Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 21, 2001 / Notices 11021

through 04/30/01). Before submitting

the ICR to OMB for review and

approval, EPA is soliciting comments on

specific aspects of the collections as

described below.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before April 23, 2001.

ADDRESSES: U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of

Transportation and Air Quality,

Certification and Compliance Division,

Outreach and Planning Group, Ariel

Rios Building, 1200 Pennsylvania

Avenue, NW., Mail Code 6405J,

Washington, D.C. 20460. Interested

persons may request a copy of the ICR

without charge from the contact person

below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Chestine Payton, tel.: (202) 564–9328,

fax (202) 565–2057. E-mail address:

payton.chestine@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Affected Entities: Parties potentially

affected by this action are manufacturers

of light duty vehicles and light duty

trucks.

Title: Regulations for A Voluntary

Emissions Standards Program

Applicable to Manufacturers of LightDuty Vehicles and Trucks Beginning in

Model Year 1997, OMB 2060–0345,

Expiration date 01/31/01.

Abstract: The information collection

will be conducted to support averaging,

banking, and trading provisions

included in the National Low Emission

Vehicle (NLEV) program. These

averaging, banking, and trading

provisions will give the automobile

manufacturers a measure of flexibility in

meeting the fleet average non-methane

organic gas (NMOG) standards and the

five-percent cap on Tier 1 vehicles and

transitional low emission vehicles

(TLEVs) in the ozone transport region

(OTR). EPA will use the reported data

to calculate credits and debits and

otherwise ensure compliance with the

applicable production levels and

emissions standards. When a

manufacturer has opted into the

Voluntary National LEV program,

reporting will be mandatory.

Manufacturers would submit

information regarding the annual sales,

calculation, generation, and usage of

emission credits in an annual report. In

addition, upon transferring credits to

another manufacturer, the manufacturer

would submit this information along

with their annual report. This

information will be submitted to EPA in

annual reports and will involve

approximately 25 respondents at a total

annual cost of about $318,995.

EPA currently has in place an ICR and

clearance for annual sales/production

reporting for light-duty vehicles and

trucks. This ICR reflects additional

requirements (beyond the annual sales/

production reporting requirement) to

collate the annual sales/production

data, and implement the credit

calculation program. In the future, this

ICR will be integrated with ICR 783.39,

(Reporting and Recordingkeeping

Requirements for Motor Vehicle

Certification under the Proposed Tier 2

Rule), as part of the consolidation under

the certification and fuel program

reporting requirements.

The information collection activity

complies with the guidelines in 5 CFR

1320.6 except for the following:

First, to provide EPA with a

mechanism for auditing the accuracy of

these required reports, EPA will require

pertinent production information to be

maintained and kept for eight model

years. The eight-year requirement arises

from the phase-in periods and the fact

that credits have a four-model year

lifetime. EPA enforcement action

regarding the credit program could

require documentation justifying credit

or debit generation from the beginning

of the phase-in and/or four-year credit

lifetime period. Pertinent production

information includes, but is not limited

to, the number of vehicles or trucks sold

in each averaging set, the EPA engine

family, assembly plant, VIN number,

and the NMOG standard to which the

vehicle or truck is certified. Pertinent

information, whether kept by the

manufacturer or by a contractor, is

subject to auditing by EPA.

Consequently, EPA officials will require

voluntary entry and access to facilities.

The EPA would like to solicit

comments to:

(i) Evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the Agency, including

whether the information will have

practical utility;

(ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the

agency’s estimate of the burden of the

proposed collection of information;

(iii) Enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; and

(iv) Minimize the burden of the

collection of information on those who

are to respond, including through the

use of appropriate automated collection

techniques or other forms of information

technology, e.g., permitting electronic

submission of responses.

Burden Statement: The estimated

annual burden attributed to the

collection in this ICR is 241.3 hours for

each of the 25 potential respondents.

Burden means the total time, effort, or

financial resources expended by persons

to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose

or provide information to or for a federal

agency. This includes the time needed

to review instructions; develop, acquire,

install, and utilize technology and

systems for the purpose of collecting,

validating, and verifying information,

processing and maintaining

information, and disclosing and

providing information; adjust the

existing ways to comply with any

previously applicable instructions and

requirements; train personnel to be able

to respond to a collection of

information; search data sources;

complete and review the collection of

information; and transmit or otherwise

disclose the information.

Respondents/Affected Entities: Parties

potentially affected by this action are

manufacturers of light-duty vehicles and

light-duty trucks.

Estimated Number of Respondents:

25.

Frequency of Response: Annually.

Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden

Per Respondent: 241.3.

Estimated Total Annualized Cost

Burden Per Respondent: $12,759.80.

Send comments on the Agency’s need

for this information, the accuracy of the

provided burden estimates, and any

suggested methods for minimizing

respondent burden, including through

the use of automated collection

techniques to the addresses listed above.

Please refer to EPA ICR No. 1761.02 and

OMB Control No. 2060–0345 in any

correspondence.

Dated: February 14, 2001.

Robert D. Brenner,

Acting Assistant Administrator.

[FR Doc. 01–4270 Filed 2–20–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6945–5]

Clean Air Transportation Communities:

Innovative Projects to Improve Air

Quality and Reduce Greenhouse

Gases: Solicitation Notice

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: Today’s Notice announces the

availability of funds and solicits

proposals from state, local, multi-state,

and tribal agencies involved with

climate change and transportation/air

quality issues, for pilot projects that

have a high potential to spur

innovations in the reduction of

transportation-related emissions and

11022 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 21, 2001 / Notices

vehicle miles traveled (VMT), at the

local level and throughout the United

States. EPA is particularly interested in

projects that incorporate at least one of

the following: smart growth efforts that

reduce transportation-related emissions,

commuter choice, and cleaner vehicles/

green fleets (as described elsewhere in

this solicitation). To this purpose, EPA

will make available financial assistance

ranging from $50,000 up to $300,000 to

each recipient, in the form of

cooperative agreements. EPA hopes to

make at least one award to a qualifying

tribal agency, and at least one more

award to a qualifying multi-state agency,

depending upon the merits of the

proposals received.

