Jump to main content.

Pollution Prevention Grants
FY 2003 Grant Guidance

Information provided for informational purposes only

Note: This information is provided for reference purposes only. Although the information provided here was accurate and current when first created, it is now outdated.

Introduction
Authorization
Program History
2003 P2 Grant National Criteria
Regional 2003 P2 Grants Priorities
Pollution Prevention Division Program Focus
Award Process
Reporting Process
Regional Contacts

Sample Progress Report Reporting Format

I. INTRODUCTION
Under the authority of the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990, EPA plans to award $5 million in pollution prevention grants to the States, Tribes, and Intertribal Consortia in FY 2003 for prevention activities during FY 2004. These grant dollars are targeted at State and Tribal technical assistance programs that address the reduction or elimination of pollution across all environmental media: air, land, and water. Since the inception of the grant program, EPA has awarded approximately $80 million.

This guidance describes the process by which EPA will award the grants under the Pollution Prevention grant program (40 CFR Part 35, Subpart A and 40 CFR Part 35, Subpart B). This document provides an overview of the program, description of the evaluation criteria, grant management tools and time lines for submissions and final awards.

The goal of this grant program is to assist businesses and industries in identifying better environmental strategies and solutions for reducing waste at the source. Funds awarded under this grant program can be used to support p2 programs that address the transfer of potentially harmful pollutants across all environmental media: air, water, and land. Programs should reflect comprehensive and coordinated pollution prevention planning and implementation efforts Tribal, State or Region-wide.

Successes include improving environmental performance through pollution prevention measures. Past P2 grant projects have demonstrated that facilities have ample opportunities to implement pollution prevention, and that source reduction can be a cost-effective way of meeting or exceeding Federal and State regulatory requirements. Successful P2 grant projects have included decreases in facility emissions and discharges which lead to less stringent regulatory and permitting requirements, increases in production rates that correlate to decreasing environmental costs, elevated investments in new and better technologies, and savings that directly impact the overall profitability of a business.

In 1992, the All Indian Pueblo Council became the first Tribal recipient of a P2 grant. Since that time, EPA has funded 27 Tribal P2 grant projects. Like the State P2 programs, there is a broad range of activities from Tribe to Tribe. While many Tribal environmental programs are just beginning to address their environmental problems and are single media focused, several P2 grants have been issued to Tribal governments to focus their pollution prevention efforts on small business education and outreach.

Back to top

II. AUTHORIZATION
Section 6605 of the Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) of 1990 and 40 CFR Part 35, Subpart B authorize EPA to award grants to States, Tribes and Intertribal Consortia for programs to promote the use of source reduction techniques by businesses. EPA has designated the P2 grant program to implement the Act. In evaluating applications for grants under Section 6605, the PPA requires EPA to evaluate whether the proposed program would accomplish the following:

make specific technical assistance available to businesses seeking information about source reduction opportunities, including funding for experts to provide on-site technical advice to businesses seeking assistance and to assist in the development of source reduction plans;

target assistance to businesses for whom lack of information is an impediment to source reduction,

provide training in source reduction techniques.

Pollution Prevention/source reduction is defined as any practice which

reduces the amount of any hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant entering any waste stream or otherwise released into the environment (including fugitive emissions) prior to recycling, treatment or disposal; and

reduces the hazards to public health and the environment associated with the release of such substances, pollutants, or contaminants.

reduces or eliminates the creation of pollutants through:
(i) increased efficiency in the use of raw materials, energy, water , or other resources; or
(ii) protection of natural resources by conservation

(See PPA Section 6603 and 40 CFR 35.343 and 35.662). Pollution prevention/source
reduction includes: equipment or technology modifications, process or procedure modifications, reformulation or redesign of products, substitution of raw materials, and improvements in housekeeping, maintenance, training, or inventory control.

Pollution prevention/source reduction does not include any practice which alters the physical, chemical, or biological characteristics of the volume of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant through a process or activity which itself is not integral to and necessary for the production of a product or the providing of a service.(See PPA Section 6603 and 40 CFR 35.343 and 35.662).

