Including Fiscal Year 1999-2000 Priorities, GLNPO Request for Preproposals, and a Roadmap to Federal Funding Opportunities.

The Great Lakes Priorities and Funding Guidance (Funding Guidance) is a resource to assist the network of State, Tribal, Federal, and non-governmental organizations which together constitute the Great Lakes program. It identifies joint priorities of the governmental partners of the Great Lakes Program. With this document, the Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("USEPA" or the "Agency") also describes its funding process and solicits Preproposals for projects to be awarded from Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 funds. Work done with these awards would generally occur during FY 2000. At the end of this document we have included a "Roadmap" to other Federal Great Lakes Funding Opportunities to assist other organizations and programs as they target their Great Lakes activities during annual program planning processes. If this "Roadmap" continues to prove useful to our partners, we will improve and expand it in future years.

I. PURPOSE

The mission of the Great Lakes Program, as set forth in the U.S./Canada Water Quality Agreement, is to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem.

By publishing the Great Lakes Priorities and Funding Guidance each Fall, GLNPO seeks to:

• implement that mission by fostering development of appropriate projects.
• achieve the objectives of the 1992 Great Lakes 5-Year Strategy - Protecting the Great Lakes: Our Environmental Goals and How We Plan to Achieve Them.
• maximize the opportunity for developing joint partnerships between agencies and non-governmental organizations to achieve common environmental objectives.
• provide program and funding guidance such that State and Tribal agencies are able to efficiently prepare grant proposals in concert with other program planning activities.
• identify joint priorities so that Great Lakes Program partners can use them in internal planning and so that grant proposals can be targeted at opportunities for the most significant environmental improvement.
• reduce the administrative burden associated with competing for individual project grants at various, unpredictable times throughout the funding cycle.

The Great Lakes Priorities and Funding Guidance does not replace general USEPA National guidance or guidance developed by the Regional Program Offices. Rather, it is a supplement to the annual planning process and should be used to facilitate planning Great Lakes activities in concert with other program planning efforts. The Great Lakes Funding Guidance is also intended to provide linkages among USEPA and other Federal Great Lakes programs.

II. GREAT LAKES PRIORITIES

The Great Lakes Basin is home to 33 million people, including more than one-tenth of the population of the United States. It contains some of the world's largest concentrations of industrial capacity; agricultural land; forests; dunes; wetlands; and 141 globally rare plant and animal species. The Lakes themselves constitute the largest system of fresh, surface water on earth, containing 20% of the world's supply. They are sensitive to a range of pollutant sources, including runoff, waste, industry discharges, and disposal leachate. Their size increases their vulnerability to atmospheric deposition. Pollutants bioaccumulate and are retained in the system for decades (outflows are less than 1 % annually and water retention ranges from 191 years in Lake Superior to 2.6 years in Lake Erie).

Great Lakes Program partners are united in their efforts, as set forth in the U.S./Canada Water Quality Agreement, to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem. This mission is supported through:

• Reducing toxic substances, with an emphasis on persistent, bioaccumulative substances.
• Protecting and restoring vital habitats.
• Protecting biological integrity; restoring and maintaining diverse living populations.

To achieve those objectives, a nested structure of Great Lakes activities is managed and implemented by an alliance of Federal, State, Tribal, and non-governmental agencies. This structure fosters cross-program and cross-agency integration of programs at a variety of scales; from Areas of Concern to issues of lakewide and those of basinwide concern. Thus, the Great Lakes priorities include a variety of tools and focuses, including:

A. Toxics Reduction

• Great Lakes Water Quality Guidance. All Great Lakes States have submitted rules packages and associated materials pursuant to the requirements of the Critical Programs Act (CWA Section 118) and the Great Lakes Water Quality Guidance (40 CFR 132). USEPA is currently reviewing these materials in order to assess whether or not the States' programs are as protective as the Great Lakes Guidance.

• Binational Toxics Strategy. The Strategy, a ground breaking international toxics reduction effort, targets a common set of persistent, toxic substances for reduction and virtual elimination from the Great Lakes. It focuses on pollution prevention efforts, using voluntary and regulatory tools to achieve reductions, and contains reduction challenges for a targeted set of substances, e.g., mercury, PCBs, dioxins/furans, and certain canceled pesticides. Each targeted substance will be addressed at the appropriate phase of an analytical framework which consists of information gathering, analysis of current regulations/initiatives, identification of options and implementing reduction actions.