EPA’s Office of Transportation and

Air Quality (OTAQ) is committed to

reducing emissions from the

transportation sector through voluntary

efforts to slow the growth of VMT—

including encouragement of smart

growth in land use policies (that is, in

short, development patterns designed to

minimize VMT)—and promoting the use

of cleaner vehicles and clean, renewable

fuels. Many states and localities that are

dealing with the problems associated

with increased transportation-related

emissions and VMT (such as congestion

and emissions of greenhouse gases

(GHG), criteria pollutants, and airborne

toxics) are seeking nonregulatory federal

assistance. Voluntary efforts that

improve the efficiency of the

transportation system within the United

States, promote development patterns

that reduce the growth in VMT, and

expand the availability of

environmentally-sensitive

transportation alternatives play a critical

role in helping communities protect the

natural environment, human health,

economic vitality, and quality of life.

EPA wishes to provide assistance to

tribal, state, local, and multi-state

agencies that develop innovative

proposals for demonstration projects

that will yield measurable reductions in

VMT, GHG, and/or criteria air

pollutants in a coordinated fashion at

the community level. To qualify for

funding, the applicant must be a tribal,

state, local, and multi-state agency that

proposes a demonstration project

involving new or experimental methods,

technologies, or approaches. So that this

competition eventually generates even

greater benefits among numerous other

stakeholders, EPA also requires that

such projects be readily replicable in

other states and in local and tribal

communities. The cooperative

agreements will be allocated by OTAQ

through the competitive process

described in this notice.

DATES: The deadline for submitting

Final Proposals is Tuesday, April 24,

2001 (that is, they must be postmarked

by that date). To allow for efficient

management of the competitive process,

OTAQ is requesting organizations to

submit an informal Intent to Apply by

Wednesday, March 14, 2001.

(Instructions for submitting Intents to

Apply and final proposals are found in

Section IX. below.) Submission of an

Intent to Apply is optional; it is a

process management tool that will allow

OTAQ to better anticipate the total staff

time required for efficient review,

evaluation, and selection of submitted

proposals.

To ensure that every agency interested

in participation has an opportunity to

gain any needed additional information

useful to the application process, OTAQ

has scheduled two sets of conference

calls. The first pair of calls is primarily

intended to help agencies decide

whether this competition is appropriate

for them prior to the deadline for

submitting an Intent to Apply. The

second pair of calls is intended to assist

agencies with questions about the

proper completion and submission of

their proposals. The content of the calls

is entirely dependent upon the

questions asked. The dates and times of

these calls, with the call-in phone

numbers and access codes, are:

Tues., March 6, from 3—5 p.m., EST

(202–260–2025; access code 6898#)

Weds., March 7, from 2:30—4:30 p.m.,

EST (202–260–2025; access code 6898#)

Tues., March 27, from 3—5 p.m., EST

(202–260–2025; access code 6898#)

Thurs., March 29, from 2—4 p.m.,

EST (202–260–8330; access code 7731#)

Questions and answers from the

conference calls will be summarized

and posted as soon as possible on the

OTAQ website; the precise web location

of the summaries will be announced at

‘‘www.epa.gov/otaq/whatsnew.htm’’.

In order to ensure that all applicants

have access to the same information, the

only forums for posing substantive

questions on the competition are these

conference calls. Except for responses to

procedural questions (e.g. due dates,

proposal formats), EPA will not provide

other assistance prior to final

submission of applications.

ADDRESSES: This Notice can also be

accessed on the Office of Transportation

and Air Quality Web Page at:

‘‘www.epa.gov/otaq/’’. Click on ‘‘What’s

New’’ or go directly to ‘‘www.epa.gov/

otaq/whatsnew.htm’’. Addresses for

submitting informal Intents to Apply

and for submitting final proposals can

be found in Section IX., below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary Walsh, USEPA Office of

Transportation and Air Quality,

Transportation and Regional Programs

Division, 2000 Traverwood Dr., Ann

Arbor, MI 48105. Telephone (734) 214–

4205; Fax (734) 214–4052; or email

walsh.mary@epa.gov—or—Joann

Jackson Stephens, USEPA Office of

Transportation and Air Quality,

Transportation and Regional Programs

Division, 2000 Traverwood Dr., Ann

Arbor, MI 48105. Telephone (734) 214–

4276; Fax (734) 214–4052; or email

jackson-stephens.joann@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Eligible

Entities: State, local, multi-state, and

tribal agencies actively involved with

transportation, air quality, and/or

climate change issues. Such entities

must be interested in undertaking a

project with the purpose of reducing

transportation sector emissions through

voluntary efforts to decrease VMT and/

or transportation-related emissions.

Eligible entities must already be

engaged in some form of partnership

with other entities in the community

(e.g., non-governmental organizations,

departments of transportation,

departments of energy, other state

organizations, metropolitan planning

organizations, councils of government,

planning departments, private

companies and business associations,

public transit agencies, universities,

public health organizations, state-wide

or community-based non-profit

organizations, and so forth) related to

transportation and air quality/climate

change issues or some aspect of

transportation and/or air quality

planning. EPA would like to emphasize

that it is very interested in receiving

applications from tribal governments,

which have historically not have had

high representation among the

recipients of OTAQ grants. In addition,

EPA particularly desires that multi-state

organizations apply, in the expectation

that their proposals would have a high

potential for replication among the

members of such organizations.

Title: ‘‘Clean Air Transportation

Communities: Innovative Projects to

Improve Air Quality and Reduce

Greenhouse Gases: Solicitation Notice’’

Background: EPA’s Office of

Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ)

recognizes that achieving future

reductions in transportation-related

emissions will require more attention to

limiting VMT, through such means as

enhancing transportation system

efficiency and the availability of

transportation alternatives, promoting

smart growth initiatives and brownfield/

infill redevelopment, and addressing

travel behavior. It is worth mentioning

that efforts to reduce VMT also yield an

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 21, 2001 / Notices 11023

array of other potential benefits,

including congestion mitigation, more

liveable communities, reduced demand

for additional construction of roadways

(with the associated social, economic,

and environmental consequences),

reduced water pollution, waste

reduction, and improved quality of life

as a result of spending less time (and

money) on travel.