Back to top

III. PROGRAM HISTORY
EPA started the P2 (previously known as Pollution Prevention Incentives for States - PPIS) grant program with the philosophy that States should play a primary role in encouraging industry, small and medium-sized businesses, local governments, and the public to shift priorities from pollution control to pollution prevention. EPA established the program believing that since States have more direct contact with generators, the States are, therefore, more aware of their needs and problems and in a better position to provide pollution prevention assistance. As a result, State-based environmental programs could make a unique contribution to the national effort to promote source reduction.

EPA set the following goals at the outset of the program:

The P2 grant program has evolved - and will continue to evolve - to meet the changing needs and priorities. In the first years of the grant program, EPA administered the grant program from EPA Headquarters in Washington, D.C., with the goal of jump-starting as many State pollution prevention programs as possible. EPA believed that by educating businesses and providing p2 technical assistance, the businesses would quickly realize the benefits of a preventive approach and implement pollution prevention projects.

Once most States developed basic pollution prevention programs, EPA shifted responsibility for implementing the grant program from EPA Headquarters to the EPA Regions. This enabled the Regions to focus resources on regional priorities. Many States initiated regulatory integration projects to develop prevention strategies; train regulatory staff on P2 concepts; and examine opportunities for incorporating pollution prevention into permits, inspections, and enforcement. Some Regions also encouraged applicants to establish partnerships with State agencies in nonindustrial sectors such as agriculture, energy, health, and transportation.

Prior to 1992, essentially no pollution prevention activities were under way on Tribal lands. Since the first award of a P2 grant to a Tribe in 1992, there have been a small number of grants to Tribal governments. Federal grant programs, such as P2 grants, have provided Tribes with the flexibility to begin addressing the most salient pollution issues on reservations. A few Tribes have taken a broad approach to pollution prevention program development, focusing on building infrastructure rather than implementing specific projects. As Tribal environmental programs develop and Tribal environmental managers move beyond the most immediate environmental problems on their reservation, pollution prevention ideas and programs will become further integrated into Tribal programs.

Back to top

IV. 2003 P2 GRANT PROGRAM NATIONAL CRITERIA
Funds awarded under the P2 grant program must be used to support pollution prevention programs that address the transfer and reduction of potentially harmful pollutants across environmental media: air, water, and land. Programs should reflect comprehensive and coordinated pollution prevention planning and implementation efforts.

This section describes the five national program criteria EPA will use to evaluate proposals under this grant program in addition to the statutory criteria discussed in Section II of this guidance. In addition to the statutory criteria and the national program criteria, there may be regionally specific criteria that the proposed activities are also required to address. For more information on the EPA regional requirements, applicants should contact their EPA Regional Pollution Prevention Coordinator, listed under Unit X of this document. As well as ensuring that the proposed activities meet EPA's definition of pollution prevention, the applicant's proposal must include how they plan to address the following five criteria:

Promote multimedia pollution prevention.
Applicants should identify how projects will encourage source reduction to actively prevent pollution across environmental media: air, water and land. Programs should reflect comprehensive and coordinated pollution prevention planning and implementation efforts State-wide. Programs might focus on, for example:

- developing multimedia pollution prevention activities including but not limited to providing technical assistance to businesses, collecting and analyzing data to target outreach and technical assistance opportunities, conducting outreach activities, developing measures to determine progress in pollution prevention, and identifying and addressing regulatory and non-regulatory barriers and incentives to pollution prevention.

- institutionalizing multimedia pollution prevention as a environmental management priority, establishing pollution prevention goals, developing strategies to meet those goals, and integrating the pollution prevention ethic within the organization.

- initiating demonstration projects that test and support innovative pollution prevention approaches and methodologies.

