have ethics related questions should
contact the HUD Ethics Law Division at (202) 708-3815. (This is not a
toll-free number.) For HUD employees who have specific program
questions, the employee should contact the appropriate field office
counsel, or Headquarters counsel for the program to which the question
pertains.
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number for this program
is 14.900.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4854 and 4854a.
Dated: May 20, 1998.
David E. Jacobs,
Director, Office of Lead Hazard Control.
Appendix A--Relevant Publications and Guidelines
To Secure Any Of The Documents Listed, Call The Listed Telephone
Number (generally not toll-free).
Regulations
1. Worker Protection: OSHA publication--Telephone: 1-202-219-
4667 (OSHA Regulations) (available for a charge)--Government
Printing Office--Telephone: 202-512-1800 (not a toll-free number).
--General Industry Lead Standard, 29 CFR 1910.1025; (Document Number
869022001124)
--Lead Exposure in Construction, 29 CFR 1926.62, and appendices A,
B, C, and D; (Document Number 869022001141)
2. Waste Disposal: 40 CFR parts 260-268 (EPA regulations)
(available for a charge)--Telephone 1-800-424-9346, or, from the
Washington, DC, metropolitan area, 1-703-412-9810 (not a toll-free
number).
3. Lead; Requirements for Lead-Based Paint Activities in Target
Housing and Child-Occupied Facilities; Final Rule: 40 CFR part 745,
subparts L and Q (EPA) (State Certification and Accreditation
Program for those engaged in lead-based paint activities)--
Telephone: 1-202-554-1404 (Toxic Substances Control Act Hotline)
(not a toll-free number).
4. Requirements for Notification, Evaluation and Reduction of
Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Federally Owned Residential Property and
Housing Receiving Federal Assistance; Proposed Rule: 24 CFR parts
35, 36 and 37 (HUD)--Telephone: 1-202-755-1785 (Office of Lead
Hazard Control) (not a toll-free number).
Guidelines
1. Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Lead-Based Paint
Hazards in Housing; HUD, June 1995 (available for a charge)--
Telephone: 1-800-245-2691:
Post-lead hazard control clearance, no more than:
100 Micrograms/sq.ft. (Bare and carpeted floors)
500 Micrograms/sq.ft. (Window sills)
800 Micrograms/sq.ft. (Window troughs (wells), exterior concrete and
other rough surfaces)
2. Preventing Lead Poisoning In Young Children; Centers for
Disease Control, October 1991: Telephone: 1-770-488-7330 (not a
toll-free number).
3. Screening Young Children for Lead Poisoning: Guidance for
State and Local Public Health Officials, November 1997; Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Telephone: 1-770-488-7330 (not
a toll-free number).
Reports
1. Putting the Pieces Together: Controlling Lead Hazards in the
Nation's Housing, (Summary and Full Report); HUD, July 1995
(available for a charge)--Telephone 1-800-245-2691.
2. Comprehensive and Workable Plan for the Abatement of Lead-
Based Paint in Privately Owned Housing: Report to Congress; HUD,
December 7, 1990 (available for a charge)--Telephone 1-800-245-2691.
3. A Field Test of Lead-Based Paint Testing Technologies:
Summary Report (Summary also available); U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, May 1995. EPA 747-R-95-002a (available at no
charge)--Telephone 1-800-424-5323.
4. Urban Soil Lead Abatement Demonstration Project. EPA
Integrated Report, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, April,
1996. EPA/600/P-93-001AF (available from National Technical
Information Service (NTIS) for a charge)--Telephone 1-800-553-6847.
[FR Doc. 98-14364 Filed 5-29-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-01-P