Historically, OTAQ (formerly the

Office of Mobile Sources) has

encouraged the adoption of

technological means of reducing criteria

pollutants and toxic emissions from

vehicles, with great success. Per-mile

emissions of gaseous criteria pollutants

from new vehicles are already reduced

over 90% compared to their

predecessors before the era of emission

controls. However, as of 1999, 62

million people in the United States still

lived in areas that do not meet the

health-based National Ambient Air

Quality Standards for at least one of six

major air pollutants. And Americans

are, on average, driving more miles

every year.

Moreover, with the growing interest

in achieving reductions in GHG

emissions, the issue of reducing all

types of pollutant emissions is even

more problematic. The technological

measures that have lead to reductions in

a vehicle’s tailpipe emissions in the past

have done little to reduce GHG

emissions. The trend toward decreasing

average fuel economy in recent years

translates directly into increasing GHG

emissions on a per-mile basis.

Combined with the steady growth in

VMT, this means that, while most

criteria pollutant emissions have

trended downwards in recent years,

GHG emissions have been rising

steadily.

EPA, its state counterparts, and local

governments are increasingly examining

travel choice and smart growth

strategies as they affect VMT and

transportation-related emissions. In this

context, OTAQ is committed to

encouraging voluntary efforts as an

important part of its approach.

Voluntary efforts to improve the

efficiency of the U.S. transportation

system and expand the availability of

environmentally-sensitive

transportation alternatives are essential

elements in helping communities

balance their charges to protect the

natural environment, human health,

economic vitality, and quality of life.

This solicitation advances OTAQ’s

support of such voluntary efforts.

EPA also recognizes that, despite huge

gains in vehicle-related emission

reductions over the past two decades,

there is still the potential to especially

reduce GHG emissions with technology

that would improve the fuel economy of

vehicles, and perhaps further reduce

GHG emissions through the use of

alternative fuels.

However, consumers have in the past

typically ranked fuel economy relatively

low, when compared to other attributes

they look for when acquiring a vehicle.

Consequently, automobile

manufacturers have applied recent

technological advances to increased

vehicle size, power, and luxury, rather

than to improved fuel economy. In order

to encourage the market penetration of

cleaner, more fuel-efficient vehicles and

cleaner renewable fuels, EPA desires to

help stakeholders promote and expand

the use of advanced vehicle and fuel

technologies, as they become available.

A comprehensive program which

combines improved vehicle choices,

reduced emissions, and reduced VMT

can provide the information and

resources that the pu blic needs to make

more informed transportation choices.

EPA recognizes that innovations in

reducing VMT and encouraging the use

of cleaner vehicles and cleaner,

renewable fuels have been implemented

across the United States in recent years.

It is increasingly clear that the most

successful of these have not been onetime, stand-alone efforts, but rather have

been conceived to fit into a larger,

coordinated strategy for transportationrelated emissions reduction over a

multi-year scheme. Such programs have

typically been those most successful in

productively capitalizing on

partnerships among different types of

organizations sharing a common interest

in VMT and/or emission reduction, and

in leveraging resources through these

partnerships and other funding sources.

Therefore, EPA desires to help meet its

stakeholders’ need for seed money and

technical assistance to help them

implement more multifaceted

approaches to VMT reduction and the

promotion of cleaner vehicles and fuels

that have a higher potential for longterm success.

Therefore, OTAQ seeks to support up

to ten pilot projects through seed

funding, ranging from $50,000 to

$300,000 per award (depending upon

the project), and other assistance. OTAQ

intends that the assistance award will

help communities identify and launch

suites of innovative and practical

transportation solutions that both

reduce impacts on the environment and

enhance mobility and access. Through

this Notice, OTAQ seeks proposals for

pilot projects in support of voluntary,

consensus-supported activities to

improve community designs, spur

transportation innovations, develop and

implement incentives, make more

efficient use of transportation systems,

promote use of cleaner fuels and

vehicles, create effective partnerships,

support the measurement of results, and

recognize exemplary projects. OTAQ

encourages applicants to explore

comprehensive approaches that

combine VMT reduction, smart growth,

cleaner vehicles, and clean renewable

fuels, thereby providing enhanced

opportunities for emissions reductions.

In order to encourage the most

successful approaches to accomplish

these objectives, OTAQ is seeking

proposals that represent strong

transportation/air quality partnerships

among a broad range of perspectives.

Because this sort of funding is made

available from EPA under the authority

of section 103(b)(3) of the Clean Air Act,

the Agency must assure that a project

selected for funding meet two

‘‘threshold determinations’’ for funding;

in this context:

• It must address the causes, effects,

extent, prevention, reduction, and

elimination of air pollution—in short, it

will act to control pollution.

• It must consist of such activities as

research, investigations, experiments,

demonstrations, and similar activities

that are within the scope of Section

103(b)(3) of the Clean Air Act.

Therefore, the proposals should focus

on the learning opportunities they

present for future pollution control

efforts, rather than on simply addressing

pollution problems through wellestablished methods.

Examples of activities that OTAQ is

interested in funding are outlined in

Section IV., ‘‘Program Emphasis.’’