Advance environmental goals.
EPA believes that State and Tribal pollution prevention programs have a unique opportunity to promote P2, especially through the environmental performance agreements. By developing applications that support Stated environmental goals, pollution prevention programs can help ensure that States and Tribes achieve objectives through a cost-effective preventive approach. Programs will continue to be valuable to top management if they can demonstrate how their actions will help advance Stated goals. EPA would like to ensure that pollution prevention is integrated and that the funds provide a service that supports the State's or Tribes strategic plan. EPA will not fund any projects developed apart from the Stated strategic plan.

Promote accomplishments within State's environmental programs.
EPA realizes the importance of being able to document the effectiveness of the program back to the affected media office. EPA added this application criteria to create the necessary link between the regulatory program and the pollution prevention program activities to ensure that the affected offices know the good work that is being done within their sectors/programs/geographic areas. By periodically documenting the proposed activities' accomplishments, grantees will help media program managers understand the benefits of their delivered services. By creating this positive feedback mechanism to the regulatory program, the grantee can market their accomplishments and help promote the sustainability of the p2 program.

Promote partnerships.
For the past 6 years, EPA has required P2 grant applicants to identify major environmental assistance providers in their States and to work with these organizations to educate businesses on pollution prevention. EPA believes that P2 programs who do not develop a strong relationship with other environmental assistance providers will face difficulties accessing State and Federal resources in the future.

EPA continues to seek more cooperation among pollution prevention programs and the other environmental and business assistance providers at the State level. These can include university-based technical assistance and cooperative extension programs, and other assistance programs offered within the State. Partnerships are also encouraged with regional and national programs such as the P2Rx centers, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) programs, Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assistance (OECA) Compliance Assistance Centers, EPA's Small Business Assistance Programs (SBAPs), etc

By developing such partnerships, EPA would like to ensure that State pollution prevention programs leverage this outside expertise. These partnerships will also reduce the need for other environmental assistance providers to develop their own expertise, duplicating effort.

Estimate Environmental Impact.
Applicants are requested to estimate the environmental impact from their proposed activities. This would be a quantifiable number that provides an estimation of waste reduction expected. Many of the EPA regional offices have negotiated with their States specific measurement structures which may provide appropriate frameworks for estimating environmental impact.

Back to top


V. REGIONAL PRIORITIES FOR FY2003 POLLUTION PREVENTION GRANTS
As well as noting how the grant's proposed activities meet the national criteria, the proposals must also document how the proposed activities meet the regional specified criteria listed below.

Region 1
Region 1 invites applicants to address any of the following EPA regional priorities, their own distinct priorities, or a combination of shared and distinct priorities.
– Activities that integrate P2 and Compliance objectives, including those that focus on Colleges and Universitites; Marinas; Schools; Hospitals; Junkyards; and Phase II of the Storm Water program
– Environmental Management Systems
– Greening Government Agencies (energy efficiency, environmentally preferable purchasing, etc)
– Greening the Supply Chain (manufacturers leveraging P2/performance among their suppliers)
– Energy Conservation and Renewable Energy
– Persistent, Bioaccumulative and Toxic chemicals (mercury, lead, dioxin, etc)
– Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness (through reducing use/storage of hazardous substances)
– Urban Environments and Environmental Justice (as focus for P2 efforts)

Region 2
- Reductions in persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) contaminants
- Integration of technologies which have P2 market transformation potential
- Integration of source reduction and waste minimization practices in agricultural, industrial, business, manufacturing and institutional operations
- Minimize waste and reduce pollution through the procurement of environmentally preferable products and services
- Build P2 program capacity among States, territories and Indian nations

Region 3
No specific regional priorities beyond National Criteria. However, participation in Region 3's Performance Track Network is grant eligible. Region 3 anticipates that the Performance Track Network will begin meeting in FY ‘04. Eligible activities could include efforts to review Performance Track applications, conduct compliance screens, and participate in site visits. Applications may not exceed $80,000 unless they are for a budget/project period greater than two years. If the budget/project period is greater than two years, then the application limit is $160,000.

