Jump to main content.

Great Lakes Funding

Great Lakes Program Funding

Are you interested in news about our USEPA Great Lakes funding opportunities? Join our mail list, "greatlakesnews"  

exit EPA (About PDF)
Download the 2005-2006 Guidance
[PDF 106Kb , 34 pages]

Back To Index

FY 2005 - 2006 Great Lakes National Program Office Funding Guidance

I. Funding Opportunity Description

Under this FY2005-2006 Funding Guidance, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA's) Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) is requesting Great Lakes project submissions addressing one or more of the following topics: Pollution Prevention and Toxics Reduction, Habitat (Ecological) Protection and Restoration, Emerging or Strategic Issues (including Invasive Species), Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Priorities, and Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP) Priorities.

This funding opportunity is issued pursuant to (i) §104 of the Clean Water Act, authorizing EPA to conduct and promote the coordination and acceleration of, research, investigations, experiments, training, demonstrations, surveys, and studies relating to the causes, effects, extent, prevention, reduction, and elimination of pollution and (ii) §118 of the Clean Water Act calling for the achievement of the goals in the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, the principal goal of that Agreement being the restoration and maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Great Lakes basin. Projects funded under this solicitation will advance protection and restoration of the Great Lakes ecosystem in support of Goal 4 (Healthy Communities and Ecosystems), Objective 3 (Ecosystems), Subobjective 3 (Improve the Health of Great Lakes Ecosystems) of USEPA’s Strategic Plan <http://www.epa.gov/ocfo/plan/plan.htm>.

In support of Subobjective 4.3.3, and consistent with EPA Order 5700.7 <http://www.epa.gov/ogd/grants/award/5700.7.pdf> on environmental results, awards issued pursuant to the respective topics above will be expected to accomplish various environmental outcomes and include various environmental outputs. Each topic area includes a description of some of the possible environmental outcomes/outputs for that area, not all of which would be achievable within an assistance agreement funding period, and not all of which would necessarily result from each project selected.

Descriptions of each topic and priorities, Expected Outputs/Outcomes, Projects of Particular Interest, Examples, and estimated target amounts follow. Estimates of dollar amounts and numbers of projects are included as planning targets only. The actual amounts and numbers may differ substantially as described in Section II - Award Information. Amounts, Targets, and Number of Projects. In addition, EPA reserves the right to make no awards under this announcement.

Applicants will be required to categorize each of their project submissions into one of the topic areas described below. Submissions will be evaluated within the applicable topic areas. Section V identifies general criteria applicable to all submissions and Specific Criteria applicable to the respective topic areas.

A. Pollution Prevention and Toxics Reduction

back to
FY2005-2006 Guidance
Table of Contents

GLNPO requests project submissions for pollution prevention, reduction, or elimination projects, with an emphasis on substances which are persistent and toxic, especially those which bioaccumulate, in the Great Lakes basin. Under this topic area, an estimated $500,000 is targeted for approximately 8-15 projects.

Expected Environmental Outcomes/Outputs. Will include among the following:

Please note that projects addressing Pollutant-related Beneficial Use Impairments, including de-listing target development, should be submitted under Section I.D. - “RAP Priorities.”

Projects of Particular Interest. We are particularly interested in the following projects:

  1. Source characterization: Assessment of potential sources of persistent toxic substances.
  2. Indicators of progress toward virtual elimination of persistent toxic substances.
  3. Proper disposal of persistent toxic substances.
  4. Foster adoption of innovative products that would reduce the use and release of persistent toxic substances and that are consistent with the principles of EPA's Environmentally- Preferable Purchasing Program (see http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/epp).
  5. Implementation of projects/actions delivering toxic reductions/pollution prevention in sectors targeted by the Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy (GLBTS). Expected environmental outcomes must be quantified.
  6. Foster adoption of green technologies. In this context, green technology involves reducing or eliminating the use or generation of persistent toxic substances - including feedstocks, reagents, solvents, products and byproducts-during design, manufacture and use of chemical products and processes.
  7. Outreach to achieve source reductions from targeted sectors or groups, e.g., designing a campaign for educating the XX industry on ways to reduce usage and releases of YY chemical.
  8. Predictive emerging chemical screening/modeling studies to anticipate potential exposure and/or risk from emerging chemical threats in the basin, based on emissions, wastewater effluent discharge, or other potential sources of emerging chemicals to the basin, fate and transport properties, and known or estimated toxicological properties.