Contents by Section

I. Overview and Deadlines

II. Eligible Organizations

III. Funding Issues

IV. Program Emphasis

V. Selection Criteria

VI. Evaluation and Selection

VII. Proposals

VIII. Other Items of Interest

IX. How to Apply

Clean Air Transportation Communities:

Innovative Projects to Improve Air

Quality and Reduce Greenhouse Gases:

Solicitation Notice

Section I. Overview and Deadlines

A. Overview

In today’s notice, OTAQ is soliciting

proposals to encourage innovations in

improving air quality (with regard to

both criteria pollutants and GHG) in the

U.S., by reducing VMT, promoting

smart growth, and encouraging the use

of cleaner vehicles and cleaner,

renewable fuels. There are serious

11024 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 21, 2001 / Notices

environmental implications in relying

solely upon the ‘‘conventional’’

approach to transportation—typically, a

single driver, in a vehicle that often is

not highly fuel-efficient. Clearly, the

very limited penetration of traditional

alternatives to driving alone (transit,

carpooling, and non-motorized modes)

into American’s travel choices suggests

that more integrated and flexible

alternatives need to be developed. Ultraclean, highly fuel-efficient vehicles are

beginning to become more available;

their use needs to be encouraged. The

impact of community design and

location on livability and environmental

concerns is receiving enhanced

visibility with the rise of smart growth

initiatives. OTAQ is especially

interested in proposals that implement

pilot projects allowing the replication of

promising practices, methodologies,

technologies, incentives, and

applications pertinent to these areas. It

is looking for the creative,

groundbreaking approaches that

stakeholders are generating, and wants

to see how they actually perform for the

lessons that can be gained for future

efforts.

Moreover, OTAQ has especially

committed in this competition to

support community-level efforts that

employ a suite of tools for achieving

reductions in transportation-related

emissions and VMT, to stimulate and

reward planning that incorporates

individual projects into a coordinated,

broader-focus strategy. An example

might be a program that integrates a

Commuter Choice strategy with the

construction of bicycle commuter

centers (secure parking, rental, and

repair) at transit hubs; or a ‘‘Green

Fleets’’-type program that makes lowemission vehicles and/or vehicles with

high fuel economy ratings available for

car-sharing, perhaps focusing upon

institutions that have a ‘‘campus’’

layout; or a brownfields/infill project

that incorporates transit-oriented

development programs and practices.

Proposals that make an effort to

logically integrate various VMT- and

emission-reduction program

components (both proposed and

existing), rather than presenting a

piecemeal approach, will receive higher

priority.

An important aspect of the evaluation

of proposals will be an assessment of

their potential effectiveness in bringing

these innovations into significant,

replicable pilot projects relative to the

dollar amount of the grant. Also

important in the evaluation will be the

degree of innovation, estimated amount

of environmental benefit, and apparent

resources, capability, and commitment

to succeed. Effective leveraging of other

sources of available funding will count

favorably in the evaluation process.

Examples of relevant sources of

potential leveraging funds include the

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality

(CMAQ) program, the Transportation

and Community and Systems

Preservation (TCSP) program, the

Federal Transit Administration’s ‘‘New

Starts’’ program (which supports mass

transit projects), the U.S. Department of

Energy’s ‘‘Clean Cities’’ program (which

promotes alternative fuel vehicles; see

their website at www.ccities.doe.gov),

the International Council for Local

Environmental Initiatives’ ‘‘Green

Fleets’’ program (see their website at

www.greenfleets.org), or other state and

local funding sources (e.g., HOV lane

programs). Special attention should be

provided to the details of pilot

implementation and the mechanisms

proposed to enable broad-scale

replication. OTAQ also places a high

priority on proposals that indicate

clearly how they will estimate and

count the tons of emissions reduced as

a result of their project.

Interested persons can obtain copies

of this solicitation at no charge by

accessing ‘‘What’s New?’’ on the OTAQ

Website at ‘‘www.epa.gov/otaq’’ or

‘‘www.epa.gov/otaq/whatsnew.htm’’.

B. What Are the Deadlines for This

Competition?

In order to efficiently manage the

selection process, the Office of

Transportation and Air Quality requests

that an informal ‘‘Intent to Apply’’

within 30 days of the publication of this

notice. (Please provide project title or

subject and email address). An ‘‘Intent

to Apply’’ simply states in the form of

e-mail, phone, or fax that your

organization intends to submit a

proposal to be received by the deadline.

Submitting an ‘‘Intent to Apply’’ does

not commit an organization to submit a

final proposal. The ‘‘Intent to Apply’’ is

an optional submission; those not

submitting an ‘‘Intent to Apply’’ may

still apply by the deadline.

The deadline for submitting

completed final proposals (original and

six copies, plus one fully-completed

Application for Federal Assistance,

forms SF 424 and 424A) is Tuesday,

April 24. The Office of Transportation

and Air Quality expects to complete the

Evaluation/Selection process in May,

2001.

Section II. Eligible Organizations

C. Who Is Eligible To Submit Proposals?

While cooperative agreements with

federal agencies are available to a range

of governmental and non-profit

organizations, for the purposes of this

solicitation, proposals may only be

accepted from state, local, multi-state, or

tribal agencies. EPA strongly encourages

applicants to incorporate partnerships

with a broad range of agencies and

organizations. It will give priority to

proposals from agencies actively

partnering with organizations showing a

diversity of perspectives (e.g.,

environmental justice, community

development, land use/smart growth,

etc.).

EPA encourages private sector, not-for

profit, and public health organizations

that provide leadership in meeting

national environmental objectives by

effecting substantial reductions in

vehicle emissions and VMT to enter into

a partnership with an eligible entity. To

illustrate, some examples of private

sector organizations that might seek

partnerships with qualifying agencies to

make a proposal include (but are not

limited to) local homebuilders’

associations pursuing smart growth

strategies, car insurance companies

offering pay-as-you-drive insurance, car

rental companies offering low-emission

and/or car sharing products, automobile

manufacturing companies and dealers

offering per-mile car leases or special

incentives for cleaner cars and those

using clean renewable fuels, and

companies with innovative ideas for

reducing commuting via the singleoccupant vehicle and encouraging infill

and mixed-use development. Likewise,

eligible agencies are encouraged to seek

out partnerships with these sorts of

organizations. Note that applicants must

ensure that any financial transactions

with project partners comply with

applicable EPA assistance regulations

relating to procurement contracts,

subgrants, and allowable costs

contained in 40 CFR Part 31 (in the case

of state or local agencies and tribes) and

40 CFR Part 30 (in the case of nonprofit

multi state organizations).

D. Why Are Tribal and Multi-State

Organizations Particularly Encouraged?