• Air Toxics. Regional work continues with the States, the Office of Air and Radiation, the Office of Research and Development, GLNPO, and the Office of Water in developing multimedia strategies and studies under the Great Waters atmospheric deposition program. The studies involve utilizing the air toxics emissions inventory in multi-media modeling and dispersion and deposition studies along with toxics monitoring data. The Lake Michigan Mass Balance Study will help determine the extent that air toxics emissions harm lake waters and their ecosystems. Much of the deposition work concerns the atmospheric deposition of mercury to lakes and land, a national priority and a global concern. Associated priorities include:

Inventory and Monitor
Assist States in (i) developing the Great Lakes Regional Air Toxics Emissions Inventory (to define and regulate sources, evaluate control technologies and reduce atmospheric deposition of toxic pollutants to the Great Lakes (and other inland lakes) and (ii) monitoring of air toxics trends.

Toxics Modeling
Continue research on toxic pollutant modeling in order to better understand the fate and cycling of toxic pollutants through the Great Lakes ecosystem. In particular, force the computation linkages between atmospheric models and water-based models to simplify and enhance the prediction of relative loadings of contaminants from air and water to a given waterbody.

Long Range Transport
Assess and identify long-range transport of substances from sources outside of the Great Lakes (per the Great Waters Report).

Control Technologies
Further investigate the development of cost-effective control technologies for mercury as well as other pollutants (both end-of-pipe controls and pollution prevention options).

• Contaminated Sediments. Polluted sediments are the largest major source of contaminants to the Great Lakes food chain - over 2,000 miles (20%) of the shoreline are considered impaired because of sediment contamination. The Region 5 sediment inventory contains 346 contaminated sediment sites. Fish consumption advisories remain in place throughout the Great Lakes and many inland lakes. Contaminated sediments also cause restrictions and delays in dredging of navigable waterways, which in turn can negatively affect local and regional economies. Contaminated sediments must be cleaned up - before these sediments move downstream or into open waters, which makes them inaccessible and cleanup impossible. Associated priorities include: (i) provide communities with technical assistance, especially in Areas of Concern, to clean up contaminated sediments in their rivers and harbors through application of regulatory authorities and cooperative approaches including on-the-ground cleanup, remedial design, and field work and assessment; (ii) prioritize Regional sediment sites and develop a Regional Sediments database; and (iii) improve the process for managing dredged materials from navigable waterways.

B. Habitat (Ecological) Protection and Restoration.

Much of the Great Lakes basin ecosystem has been permanently altered by anthropogenic stressors, but viable remnants of most of the biological components remain. Habitat priorities are focused on efforts to:

• Protect ecosystems possessing ecological integrity, bio-diversity, or rare ecological occurrences from adverse impacts of anthropogenic stressors.

• Restore physical processes, ecological structures, and functions to formerly degraded ecosystems that have the potential to be ecologically significant.

C. Ecosystem tools and approaches, addressing both toxics and habit:

• Lakewide Management Plans (LaMPs). USEPA and its partners are working to restore and protect the biological, chemical, and physical integrity of the Great Lakes. Priorities being addressed through lake management teams for each of the Lakes include:

Lake Michigan
The basin contains the Nation's third largest population center, the world's largest concentration of pulp and paper mills, 40 percent of the Nation's steel mills, and substantial fruit and grain production. While water quality at Lake Michigan has improved, contamination still exists. Nonpoint source runoff, air deposition, and large contaminated sediment sites are main sources of the lake's contamination. Fish advisories and beach closings are still necessary. Habitat destruction, developmental pressures, and exotic species present significant challenges. Priority Activities: Develop the LaMP to direct activities to preserve and restore Lake Michigan's ecosystem. By a date certain, complete the next version of the LaMP (Stage II) including goals, status and trends, causes, sources, and pathways, as well as indicators, incorporating early sampling results provided by the Lake Michigan Mass Balance Study and results from a stakeholder comparative risk exercise.

Lake Ontario
There have been significant improvements since the 1960s and 1970s, when colonial waterbirds experienced nearly total reproductive failures due to high levels of toxic contaminants in the food chain. Following actions to ban and control contaminants entering the Great Lakes and GLWQA renewal, levels of toxic contaminants have decreased significantly, and colonial waterbird populations have overcome most of the recognized contaminant-induced impacts of 25 years ago (i.e., their eggshells show normal thickness, they are reproducing normally, and most population levels are stable or increasing). However, bioaccumulative toxics persist in sediment, water, and biota at levels of concern for some fish species and for higher order predators. Priority Activities: The Stage I (problem definition) LaMP was finalized in May, 1998. The LaMP workgroup will work with its partners to implement the binational workplan laid out in the Stage I document, towards the development of a draft Stage 2 LaMP by the fall of the year 2000. Items identified in the binational workplan include updating sources and loadings information for LaMP critical pollutants, undertaking source trackdown to identify sources, enhancing existing mass balance models, facilitating cooperative lakewide monitoring, refining beneficial use impairment assessments, habitat protection and restoration activities, and finalizing ecosystems objectives and indicators for the Lake.