Following are the Pollution Prevention and Reduction Projects of Particular Interest for each Lake basin, as derived from Lakewide Management Plans:

  1. address pollutants causing beneficial use impairments in Areas of Concern -- especially PBT, Chlordane, Dioxin, and Mercury -- but also including PAHs, heavy metals, and other compounds identified in the Saginaw River/Bay and St. Marys River RAPs.
  2. demonstrate innovative approaches to address the long-range transport of atmospheric pollutants to Lake Huron.
  1. demonstrate innovative technologies for control of pollutant loadings through a watershed assessment plan.
  2. address dioxin and other pollutants formed from "burning trash in barrels."
  3. further agricultural clean sweep efforts.
  4. collect and/or phase out PCB and Mercury, including urban clean sweeps.
  5. prevent pollution from pesticides, including substitution or reduction projects, with high priority given to atrazine.
  6. work to implement an impaired waters strategy or incremental steps toward virtual elimination of PCB and mercury, consistent with a traditional Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) approach for Lake Michigan.
  7. enhance and/or utilize Lake Michigan LaMP 2004 watershed fact sheets.
  1. address pollutants identified in the Lake Ontario LaMP Status Report 2004, Chapter 6 (PCBs, DDTs, mercury, mirex, dieldrin, and dioxins), and emerging toxics such as PBDE as well as projects along the Niagara River which address the priority toxics identified in the Niagara River Toxics Management Plan.
  2. reduce mercury or other pollutants by building upon, or initiating projects similar in concept to auto mercury switch/ thermometer replacement; mercury collections from medical facilities; or electronic equipment collections.
  3. reduce pesticides through clean sweeps.
  4. demonstrate innovative technologies for control of pollutant loadings from the watershed.
  5. promote household hazardous waste collection efforts that address bioaccumulative contaminants.
  6. reduce PCBs from transformers.
  7. address the source of PCB contamination in the 18-Mile Creek.
  1. address the mercury reduction commitments in the LaMP 2000, including basinwide mercury reduction projects (especially for the shipping industry and community collections); energy efficiency or alternative energy; and proactive mercury reductions at proposed new or expanded facilities in the basin.
  2. enhance open burning outreach and education, provide incentives to not burn, identify and lower infrastructure barriers and assist local government restrictions on burning.
  3. update in-basin inventories of mercury, PCBs, dioxin and hexachlorobenzene in preparation for the 2005 load reduction milestone reporting
  4. otherwise address the chemicals identified as critical pollutants, including PCBs, dioxins, DDT and metabolites, toxaphene, chlordane, aldrin/dieldrin, mercury, hexachlorobenzene and octachlorostyrene, as well as PAHs, BHC, cadmium, and heptachlor.
  5. demonstrate significant reductions of non-point loadings of critical and other pollutants originating from the development of previously undeveloped land such as new parking lots and highway construction.
  6. address the long-range transport of atmospheric pollutants to Lake Superior.

Contact: Ted Smith (312) 353-6571, smith.edwin@epa.gov

Further information: Please see http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/p2.html


B. Habitat (Ecological) Protection and Restoration

back to
FY2005-2006 Guidance
Table of Contents

GLNPO requests Great Lakes Habitat (ecological) Protection and Restoration project submissions. Under this topic, an estimated $300,000 is targeted for approximately14-21 projects.

Expected Environmental Outcomes/Outputs. Will include among the following:

Please note that:


1. Basinwide/Regional Projects. An estimated amount of up to $250,000 will be awarded for approximately 4-6 projects that are Great Lakes basinwide or regional in scope. Projects must be collaborative partnerships that demonstrate common goals and expected outcomes.