OTAQ wishes to particularly

encourage the participation of tribal

agencies because it desires to improve

its communication and coordination

with tribal agencies. It would like to

increase awareness of opportunities for

tribal agencies to access EPA assistance

in achieving their air quality goals.

Likewise, through substantial

involvement in the assisted activity,

OTAQ will have an opportunity to gain

better understanding of tribal air

management issues and strategies, and

their context.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 21, 2001 / Notices 11025

Regarding multi-state organizations,

OTAQ believes that such entities, which

may represent state, local, regional, or

tribal organizations themselves, have

unique opportunities for the placement,

replication, and dissemination of

promising approaches to pollution

control. OTAQ wishes to encourage

such organizations to step up to the

challenge of developing and promoting

innovative pilot projects for the control

of air pollution through cleaner vehicles

and fuels and the reduction of VMT.

Section III. Funding Issues

E. What Is the Amount of Available

Funding?

Approximately $750,000 is

anticipated to be available in fiscal 2001

for this competition.

F. How Many Agreements Will EPA

Award in This Competition?

Subject to the availability of funds,

EPA plans to fund as many high-quality

projects as possible. The Agency may

exercise its discretion to fund a mix of

large and small projects.

G. Are Matching Funds Required?

No. However, the Agency will

consider voluntary financial or in kind

commitments of resources as an

evaluation factor which maximizes the

effective use of EPA seed money.

H. Can Funding Be Used To Acquire

Services or Fund Partnerships?

Yes, provided the recipient follows

applicable procurement and subgrant

procedures. Please note that EPA will

not be a party to these transactions and

approval of a funding proposal does not

relieve recipients of their obligations to

compete for service contracts, conduct

cost and price analyses, and use

subgrants only for financial assistance

purposes in accordance with Section

.210 of OMB Circular A–133.

Section IV. Program Emphasis

This program is designed to provide

seed money for transportation and air

quality projects specifically to spur

innovations in transportation to reduce

VMT and vehicular emissions, and

thereby positively impact air quality

and/or climate change. EPA is

particularly interested in proposals

designed to implement pilot projects

which yield measurable reductions in

VMT, CO2, and/or criteria air pollutants

and other GHG, and that promote the

replication of promising practices,

methodologies, technologies, incentives,

and applications. EPA considers that the

element of innovation lies not solely in

the program components proposed, but

in how they fit into a comprehensive

strategy.

Innovative approaches of particular

interest to OTAQ encourage community

design that promotes alternatives to the

single-occupant vehicle mode of travel,

reduce the need to travel, increase use

of higher occupancy modes of travel,

and promote low- or non-polluting

means of travel. As mentioned above,

proposals should show how the project

will be part of a coordinated plan for

VMT and/or transportation-related

emissions reduction. Elements that EPA

is especially interested in seeing in

proposals include the following

(although strong proposals that contain

elements other than these will certainly

be considered):

• Smart Growth/Development

Patterns That Minimize VMT—support

state, local, multi-state, and tribal efforts

to define best practices, implement

effective incentives, and design livable

communities that would provide better

access to jobs, entertainment, and

services while reducing miles driven.

(To learn more about EPA’s land use

guidance and policy, access the web

page at www.epa.gov/otaq/traq/

traqsusd.htm).

• ‘‘Green Fleets’’—type program—

support adoption of energy conservation

and VMT reduction strategies for lightduty fleets and freight distribution

systems; e.g., fleets comprised of cleaner

(low-emission) vehicles and/or vehicles

with higher fuel economy or that utilize

cleaner, renewable fuels. (To learn more

about the Green Fleets program

developed by the International Council

for Local Environmental Initiatives, see

their website at www.greenfleets.org;

‘‘Green Your Fleet’’ is a downloadable

document that gives a basic overview of

their program.)

• Commuter Choice—support

implementation of employer provided

benefits for increased parking cashout,

telework, compressed work schedule,

carpooling, transit, bus and vanpool

ridership, bicycling and pedestrian

commuting. (To be considered a

Commuter Choice program for the

purposes of this solicitation, a project

must meet EPA’s six conditions for

‘‘leaders’’ described in the Commuter

Choice program announcement on its

website at: www.epa.gov/otaq/traq/

comchoic/ccweb.htm; select the

document ‘‘Commuter Choice

Leadership Initiative.’’ EPA’s

commitments to its partners are also

described therein.)

• Clean Vehicles—incentives for the

purchase by individuals of vehicles

designed to emit lower lifetime

emissions of GHG and criteria

pollutants. (Applicants may wish to

review EPA within-class vehicle

rankings developed to assist consumers

with choosing the cleanest and most

fuel efficient vehicle that meets

individual needs at: www.epa.gov/

autoemissions.)

In addition to the examples of

possible program elements mentioned

above, an applicant might want to

consider such elements as:

• Improvements to ‘‘connecting’’

activities at campus institutions (e.g.,

hospitals and universities)—initiatives

focused upon reducing VMT and/or

emissions at organizations having

various buildings or facilities located

over a limited geographic distance that

require transportation, teleconferencing,

video conferencing, telecommuting or

other ‘‘connecting’’ activities as a major

component of conducting business (may

address movement within the campus

area, movement on/off the campus area,

or both). This is a high-priority area for

innovation.

• Youth demonstration projects to

mobilize the implementation of youthoriented tools. Examples of previously

funded projects that engage youth,

especially pre-drivers, in transportation/

air quality/climate issues include Let

Kids Lead Starter Guide (see the website

www.letkidslead.org), Going Places,

Making Choices Curriculum (see the

website www.fourhcouncil.edu/ycc/

gpmc), the Cleaner Cars Module for

driver’s education, and projects funded

through the Mobile Sources Outreach

Assistance Competition.

• Real time casual carpool ride

matching.

• Pay-as-you-drive car leases.

• Pay-as-you-drive automobile

insurance.

• Automobile insurance incentives

for driving cleaner vehicles and/or

vehicles having higher fuel economy or

that utilize cleaner, renewable fuels.

• HOV-lane access for ultra-clean

vehicles and/or those having high fuel

economy or that utilize cleaner,

renewable fuels.