Region 4
- Maintaining strong coordinated State P2 Programs
- Measuring environmental outcomes from technical assistance
- Promote regulatory integration by encouraging demonstration or pilot projects that integrate P2 practices, policies, and procedures into State or local regulatory programs.
- Transfer technological information of P2 practices within specific industrial sectors. Consideration should be given to recent Design for the Environment(DfE) technical work in the following sectors: Flexography; Foam Adhesives; Auto Refinishing; Garment Care; Industrial Laundry; Printed Wire Board; and Auto Suppliers.
- Projects addressing high relative risk chemicals in the region including Manganese Compounds, Chromium Compounds and Acrolein.
- Projects in the Chemical, Primary Metals, Stone Clay and Glass, Lumber and Wood sectors (highest relative risk sectors in the region)

Region 5
- Likelihood of showing actual measurable results especially direct environmental benefit of waste reduced.
- Reductions in persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) contaminants.
- Leverage success from or benefit to National/Regional P2 projects such as: Hospitals for a Healthy Environment, Environmentally Preferable Purchasing, Greening Government or Supply Chain, PBT Strategy or PBT Profiler tool.
– Application cannot exceed requests for more then $125,000.

Region 6
–Provide long term protection of human health and natural ecosystems in the U.S./Mexico Border area
- Reduce the ozone levels in nonattainment or near nonattainment areas in the Region
- Minimize loss of natural ecosystems, reduce impact of air toxics, and reduce pesticides exposure in the Lower Mississippi Area
- Protect, restore and reduce the loss of Gulf of Mexico coastal wetlands through the implementation of pollution prevention
- Encourage pollution prevention projects between the States and Tribes to foster a mutually supportive working relationship

Region 7
- Reductions in persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) contaminants.
- Projects or approaches which address pollution prevention within the agriculture sector.

Region 8
No specific regional priorities beyond National Criteria

Region 9
No specific regional priorities beyond National Criteria

Region 10
- Technical assistance to businesses,
- Measurement on financial, and environmental benefits due to technical assistance to business
- Projects that target Persistent Bioaccumulative and Toxic (PBTs) Chemicals

Back to top


VI. POLLUTION PREVENTION DIVISION PROGRAM AREAS
The Pollution Prevention Division has several broad program categories where we are focusing our work efforts. The areas highlighted below are included for information purposes solely and to provide possible new ideas/areas for technical assistance providers. These categories should not to be confused with the P2 National or Regional criteria which the proposals must address. The National P2 program is interested in any State and Tribal programs that may also be focusing their efforts in these similar areas. We have included recent examples of what some States are doing in these areas.

Regulatory Integration
Traditionally, Pollution Prevention Programs have not been a central component of the Agency's environmental regulatory program. Initially, most State's pollution prevention programs focused on providing non-regulatory assistance to industry to help them realize environmental and economic benefits by reducing pollution prior to control and treatment systems. Many States are increasingly interested in looking for opportunities to improve environmental protection provided by their regulatory programs beyond that afforded by the traditional media-specific end-of-pipe programs. Various efforts have been piloted in several States to integrate pollution prevention tools, technology and assistance into the regulatory operation of the agency.

For example, Virginia's Department of Environmental Quality used its P2 grant to integrate P2 into regulatory programs and initiate several supplemental P2 projects by training department staff on environmental management systems, P2 techniques relevant to Virginia industry, and integrating P2 and environmental management systems into regulatory programs. After the training, Virginia DEQ incorporated multimedia P2 into hazardous waste inspections, air permitting, water permitting, enforcement, brownfield remediation projects, and a construction grant initiative. The State has also initiated a P2 employee award program that should reinforce the integration effort.

Another example is Texas which has taken a similar track of focusing on their P2 technical assistance on the agency's media programs regulatory issues. For example,
to reduce air emissions from upset and maintenance events, the State provided technical training, established local industry workgroups, and conducted site assistance visits to local regulated entities. Another project was to educate stakeholders about using pollution prevention to reduce emissions from both point sources and non-point sources by conducting P2 site assistance visits to facilities within watersheds listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list and worked with the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) program to conduct a "threatened waters pilot" project.