Examples. For reference, the type of projects which may be selected include:

  1. Multi-organizational, binational partnerships to protect or restore ecosystems that currently lack over-arching, strategic management.
  2. Projects addressing Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP) habitat priorities. The LaMPs are available from http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/gl2000/lamps/index.html. For your reference, we include these examples of the type of projects which may be selected:
    1. In Lake Erie, refine or develop indicators for Lake Erie species and habitats, and implement the Lake Erie LaMP Habitat strategy.
    2. In Lake Huron, restoration of natural tributary flows, increasing fish spawning habitats, protect and restore shorelines, quantify and prioritize coastal wetlands in Saginaw Bay, and assess and restore off-shore reef habitats.
    3. In Lake Michigan, develop and implement a watershed-wide biodiversity recovery plan and a plan for species reliant on ground and surface water interaction, protect and restore fish spawning habitats and rare ecosystems, create a GIS layer of habitat and ground water/surface water exchange, and enhance and/or utilize Lake Michigan LaMP 2004 Watershed Fact Sheets.
    4. In Lake Ontario, LaMP habitat priority projects other than those identified in Section I.E.4.
    5. In Lake Superior, develop and field test a basin-wide herptile monitoring program, including a data repository process; develop and establish a land-use and land cover monitoring program; establish a pilot program for an ecological land-use decision process for local governments; restore tributary and embayment habitats to rehabilitate lake sturgeon, lake and brook trout and walleye; identify and quantify critical habitats for self-sustaining fish stocks; develop a pelagic and benthic fish monitoring program; and establish reference sites for representative ecosystems.

2. Habitat (Ecological) Conferences and Printing. An estimated amount of up to $50,000 is targeted for approximately 10-15 conference/meeting or education material projects that address Great Lakes ecological protection and restoration issues, information and/or actions. Each project submission may be for up to $5,000 and have a budget period of one year or less. Projects in excess of $5,000 or having a longer budget period will be rejected for consideration under this topic, but may, at the discretion of GLNPO, be transferred to the general Habitat topic as a Basinwide/Regional project.

Contact: Karen Rodriguez, (312) 353-2690, rodriguez.karen@epa.gov


C. Emerging or Strategic Issues

back to
FY2005-2006 Guidance
Table of Contents

In order to better fulfill its mission under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement for the restoration and maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem, GLNPO is requesting project submissions which identify and propose solutions/mitigation for Emerging or Strategic issues of Great Lakes Basin-wide applicability. An estimated amount from between $0 - $600,000 may be targeted for approximately 0 to 12 projects. The total budget for such projects cannot be determined at this time, and is largely contingent on the amount, if any, available after making provision for every-five-year expenditures for seaworthiness of the Lake Guardian. The amount of these expenditures may not be known until October, 2005, consequently decisions for this topic may be delayed until then. Of the total available estimated amount, $100,000 would be targeted for Invasive Species.

We expect that Emerging or Strategic Issues projects would:

Expected Environmental Outcomes/Outputs. Will include among the following:

Examples. For reference, the type of projects which may be selected include:

  1. Projects which address invasive (non-indigenous) aquatic and terrestrial species in the Great Lakes Basin with an emphasis on prevention or control. Projects may include:
    1. development and demonstration of effective and innovative programs to prevent the introduction of new invasive species (aquatic or terrestrial) into the Great Lakes Basin or to control the spread of invasive species within and from the Great Lakes Basin.
    2. documenting ecological impacts of invasive species on the Great Lakes Basin food web.
    3. documenting the economic impacts or potential economic impacts of invasive species already in the Great Lakes Basin.
    4. identification of chemical, physical, and biological conditions that promote the establishment of invasive species.
    5. development of innovative education/outreach projects.
    6. monitoring and follow-up on past invasive species controls.
  2. Investigation of chemicals of potential environmental concern such as polybrominated flame retardants, pharmaceuticals, and endocrine disruptors.
  3. Documentation and investigation of causes and effects of observed changes in components of the Great Lakes ecosystem (for example, population estimates, nutrient loads; changes in lower food web assemblages, including Mysis, Diporeia, benthos and plankton; and effects of these changes on the lake fisheries).
  4. Quantify and/or assess the connection between environmental contamination directly related to Great Lakes water quality and human health.
  5. Social and economic issues affecting Great Lakes management and environmental decision-making.
  6. Harnessing the innovation of market forces in environmental protection via air or water emissions trading.
  7. Conferences, workshops, and meetings whose theme addresses strategically important issues under the under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA), the 2002 Great Lakes Strategy <http://www.epa.gov/grtlakes/gls/index.html>, and or the Great Lakes Executive Order <http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/collaboration/index.html>.
  8. Projects that facilitate linking Federal, State, Tribal, and/or local efforts to integrate and update strategic priorities and help align programs and actions needed to plan for and implement Great Lakes restoration progress.
  9. Human health projects, including fish consumption outreach to minority and sensitive populations to increase the understanding of fish consumption advisories.
Contacts:  
General: Paul Horvatin (312) 353-3612, horvatin.paul@epa.gov
Michael Russ (312) 886-4013, russ.michael@epa.gov
Invasive Species: Marc Tuchman(312) 353-1369, tuchman.marc@epa.gov


D. RAP Priorities

back to
FY2005-2006 Guidance
Table of Contents

USEPA requests project submissions which advance Remedial Action Plan implementation and development. Under this topic, an estimated amount of $2,440,000 is targeted for approximately 7-20 projects.

Funding for some RAP "program implementation awards for Great Lakes States" is not included in this Funding Guidance pursuant to a January 8, 2004 exemption from USEPA's Policy for Competition in Assistance Agreements. USEPA has contacted States separately to discuss assistance pursuant to this exemption, and plans to support enhanced RAP program management and implementation support.

During the evaluation process, applicable State environmental agencies may be asked whether they support projects being considered pursuant to this Section I. D. Applicants will be asked to document support from the applicable State environmental agency before an award will be issued.

USEPA has worked extensively with States, Tribes, and other partners in development and implementation of Remedial Action Plans. Information about Remedial Action Plans is available from: http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/aoc/index.html

A table showing the status of delisting targets for all US Areas of Concern (AOCs) is at:
http://www.glc.org/spac/proceedings/documents/Delisting-targets_US-AOCs_000.xls

Expected Environmental Outcomes/Outputs. Will include among the following:

Projects of Particular Interest:

1. Setting RAP Delisting Criteria and Targets for US AOCs*. Projects for setting RAP delisting criteria and targets of one or more of the US AOCs, including:

  1. develop statewide delisting criteria
  2. setting delisting targets for identified beneficial use impairments
  3. re-evaluate beneficial use impairments and adjust remediation strategies and ecosystem restoration efforts as necessary for the elimination of impairments and AOC delisting
  4. formal delisting of individual AOCs which would include the development of delisting documents.

2. Projects Leading to Delisting of RAP Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs) in the AOCs*. Projects that result in measurable progress toward meeting BUI delisting targets, including coordination and implementation of remediation efforts as identified in the RAP.

  1. The project submission or the negotiated workplan for the implementation of actions leading to the delisting of an AOC must include a comprehensive, detailed schedule of actions that will achieve complete AOC delisting, ideally by a target date of 2010. The project submission, or the negotiated workplan will need to include:
    1. for each BUI identified as impaired:
      1. detailed descriptions of all remedial and restoration actions required to delist a BUI;
      2. a cost estimate and schedule for each of these actions, including the identification of additional funding sources, as needed; and
      3. a detailed description and cost estimate of postremedial monitoring, as necessary, to satisfy delisting criteria.
    2. for BUIs of unknown status:
      1. a detailed description and cost estimate of the monitoring required to definitively determine the status of a BUI; and
      2. an outline of proposed remedial actions (as above) that would be required for BUI delisting should monitoring results indicate an impairment. Note that the Oswego AOC is not eligible for this topic of funding.