Section V. Selection Criteria

Each eligible proposal (section VIII.R.,

below, summarizes basic requirements

for eligibility) will be evaluated

according the criteria set forth below.

Proposals which are best able to directly

and explicitly address the primary

criteria will have a greater likelihood of

being selected for award in this

assistance competition. Each proposal

will be rated according to how well it

addresses the criteria. Please note that

projects that do not meet the threshold

legal criteria for funding under Section

103(b)(3) of the Clean Air Act cannot be

considered at all.

11026 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 21, 2001 / Notices

I. Primary Criteria

• Problem: States clearly the air

quality, climate change, and/or

transportation problem the proposal is

trying to address in terms of the

purpose/focus of this solicitation. Be

sure to identify what specific types of

emissions reductions are needed, and/or

the need to reduce VMT.

• Approach: Demonstrates an

innovative strategy to address

environmental goals of improved air

quality and/or reduced GHG production

from the transportation sector through

VMT reduction and use of cleaner

vehicles and fuels, coordinated as part

of a broad context of efforts to achieve

these goals; providing a sound basis for

encouraging positive transportation

behavior change.

• Measurement/Effectiveness:

Includes measure of program results;

i.e., shows how the project will be

evaluated by the applicant in terms of

quantifiable reductions in CO2

emissions, and (if targeted in the

problem statement) other pollutant

emissions and/or VMT, whether by

measurement or modeling, and

indicates a significant reduction in tons

of CO2 (and, if targeted, tons of other

emissions and/or reductions in VMT).

Note: Regardless of what other benefits

are identified, all qualifying proposals

must indicate that CO2 emissions will

be reduced through implementation of

the proposal, and must estimate tons

reduced.

• Cost Effectiveness: Demonstrates

that proposed transportation/air quality/

climate change innovation is cost

effective (i.e., indicates a relatively high

amount of emissions reduction as

compared to amount of the grant),

including a prediction of emissions

reduction from the pilot in a reasonable

scenario.

• Partnering: Demonstrates how it

will make use of an existing coalition or

collaborative established to address

transportation and air quality/climate

change issues (indicate partners in this

coalition), and describes how the

partner(s) can provide a diversity of

perspectives—each applicant must

delineate how it and its partner(s) will

allocate responsibility for the various

aspects of the program to be funded.

Applicants should make it clear that

they—and their partners—have the

skills, resources, previous performance,

capability, and commitment to make the

proposed project fully successful.

Applicants must also demonstrate that

any transfers of funding to project

partners comply with EPA financial

assistance regulations.

• Replicability: Demonstrates national

or regional applicability (i.e., is

designed to have a high potential for

being adapted for use elsewhere, and to

serve as a resource that will assist others

planning similar endeavors; including

lessons learned, productive types of

contacts/collaborations to make,

‘‘roadmap’’ of the process, etc.).

J. Other Factors to be Considered

• Integration/leveraging of funding:

Maximizes the effective use of EPA’s

limited funding through integration

with existing programs: this may

include coordination with other OTAQfunded efforts and activities, linkages

with other funding programs, such as

those mentioned in Section I.A.

(‘‘Overview’’), or financial or in-kind

contributions from non-federal sources.

• Budget: Exhibits clearly-stated and

appropriate levels of funding; indicating

where funds are allocated to provide for

interested parties to get information on

the project, including costs for materials

reproduction.

• Action-orientation. Must be capable

of generating reductions in CO, and, if

targeted, other pollutants and/or VMT,

as a direct result of the pilot program.

• Reasonable time frames. Timetables

must reflect a realistic appreciation of

the time required to properly conduct

the indicated activity.

• Past Performance. The applicant’s

experience with effectively

administering Federal financial

assistance and successfully carrying out

projects supported by EPA and other

Federal agencies will be carefully

considered. This may include the

results of audits conducted by EPA’s

Office of Inspector General, other

Federal agencies, or State, local or tribal

oversight entities. Applicants are

strongly encouraged to discuss their

performance history and to provide the

names of contacts for EPA to obtain

additional information.

Note: OTAQ places a high priority on

proposals that clearly show how they will

count the tons of emissions saved as a result

of their implementation, and on those

involving partnerships with entities that

provide wide range of perspectives on the

issue, contributing a broader vision and

wider skill mix to the effort. Applicants

should show clearly how the approach to

reducing VMT and tons of emissions

addresses the problem identified without

posing other emissions concerns. For

example, a vehicle type being promoted for

low CO2 emissions in the context of GHG

reduction should not result in even more

significant increases in emissions of

methane, an even more potent GHG.

Moreover, every applicant should

understand that EPA will consider the

ramifications that the proposal may

generate, and it wishes to ascertain

whether each proposal shows

consistency with EPA’s broader mission

beyond the realm of transportationrelated emissions. That is, the proposed

project should, for example, present no

cross-media concerns, and should

respect environmental justice

considerations.

Section VI. Evaluation and Selection

K. How does the evaluation process

work?

The EPA Evaluation Team will be

chosen in such a way that it can address

a full range of transportation/air quality/

climate change matters. Each EPA

Regional office will be given the

opportunity to review those proposals

generated by eligible organizations

within that Region. The Evaluation

Team will base its evaluation solely on

the criteria referenced in this Notice.

Completed evaluations will be referred

to a Selection Committee representing

OTAQ staff and senior managers and

Regional representatives who are

responsible for further consideration

and final selection. Selected proposals

will be submitted to EPA’s grants office

for final approval for award. Applicants

will be notified promptly after this

process concerning their proposal’s

status.

Section VII. Proposals

L. What must be included in the

proposal?

The proposal must contain a

narrative, letters of commitment from

partners, and EPA’s federal assistance

application forms (‘‘Application for

Federal Assistance and Budget

Information,’’ SF 424 and SF 424A).

(Please do not use binders or spiral

binding for your submission.) The

narrative, which should be

approximately 7–8 pages in length, must

explicitly address how the proposal

meets each of the evaluation criteria.