Environmentally Preferable Purchasing
EPA's Environmentally Preferable Purchasing program focus is to encourage and assist Executive agencies in the purchasing of environmentally preferable products and services. Environmentally preferable products or services are those that have a lesser or reduced effect on human health and the environment when compared with competing products or services that serve the same purpose. Environmentally preferable purchasing encompasses the life cycle of a product or service and thus considers raw materials acquisition, production, manufacturing, packaging, distribution, reuse, operation, maintenance, or disposal.

For example, a State-based EPP project, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection partnered with INFORM to develop a model technical assistance program in New Jersey to help government agencies and businesses eliminate or reduce their purchase of products containing persistent bioaccumulative toxic chemicals (PBTs). They identified agencies and institutions interested in participating in the program, developed a database of PBT containing and PBT-free products, provided workshops and technical assistance to help partners identify PBT-free alternatives and wrote specifications for PBT-free goods and services that met their needs, rewrote contract specifications to require the purchase of environmentally preferable products, provided market incentives for industry to develop and produce environmentally friendly products, and finally compiled case studies of PBT-free products.

Also, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection worked with the Florida Green Building Coalition to educate facility personnel in private and public commercial buildings about environmentally responsible operation and maintenance practices. As part of that effort they promoted environmentally preferable purchasing as the State theme of National Pollution Prevention Week.

Persistent Bioaccumulative and Toxic (PBT) Chemicals
The PBT Program is an integrated approach addressing widespread problems associated with toxic pollutants that persist and bioaccumulate in the environment.
The program cuts across environmental media and geographic boundaries, using a holistic and integrated approach to prevent the introduction of new PBTs into the marketplace, reduce risk to human health and the environment from exposure to priority PBTs already in the environment, halt the transfer of PBTs among air, water, and land, and assess their long-term effect on the environment.

Many States are focusing their technical assistance on reducing or removing these hazardous chemicals from the environment. For example, the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) aims to reduce the amount of persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) chemicals in the State's hazardous waste stream by 33 percent by 2005. To achieve this objective, they are conducting pollution prevention workshops aimed at reducing silver and mercury released into publically owned treatment works systems by image processing facilities, dental facilities, and laboratories. In New Hampshire, Department of Environmental Services is expanding P2 outreach and technical assistance to the health care sector to reduce mercury use and dioxin emissions from infectious waste incineration through source reduction and alternate disposal methods, and educating dentists to properly dispose of filling material that contains mercury.

Back to top


VII. AWARD PROCESS

Eligibility
Eligible applicants for purposes of funding under this program include the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, any territory of or possession of the United States, any agency or instrumentality of a State including State universities, and Indian Tribes that meet the requirement for treatment in a manner similar to a State at 40 CFR 35.663 and intertribal consortia that meet the requirements at 40 CFR 35.504. Local governments, private universities, private nonprofit, private businesses, and individuals are not eligible for funding. Eligible applicants are encouraged to establish partnerships with business and other environmental assistance providers to seamlessly deliver pollution prevention assistance. Successful applicants will be those that best meet the evaluation criteria in Section IV of this guidance. In many cases, this is likely to be accomplished through partnerships.

Applicable Regulations
State applicants and recipients of Pollution Prevention Grants are subject to the requirements of 40 CFR Parts 31 and 35, Subpart A.

Tribal applicants and recipients of Pollution Prevention Grants are subject to the requirements of 40 CFR Parts 31 and 35, Subpart B.

Federal Requirements
An applicant whose proposal is selected for federal funding must complete additional forms prior to award (see 40 CFR 30.12 and 31.10). In addition, successful applicants will be required to certify that they have not been Debarred or Suspended from participation in Federal assistance awards in accordance with 40 CFR Part 32.

Intergovernmental Review
Applicants must comply with the Intergovernmental Review Process and/or the consultation provisions of Section 204, of the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act, if applicable, which are contained in 40 CFR part 29.

Preapplication Assistance
Applicants should contact their EPA Regional Coordinator listed in part IX of this guidance for preapplication assistance.