  2. Projects aimed at significantly contributing to the delisting of an AOC may include:
    1. The implementation of restoration or remedial efforts that will lead to the delisting of an existing identified BUI. Projects of this type should also include post-remedial monitoring, as necessary, to satisfy delisting criteria for an individual BUI.
    2. Monitoring efforts aimed at evaluating the status of beneficial use impairments (BUIs) which require further assessment. (See http://www.epa.gov/greatlakes/fund/2005guid/NYStateBUITable.pdf for a table of BUIs that have been identified by New York State Department of Environmental Conservation as requiring further assessment.) These efforts should be sufficient in scope to lead to a definitive change in the use impairment status, for example from "unknown" to either "impaired", "unimpaired", or "attributable to sources outside the AOC".

3. AOC Post Remedial Monitoring*. Projects which develop post remedial monitoring plans for measuring the achievement of BUI delisting targets and for specific monitoring needs which cannot be supported by existing monitoring programs.

4. RAP Program Capacity/Coordination/Management for St. Lawrence Massena, Buffalo River, and/or the Rochester Embayment RAPs. An estimated amount of up to $1.5 million has been targeted for approximately 1-3 projects over 5 years for the St. Lawrence Massena, Buffalo River, and/or the Rochester Embayment RAPs. The submission(s) for such project(s) may request the cumulative total amount needed for work that would be done over a 5 year period to advance environmental protection by accelerating the process of delisting and restoring beneficial use impairments through the coordination, oversight, and management of one or more RAPs. If selected, funds may be awarded incrementally each year up to $100,000, depending on EPA funds availability and program needs and priorities; EPA funding each year is not guaranteed. Following selection, if EPA decides to make incremental award(s), applicants would be asked to submit an annualized 5-year budget and budget detail narrative for the project, and a detailed workplan covering each of the 5 years. Please note that funds from this targeted amount could be combined with a project described in 5 below. Each project submission should address tasks associated with RAP development and implementation, including:

  1. development of periodic RAP status reports that describe and track remediation efforts aimed at eliminating beneficial use impairments identified for applicable RAP(s) and moving the AOC(s) towards delisting;
  2. organization of periodic meetings of the public advisory committees and distribution of meeting minutes to participants and State and Federal agencies;
  3. coordination of RAP activities with other Great Lakes programs such as the LaMPs;
  4. coordination of RAPs with related organizations such as the International Joint Commission (IJC), the Federal RAP Liaisons, USEPA/GLNPO, and the Great Lakes Commission;
  5. participation and co-operation with USEPA (GLNPO and Regional programs) and their agents on gathering, assessing, and summarizing RAP progress;
  6. periodic re-evaluation of beneficial use impairments and adjustment of remediation strategies and ecosystem restoration efforts as necessary for the elimination of impairments and AOC delisting; and
  7. other applicable activities described in paragraph1, 2, and 3 above.

Contact: Barbara Belasco (212) 637-3848, belasco.barbara@epa.gov, for additional information.


5. New York State AOC Delisting. An estimated amount of up to $600,000 is targeted for approximately 1-6 projects over 5 years combining some or all of the activities described in paragraph 1, 2, 3, and 4 above for projects that will either lead to, or significantly contribute to, the delisting of New York State AOCs by 2010, the delisting target specified in EPA's Great Lakes Strategy (see http://www.epa.gov/grtlakes/gls/index.html).

One such project would be an assessment of the Oswego River of the restoration of fish habitat and population just below the Varick Dam. The Varick Dam FERC re-license (November 2004) includes requirements of minimum flows necessary for the restoration of water in the area just below the dam in order to restore fish habitat and population. The project submission may be for a 2 year budget and 2 year workplan to cover the seasons important for fish spawning and population in 2006/2007. The project’s final output would be a report describing if and when the fish habitat and populations are present after the change in flow regime at the dam.