Again, in the course of describing how

it meets the criteria, the narrative must

include:

(1) A concise statement of the nature

of the problem, project background, and

objectives;

(2) A detailed project summary—

description of specific actions to be

undertaken, and the responsible

organizations, including estimated time

line for each task;

(3) The associated work products to

be developed;

(4) An explanation of project benefits;

(5) An explanation of how project

outcomes will be designed for

replication in other communities;

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 21, 2001 / Notices 11027

(6) A detailed budget—clearly explain

how funds will be used, including

estimated cost for each task, and funds

set aside for resources to promote

replication;

(7) A detailed explanation of how the

project shall be evaluated;

(8) The projected time frame for

project from initiation through

completion;

(9) Project contact(s) (must provide

name, organization, phone, fax, and email), and;

(10) A description of the roles of the

applicant and partners.

Special attention should be provided

to the details of pilot implementation

and the mechanisms proposed to enable

broad-scale replication of its

innovations. This includes access to

tools and information for interested

parties seeking to replicate as

appropriate and build upon the project’s

outcomes. This includes materials

generated through the project, contact

information, keys/barriers to success, a

narrative or ‘‘roadmap’’ of the process,

etc.

In addition to the narrative, the

proposal should include a letter of

commitment from each partner

organization that briefly summarizes its

roles and goals in the partnership.

Again, please keep in mind that any

contracts or subgrants awarded to

partner organizations must comply with

applicable regulations.

EPA financial assistance procedures

require that the official and complete

federal assistance application forms

(‘‘Application for Federal Assistance

and Budget Information,’’ SF 424 and

SF 424A) be submitted by all applicants

with their proposals. For those in need

of guidance in filling out these forms, an

Application Kit for Federal Assistance

(which includes the forms) can be

obtained from EPA’s Grants

Administration Division at (202) 564–

5305. These forms can also be

downloaded from the following website:

www.whitehouse.gov/omb/grants/

#forms.

VIII. Other Items of Interest

M. Does this funding expire at the end

of Fiscal Year 2001? Will two-year

projects be considered?

Funding does not expire at the end of

Fiscal Year 2001. If a proposal with a

two-year project period is submitted,

OTAQ simply requires that the budget

and cost estimate be designed to

indicate what will be accomplished in

each of the first and second years.

However, the total amount of the grant

does not change if the project period

extends to two years.

N. May an eligible organization submit

more than one proposal?

Yes. However, more than one

proposal may be submitted only if the

proposals are for different projects.

O. May an eligible organization submit

a proposal for this fiscal year, even if

the organization were previously

awarded funding under another

program?

Yes. Applicants awarded funding in

previous competitions may submit new

proposals to fund a different project. As

mentioned previously, this program is

designed to provide seed money to

initiate new projects, or to add new

dimensions to existing projects (e.g.,

new focus on youth, additional

locations, innovative approaches,

different constituencies). Awards will

not be given to extend or supplement an

ongoing program if the proposal adds

nothing that is new in some significant

way.

P. May an eligible organization resubmit

a proposal which was previously

submitted to another competition for

funding, but was not selected?

Yes. However, those proposals will be

measured against the evaluation criteria

described above.

Q. What is the difference between this

solicitation and the Mobile Source

Outreach Assistance Competition? Can I

apply to both?

These are two distinct competitions,

though offered in fiscal year 2001 at

approximately the same time. While

they may share some goals, such as

providing assistance to stakeholders

wishing to implement innovative

programs that reduce mobile source

related emissions, they differ in

important ways. While the Mobile

Source Outreach Assistance

Competition was originated with the

expressed purpose of promoting

outreach in the mobile source emissions

arena, the scope of eligible projects is

broader under this solicitation.

However, this solicitation limits eligible

applicants to state, local, tribal, and

multi-state agencies involved with

transportation, air quality, and/or

climate change issues. Moreover, this

competition requires that the applicant

demonstrate how CO2 and, depending

upon the problem identified, other

emissions and/or VMT will be reduced,

and an estimate of those reductions in

VMT/tons of emissions through

implementation. The demonstration and

estimate are not required for the Mobile

Source Outreach Assistance

Competition.

Applicants to this competition may

submit a proposal that includes a

component that was submitted to the

Mobile Source Outreach Assistance

Competition. However, due to the

differing nature of the requirements, it

is unlikely that an exact duplication of

a proposal submitted to one would be

suitable to be submitted to the other.

R. What will cause a proposal to be

considered ineligible or non-responsive

to this solicitation?

A proposal will be determined to be

ineligible if :

• It is not submitted by a state, local,

tribal, or multi-state agency involved

with transportation, air quality, or

climate change issues, or;

• It does not satisfy the requirements

for funding authorized under section

103 of the Clean Air Act (described in

the ‘‘Background’’ section, above).

A proposal will be considered non

responsive if:

• It does not address each criterion

and each component outlined in Section

VII.L., above, or;

• It lacks the completed forms

‘‘Application for Federal Assistance and

Budget Information,’’ SF 424 and SF

424A, or;

• If hard copies of the proposal are

received or postmarked by the U.S.

Postal Service after the deadline.

S. Will Letters of Recommendation or

Commendation Help a Proposal During

its Evaluation?

No. Letters of recommendation or

commendation will not be considered.

However, letters from partners

expressing their commitment to the

proposed project will strengthen an

application’s standing; those

documenting successful performance on

Federal assistance projects will be given

greater weight than letters which

express only general support for the

applicant.

Section IX. How To Apply

T. How Does One Apply?

Intents to Apply may take the form of

email, fax or phone call to the Program

Contact, Mary E. Walsh (address listed

below; phone: (734) 214–4205; fax: (734)

214–4052; e-mail: walsh.mary@epa.gov.

Include organization, contact, phone

number, and project title/subject. Please

submit informal Intents to Apply by

Wednesday, March 14, 2001.

(Remember, the Intent to Apply is not

required and will have no bearing on

the judging process, but we do request

it for the benefit of our planning

process.) Submission of an Intent to

Apply or a final proposal does not

guarantee funding.