Allowable Costs
EPA grant funds may only be used for the purposes set forth in the grant agreement, and must be consistent with the statutory authority for the award. Grant funds may not be used for matching funds for other Federal grants, lobbying, or intervention in Federal regulatory or adjudicatory proceedings. In addition, Federal funds may not be used to sue the Federal government or any other government entity. All costs identified in the budget must conform to applicable Federal Cost Principles contained in OMB Circular A-87; A-122; and A-21, as appropriate. Ineligible costs will be reduced from the final grant award.

Cost-Share Requirements
Recipients of grants under section 6605 of the PPA must provide at least 50 percent of the total allowable project cost. For example, the Federal government will provide half of the total allowable cost of the project, and the recipient will provide the other half. Contributions may include dollars, in-kind goods and services, and/or third party contributions consistent with 40 CFR 31.24.

If a Tribe or Intertribal Consortium is selected for award of a Pollution Prevention Grant and the Tribe includes the funds in a Performance Partnership Grant awarded under 40 CFR Part 35, Subpart B, the required Tribal match for the Pollution Prevention portion of the PPG will be reduced to 5% of the allowable Pollution Prevention project cost for the first two years of the PPG grant. After the first two years in which a Tribe or Intertribal Consortium receives a Performance Partnership Grant, the Regional Administrator must determine through objective assessment whether the Tribe or the members of an Intertribal Consortium meet socio-economic indicators that demonstrate the ability of the Tribe or the Intertribal Consortium to provide a cost share greater than five percent. If the Regional Administrator determines that the Tribe or the members of Intertribal Consortium meet such indicators, then the Regional Administrator shall increase the required cost share up to a maximum of 10 percent of the allowable cost of the work plan budget for each program with a cost share greater than five percent.

Further, the Regional Administrator may waive the cost share required for a PPG upon request of the Tribe or Intertribal Consortium, if, based on an objective assessment of socio-economic indicators, the Regional Administrator determines that meeting the cost share would impose undue hardship (see 40 CFR 35.536(d)).

Evaluation Process
Proposals will be reviewed and evaluated by EPA Regional reviewers based on the above National and Regional-specific criteria listed. For specific information regarding your Regions review process, contact the P2 Coordinator listed in Section IX of this guidance.

Selection Process
Proposals will be selected for funding based on their ability to address the national and regional-specific criteria, to meet the eligible applicant requirements, and to meet the needs of the Regions in terms of distribution of grant funds.

Selection Official
Selection of proposals will be made by the Division Director in each EPA Region responsible for pollution prevention.

Notification
Applicants will receive acknowledgement of EPA's receipt of their proposal. Once initial proposals have been reviewed and evaluated, applicants will be notified regarding the outcome of the competition.

Dispute Resolution Process
Procedures at 40 CFR 30.63 and 40 CFR 31.70 apply.

Confidential Business Information
Applicants should clearly mark information contained in their proposal which they consider confidential business information. EPA reserves the right to make final confidentiality decisions in accordance with Agency regulations at 40 CFR Part 2, Subpart B. If no such claim accompanies the proposal when it is received by the EPA, it may be made available to the public by EPA without any further notice to the applicant.

Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance
The Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance number assigned to this program is 66.708.

Timeline
To participate in the process, eligible applicants must submit proposals to the EPA Regional Pollution Prevention Coordinator. Exact deadlines for grant proposals vary among regions, so please contact the appropriate regional Pollution Prevention Coordinator for details. Below are the grant applications due dates for each of the Regional Office. Funding decisions will be made by June/July 2003.
Region 1 - Pre-proposals are due on April 30, 2003
Region 2 - Applications are due April 30, 2003
Region 3 - Applications are due April 30, 2003
Region 4 - Pre-proposals are due April 30, 2003
Region 5 - Applications are due April 30, 2003
Region 6 - Pre-proposals are due April 30, 2003
Region 7 - Applications are due April 30, 2003
Region 8 - Applications are due April 30, 2003
Region 9 - Applications are due May 8, 2003
Region 10 - Pre-proposals are due April 30, 2003

Program management
Awards for FY 2003 funds will be managed through the EPA regional offices. Applicants should contact their EPA Regional Pollution Prevention Coordinator, listed under Section IX of this document, to obtain specific requirements for submitting proposals.