6. Habitat Beneficial Use Impairments. An estimated amount of up to $250,000 is targeted for approximately 4-8 projects leading to delisting of one of the three habitat-related beneficial use impairments (BUIs)—Degraded Fish and Wildlife Populations, Loss of Fish and Wildlife Habitat, Degradation of Benthos. Projects must be collaborative partnerships that demonstrate common goals and expected outcomes. Project activities must be based on an ecological restoration approach and comprised of one or more of the following steps in the pathway to delisting (see http://www.glc.org/spac/pdf/FishWildlifeBUI.pdf for a draft document, "Pathway for Delisting Three Beneficial Use Impairments in Great Lakes Areas of Concern" detailing the pathway to delisting of the three BUIs):

  1. Articulation of a vision and goals for all habitats within the AOC that is accepted by the community.
  2. An inventory and assessment of the plants, animals, and habitats currently in the AOC, as well as the problems that are causing the impairments to them and what is needed for them to recover.
  3. A project design (target setting) for the entire AOC, including a detailed work plan to restore and manage all sites within the AOC as articulated in a vision and goals.
  4. Implementation activities that will accomplish the goals and objectives according to an articulated project design.
  5. Development of a monitoring and re-assessment plan that will keep track of each protected or restored site within the AOC over a long period of time.

Overall RAP Priorities Contact: Mark Elster (312) 886-3857, elster.mark@epa.gov

________________________________________
* A cumulative total of up to $90,000 is targeted for 1-3 projects in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin pursuant to paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 of this Section I.D.


E. LaMP Priorities

back to
FY2005-2006 Guidance
Table of Contents

USEPA is requesting submissions for projects which will further advance Lakewide Management Plan implementation and development. An estimated amount of $852,000 is targeted for approximately 12-29 projects.

USEPA has worked extensively with States, Tribes, and other partners in development and implementation of the Lakewide Management Plans. The updated Lakewide Management Plans are available at: http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/gl2000/lamps/index.html. 

Funding for some LaMP "program implementation awards for Great Lakes States" is not included in this Funding Guidance pursuant to a January 8, 2004 exemption from USEPA's Policy for Competition in Assistance Agreements. USEPA has contacted the States separately to discuss assistance pursuant to this exemption.

See previous sections of this Funding Guidance for additional requests for projects supporting the LaMPs pertaining to Pollution Prevention and Reduction, Habitat, and Emerging or Strategic Issues. Each LaMP is different, requiring different funding mechanisms, not all of which are included in the Funding Guidance. LaMP activities are also supported by direct, non-competitive grants to States and Tribes, interagency agreements with other Federal agencies, and contractual funding.

Note that USEPA and Environment Canada have recently agreed to better coordinate ship- and land-based monitoring efforts for the Great Lakes. The objective of the coordination is to provide an intensive field sampling campaign for each Lake every five years. In 2005, USEPA will focus efforts in Lake Michigan, and in 2006, USEPA and Environment Canada will focus efforts on Lake Superior. Intensive monitoring for Lakes Huron, Ontario, and Erie would be done in 2007, 2008, and 2009, respectively.

Expected Environmental Outcomes/Outputs. Will include among the following:

Projects of Particular Interest. USEPA staff and LaMP partners have identified the following as Projects of Particular Interest:

1. Lake Erie LaMP Implementation projects. An estimated amount of $70,000 is targeted for approximately 2-4 projects, including:

  1. LaMP Implementation through Lake Erie Forum Stakeholders. An estimated amount of up to $50,000 is targeted for approximately 1-3 projects for which the focus is on the implementation of high priority LaMP goals and commitments which will advance restoration of impaired beneficial uses. Projects should include (i) facilitation of the multi-stakeholder, multi-sectoral, bi-national citizen group known as the Lake Erie Public Forum for the express purposes of gaining public participation in the LaMP process and increasing Forum and public participation in LaMP implementation activities and (ii) educational outreach using vehicles such as newsletters, web sites, and list serves.

  2. Lake St. Clair Implementation Strategy. An estimated amount of up to $20,000 is targeted for a project which would develop an implementation strategy for the Lake St. Clair Management Plan <http://www.lre.usace.army.mil/projectsandstudies/planningstudies/comprehensive%20management%20plan/index.cfm?>.