11028 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 35 / Wednesday, February 21, 2001 / Notices

Completed application packages must

be postmarked or received via regular

mail or express mail on or before

midnight, Tuesday, April 24, 2001

(please provide original proposal + six

copies—no binders or spiral binding,

please!—plus one completed set of

forms SF 424 and SF 424A,

‘‘Application for Federal Assistance and

Budget Information’’), addressed to:

Mary E. Walsh (TRPD), US EPA Office

Transportation and Air Quality, 2000

Traverwood Dr., Ann Arbor, MI 48105.

Deadline For Completed Final

Proposals

Proposals must be received or

postmarked no later than midnight on

April 24, 2001.

Dated: February 9, 2001.

Margo Tsirigotis Oge,

Director, Office of Transportation and Air

Quality, Environmental Protection Agency.

[FR Doc. 01–4268 Filed 2–20–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[FRL–6946–8]

Science Advisory Board; Notification

of Public Advisory Committee Meeting

Pursuant to the Federal Advisory

Committee Act, Public Law 92–463,

notice is hereby given that two

committees of the USEPA Science

Advisory Board (SAB) will meet on the

dates and times noted below. All times

noted are Eastern Time. All meetings are

open to the public, however, seating is

limited and available on a first come

basis. Important Notice: Documents that

are the subject of SAB reviews are

normally available from the originating

EPA office and are not available from

the SAB Office—information concerning

availability of documents from the

relevant Program Office is included

below.

The Research Strategies Advisory

Committee (RSAC) of the Science

Advisory Board (SAB), will meet on

Tuesday, March 6, 2001 and

Wednesday, March 7, 2001 in the EPA

Ariel Rios Building, Room 6013 North,

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,

Washington, DC 20460. The meeting

will begin at 8:30 am and end no later

than 5 pm on both days.

The purpose of the meeting is to begin

an advisory on second phase of RSAC’s

review of the Peer Review Program (see

64 FR 46189, August 24, 1999 for

additional details), a consultation on the

National Program Director process

established by ORD to manage large

cross-cutting programs and how the

Agency obtains science from other

sources, a consultation on multi-year

research planning, a consultation on

performance metrics for science

programs, and to plan for the FY 2002

policy budget review and commentary

and testimony to Congress likely to be

held in May 2001.

As it begins its advisory on EPA’s

implementation of the peer review

program the Committee will examine

two to three case studies to better

understand how the peer review

guidance was followed, how the charge

questions helped focus the review, and

how the product was improved by the

review. The consultation with the

National Program Directors will

examine how the NPD program works as

the NPDs share their experiences in

getting science from various sources

within and outside the Agency to

support the EPA’s mission. The multiyear research planning consultation will

look at one core and one problem-driven

research plan as a basis to inform the

committee of this activity, to elicit

advice from the individual members

about how the process could be

improved and to begin to discuss how

to measure the success of science

programs over time. The performance

metrics consultation will build on the

points raised during the multi-year

planning discussion and explore the

implications of the Government

Performance and Results Act (GPRA)

requirements which requires that

outcomes be described for all Federal

programs, including science programs.

How does one measure the success of

environmental science efforts which

take time for completion and which

contribute to but do not directly result

in clean air, water and soil. During the

budget discussion the Committee will

begin to identify specific themes and

issues against which it will evaluate

EPA’s FY 2002 Science and Technology

budget request.

Charge to the Committee—The

current RSAC charge with respect to its

review of the peer review process at

EPA is: (a) Is EPA peer reviewing the

right products? (b) Are the peer reviews

conducted appropriately? (c) Do the

peer reviews make a difference? (d)

Does EPA peer review all the science it

uses (e.g., data submitted from parties

outside the Agency)? (e) Does the RSAC

have additional comments/guidance for

EPA?

For Further Information—Members of

the public desiring additional

information about the meeting should

contact Dr. Jack Fowle, Designated

Federal Officer (DFO), Research

Strategies Advisory Committee (RSAC),

USEPA Science Advisory Board

(1400A), Room 6450, 1200 Pennsylvania

Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20460;

telephone/voice mail at (202) 564–4547;

fax at (202) 501–0582; or via e-mail at

fowle.jack@epa.gov. For a copy of the

draft meeting agenda, please contact Ms.

Wanda R. Fields, Management Assistant

at (202) 564–4539 or by FAX at (202)

501–0582 or via e-mail at

fields.wanda@epa.gov.

Background materials are available for

some of the above discussions. Where

available, these can be obtained from

Ms. Lisa Matthews, US EPA, Office of

Research and Development (8101R),

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,

Washington, DC 20460, (202) 564–6669,

fax (202) 565–2431, e-mail

matthews.lisa@epa.gov.

Providing Oral or Written

Comments—Members of the public who

wish to make a brief oral presentation to

the Committee must contact Dr. Fowle

in writing (by letter or by fax—see

previously stated information) no later

than 12 noon Eastern Time, Wednesday,

February 28, 2001 in order to be

included on the Agenda (see SAB policy

on providing comments, below). The

request should identify the name of the

individual who will make the

presentation, the organization (if any)

they will represent, any requirements

for audio visual equipment (e.g.,

overhead projector, 35mm projector,

chalkboard, etc), and at least 35 copies

of an outline of the issues to be

addressed or the presentation itself.

Providing Oral or Written Comments at

SAB Meetings

It is the policy of the Science

Advisory Board to accept written public

comments of any length, and to

accommodate oral public comments

whenever possible. The Science

Advisory Board expects that public

statements presented at its meetings will

not be repetitive of previously

submitted oral or written statements.

Oral Comments: In general, each

individual or group requesting an oral

presentation at a face-to-face meeting

will be limited to a total time of ten

minutes. For teleconference meetings,

opportunities for oral comment will

usually be limited to no more than three

minutes per speaker and no more than

fifteen minutes total, unless otherwise

stated. Deadlines for getting on the

public speaker list for a meeting are

given above. Speakers should bring at

least 35 copies of their comments and

presentation slides for distribution to

the reviewers and public at the meeting.

Written Comments: Although the SAB

accepts written comments until the date

of the meeting (unless otherwise stated),