Back to top

VIII. REPORTING
The work plans and reporting must be consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR §§ 35.107, 35.115, 35.507, and 35.515. The grantee, along with the Regional Project Officer, will develop a process for jointly evaluating and reporting progress and accomplishments under the work plan (see 40 CFR §§ 35.115 and 35.515). A description of the evaluation process and a reporting schedule must be included in the work plan (see §§ 35.107(b)(2)(iv) and 35.507(b)(2)(iv)).

The evaluation process must provide for:
(1) A discussion of accomplishments as measured against work plan commitments;
(2) A discussion of the cumulative effectiveness of the work performed under all work plan components;
(3) A discussion of existing and potential problem areas; and
(4) Suggestions for improvement, including, where feasible, schedules for making improvements.

EPA's Pollution Prevention Division has created an optional progress report format to facilitate national reporting on status of pollution prevention grant activities. A copy of the report format is included AFTER Section XIII as well as on the PPIS page of the P2 web site (http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/p2home/pubs/grants/ppis/ppis.htm). This progress report format is not required but has been used in several States for the past year.

Unless waived by EPA's project officer, all final products generated from P2 grants must be sent to the Project Officer as well as to the Pollution Prevention Division in Washington DC. Examples of final products include fact sheets, pamphlets, handbooks, model curricula, assessment and audit tools, videos, event brochures, etc. The Pollution Prevention Division may share the final product with the appropriate regional P2Rx center and will house it in the Pollution Prevention Information Clearinghouse.
Please address the documents to:

P2 Grant Products
Pollution Prevention Division (7409M)
Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20460.

Back to top

XI. REGIONAL CONTACTS
For further information, please contact the appropriate EPA Regional Office.

CT, MA, ME, NH, RI, VT
Region 1 Pollution Prevention Coordinator
1 Congress St Suite 1100 (SPN)
Boston, MA 02114-2023
(617) 918-1841

NJ, NY, PR, VI
Region 2 Pollution Prevention Coordinator
290 Broadway, 25th Floor (SPMMB)
New York, NY 10007-1866
(212) 637-3753

DC, DE, MD, PA, VA, WV
Region 3 Pollution Prevention Coordinator
1650 Arch Street (3RA20)
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029
(215) 814-2761
(215) 814-5389

AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN
Region 4 Pollution Prevention Coordinator
61 Forsyth St SW
Atlanta, GA 30303
(404) 562-9028

IL, IN, OH, MI, MN, WI
Region 5 Pollution Prevention Coordinator
77 West Jackson Boulevard (DW-8J)
Chicago, IL 60604-3590
(312) 353-4669

AR, LA, NM, OK, TX
Region 6 Pollution Prevention Coordinator
1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200 (6EN-XP)
Dallas, TX 75202
(214) 665-2119

IA, KS, MO, NE
Region 7 Pollution Prevention Coordinator
901 N. 15th Street (ARTD/TSPP)
Kansas City, KS 66101
(913) 551-7533

CO, MT, ND, SD, UT, WY
Region 8 Pollution Prevention Coordinator
999 18th Street, Suite 300 (8P-P3T)
Denver, CO 80202-2405
(303) 312-6385

AZ, CA, HI, NV, AS, GU
Region 9 Pollution Prevention Coordinator
75 Hawthorne Street (WST-1-1)
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 972-3286

AK, ID, OR, WA Region
10 Pollution Prevention Coordinator
1200 Sixth Avenue (01-085)
Seattle, WA 98101
(206) 553-4072

Back to top

 

You will need the free Adobe Reader to view some of the files on this page. See EPA's PDF page to learn more about PDF, and for a link to the free Acrobat Reader.

Back to top

Pollution Prevention Home | OPPT Home

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.