Contact: Rosanne Ellison (734) 692-7689, ellison.rosanne@epa.gov
Lake Erie Contact: Daniel O'Riordan (312) 886-7981, oriordan.daniel@epa.gov

The LaMP is at: http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/erie.html


2. Lake Huron Basin “Protection and Restoration of Beneficial Uses” Projects totaling up to an estimated amount of $100,000 targeting approximately 1-4 projects that (i) support domestic U.S. progress toward priorities established by the Lake Huron Binational Partnership in areas outside of Areas of Concern and (ii) establish or strengthen local partnerships by joint on-the-ground efforts that:

  1. restore fish and wildlife communities and their habitat (e.g., stream and shoreline restoration, fish passage/dam removal, etc.), and/or
  2. protect existing ecologically rich areas from future degradation.

Lake Huron projects must:

Contact: James Schardt (312) 353-5085, schardt.james@epa.gov. The Lake Huron Binational Partnership is at: http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/huron.html.


3. Lake Michigan LaMP Implementation. An estimated amount of $105,000 is targeted for approximately 1-3 projects, including:

  1. LaMP Implementation through Lake Michigan Forum Stakeholders. An estimated amount of $75,000 is targeted for approximately 1-3 projects the focus for which is the implementation of high priority LaMP goals and commitments which will advance restoration of impaired beneficial uses. Projects should include (i) facilitation of the multi-stakeholder, multi-sectoral, citizen group known as the Lake Michigan Forum for the express purposes of gaining public participation in the LaMP process and increasing Forum and public participation in LaMP implementation activities and (ii) educational outreach using vehicles such as newsletters, web sites, and list serves.
  2. LaMP Implementation through Monitoring Coordination. An estimated amount of $30,000 is targeted for a project to enhance Lake Michigan coordination, communication, and data management among agencies and other organizations that conduct or benefit from monitoring efforts in support of the Lake Michigan Lakewide Management Plan. The project should include facilitation of the multi-stakeholder, multi-sectoral, multi-agency group known as the Lake Michigan Monitoring Coordination Council.

Contact: Judy Beck (312) 353-3849, beck.judy@epa.gov.  The LaMP is at: http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/michigan.html.


4. Lake Ontario LaMP Implementation Projects.

  1. Lake Ontario Contaminant Source Trackdown. An estimated amount of up to $80,000 is targeted for approximately 1-3 projects. Sampling and analysis related to tracking down the sources of pollutants identified in the Lake Ontario LaMP Status Report 2004, Chapter 6, "Sources & Loads of Critical Pollutants" (see http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/lakeont/2004update/index.html) or in an AOC or non-AOC area in the Lake Ontario basin. Of particular interest is the trackdown of sources of PCBs in 18 Mile Creek and Rochester AOCs.

  2. Lake Ontario PCB TMDL Development. An estimated amount of up to $100,000 is targeted for 1 project that will provide the technical support necessary to assist New York State Department of Environmental Conservation in the development of a lakewide TMDL for PCBs in Lake Ontario. This support is expected to include the following:
    1. The analysis and modeling, as needed, of existing and readily available data and information. US EPA Region 2 and GLNPO have supported the development of a hydrophobic organic chemical mass balance and food chain bioaccumulation model, LOTOX2, for Lake Ontario. LOTOX2 has been calibrated and peer reviewed for total PCBs; the model code, the model documentation, and the peer review report can be obtained from US EPA Region 2.
    2. The development of reports that the State of New York may use to support TMDL development, including the following regulatory requirements:
      1. Identification of waterbody, the pollutant of concern, pollutant sources, and priority ranking.
      2. Description of the applicable water quality standards and numeric water quality target.
      3. Loading capacity, cause and effect relationship between numeric target and pollutant, and critical condition(s).
      4. Load allocations
      5. Wasteload allocations
      6. Margin of safety
      7. Seasonal variation
      8. Reasonable assurance
      9. Index of the administrative record
    3. The development of additional supporting information:
      1. A system of environmental indicators to measure progress in terms of desires outcomes;
      2. Actions to be implemented by other stakeholders; and
      3. Data needs recommended for collection of new data and information.

  3. Lake Ontario Tributary Load Monitoring. An estimated amount of up to $100,000 is targeted for approximately1-4 projects. To support the Lake Ontario mass balance model and to bring needed data to the Lake Ontario LaMP, information on tributary loadings from the Oswego, Genessee and Salmon Rivers and 18 Mile Creek is needed for 6 critical Lake Ontario pollutants ( PCBs, Hg, dieldrin, DDT, mirex, dioxins/furans). Monitoring projects may include:
    1. the development of monitoring plans;
    2. seasonal monitoring of Lake Ontario critical pollutants and tributary flows; and,
    3. the calculation of seasonal and annual loadings of Lake Ontario critical pollutants.

  4. Development of Lake Ontario Habitat Indicators. An estimated amount of up to $50,000 is targeted for 1-2 projects. The Lake Ontario LaMP has adopted eleven ecosystem indicators thus far (see http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/lakeont/2004update/index.html). The LaMP is interested in adopting additional indicators for habitat, for example, a coastal wetlands indicator. The indicators proposed need to be those for which a monitoring program is currently in place by an organization, so that past, current and future data will be available to the LaMP. The project should take maximum advantage of existing data, reports and studies; indicate the support of agencies or organizations involved in the relevant monitoring programs; and should include a public outreach component to inform/obtain comments from the public on the proposed indicators.

  5. Mitigating Impacts of Lake Ontario Lake-Level Controls. An estimated amount of up to $50,000 is targeted for 1-2 projects. Develop feasibility study to implement projects to mitigate the impacts that artificial lake level controls have had on New York State coastal wetlands. Projects would evaluate the use of weirs or other approaches to restore the functionality of coastal wetlands that have been altered due to the decreased range of water levels experienced since lake level controls were put in place. Projects should have strong local government support and involve government environmental and natural resource agencies. The emphasis should be on project implementation. The final project deliverable will provide an assessment of the impacts and benefits related to the mitigation project as well as a detailed workplan and budget.

Contact: Barbara Belasco (212) 637-3848, belasco.barbara@epa.gov. The LaMP is at: http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/ontario.html.


5. Lake Superior LaMP Implementation projects. An estimated amount of $197,000 is targeted for approximately 3-5 projects.

  1. LaMP Implementation through Forum Stakeholders. An estimated amount of $75,000 is targeted for approximately 1-2 projects to implement high priority LaMP goals and commitments which will advance restoration of impaired beneficial uses such as the basinwide Mercury project, including the development of peer-to-peer program advising; human health outreach efforts; outreach on AOCs, and participation in monitoring efforts. Binational participation is required. Projects should include facilitation of multi-stakeholder, multi-sectoral, citizen's groups or fora; public meetings held around the Basin for the express purpose of educating/ outreaching on specific issues of interest to the Lake stakeholder community; and other outreach such as newsletters, web sites, and e-mail lists.

  2. Tribal LaMP Implementation. An estimated amount of $82,000 is targeted for approximately 1-2 projects for LaMP implementation and coordination on behalf of Lake Superior Tribal interests, with emphasis on addressing LaMP commitments for reduction of critical pollutants, and implementing top habitat, terrestrial, and aquatics commitments of the LaMP. Projects should include active Tribal technical coordinating committee representation and participation; updating of websites; fish monitoring and assessment, tracking and updating of LaMP and RAP progress; RAP liaison work, and coordination of LaMP or RAP related monitoring.

  3. Monitoring Energy Transfer. An estimated amount of $40,000 is targeted for a project to support the Lake Superior Binational Program lake-wide effort to develop a monitoring program for benthos, phytoplankton, zooplankton, Mysis and Diporeia. Project should describe the energy transfer from these plants and animals to top fish predators.

Contact: Elizabeth LaPlante (312) 353-2694, laplante.elizabeth@epa.gov. The LaMP is at: http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/lakesuperior/index.html.

 

Great Lakes Home
Basic Information
Interagency Task Force
Interested Parties US Agencies States Canada Tribal Nations Others
Federal Programs
Legacy Act
Policies & Strategies
Monitoring
  and Indicators
Ecosystems
Toxics Reduction &
  Pollution Prevention
Funding

Jump to main content.