Lake Superior
The largest fresh-water lake in the world by surface area, the lake basin is sparsely populated and relatively pristine. Through the zero discharge demonstration program, the partnership is trying to demonstrate that Clean Water Act goals can actually be met. Priority Activities: Implement activities to prevent, reduce, and/or remediate impaired uses by continuing implementation of the zero discharge demonstration, special protection designations, the development of an integrated monitoring plan, and protection and restoration of important habitat. Release a draft of Stage 3 of the LaMP (including analysis of current regulatory programs, and developing a reduction strategy utilizing tools and incentives) for public comment.

Lake Erie
The smallest, warmest, shallowest, and most biologically productive Great lake supports major industrial, recreational, and fishing uses. Stresses from urbanization, agricultural use, and exotic species impact habitat and threaten food sources. Priority Activities: Complete several components of a LaMP Stage 1 (problem identification), and implement activities to prevent, reduce and/or remediate impaired uses, including : (i) development of ecosystem objectives and indicators, (ii) beneficial use impairment assessments, (iii) pollutant source and loadings analysis, (iv) habitat protection and restoration, and (v) public involvement. Particular emphasis will be placed on source identification and reduction of LaMP critical pollutants, particularly through pollution prevention efforts and enforcement-compliance assistance and on support for RAP development and other State, agency, or community-based projects.

Lake Huron
The third largest Lake (by volume) has a lakeshore extending 3,827 miles, and is characterized by shallow, sandy beaches and the rocky shores of Georgian Bay. Lake Huron's drainage area, which covers parts of Michigan and Ontario, is relatively large compared to the other Great Lakes. Environmental issues include habitat destruction, the leveling off of declines of toxic contaminants, a continued sea lamprey threat, and questions about the sustainability of the Lake Huron fishery. Michigan State agencies met with EPA and other partners in 1998 to begin identifying issues and efforts toward ensuring a sustainable Lake Huron watershed. Priority Activities: EPA will continue working with these organizations to explore options for addressing Lake Huron issues.

• AOCs and Special Places. Special attention is placed on geographic areas where beneficial use of water or biota is adversely affected or where environmental criteria are exceeded to the extent that use impairment exists or is likely to exist. The purpose of establishing "Areas of Concern" is to encourage jurisdictions to form partnerships to rehabilitate these acute, localized problem areas and to restore their beneficial uses.

Through ecosystem-based efforts, reduce toxic substances and protect/restore beneficial uses in the AOCs through community-based environmental protection. In supporting such efforts the Agency aims to enhance public communication and focus and coordinate implementation of all relevant Federal, State, and local media programs.

Target multi-media regulatory and non-regulatory actions to achieve risk-based environmental improvements in and around the Niagara River, Northwest Indiana, Greater Chicago, Southeast Michigan, Northeast Ohio, and on Tribal Lands.

Promote and support brownfields initiatives, including information dissemination to assist brownfields redevelopment in AOC communities.

D. Support Federal-State-Tribal Partnership and Integration

• Initiate development of a new Great Lakes Strategy, expanding the participation of partners and forging linkages with the Government Performance and Results Act.

• Improve State and Tribal capability to address Great Lakes environmental problems through a cross-program approach based on environmental information.

• Initiate coordinated post-SOLEC indicator development, monitoring, information management, and reporting

• Provide broad access (including Federal and State agencies) to a common environmental database and analytical tools, facilitating Federal/State/Tribal information exchange.

III. GLNPO ACTIVITIES AND FUNDING

General Information. Each Fall, mid-level environmental managers from Great Lakes State, Tribal, and Federal programs meet in a Great Lakes Planning Meeting to discuss Great Lakes priorities and the criteria for projects to be funded by GLNPO in the upcoming year. That information is used in developing a Great Lakes Funding Guidance which is then used in a broad solicitation of Preproposals through direct mailings, notification in the Federal Register, and Internet posting and announcements. Preproposals are then evaluated and successful applicants are asked to submit full proposals for their projects. Final decisions are based on the full proposals.

General funding priorities and targets for this Great Lakes Funding Guidance were derived from USEPA's Congressionally approved budget. Development of that budget began in 1997. Consequently, in order to have a timely influence on the Federal budget process, participants in this year's Great Lakes Planning Meeting discussed Great Lakes priorities for FY 2001.

GLNPO has provided funding for close to 300 projects totaling $35 million between 1993 and 1997. The projects are summarized at http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/fund/glf.html#top. Summaries of the FY 1998 projects will be posted in December.

FY 1998 Recap. In FY 1998, GLNPO notified potential applicants that it was seeking preproposals for a total of $4 million in the priority areas of: Contaminated Sediments; Habitat Protection and Restoration; Pollution Prevention; Assessment/Indicators; Exotic Species; and Emerging Issues. Funding for Exotic Species and Emerging Issues was possible because of a Congressional earmark. In response, 128 applicants submitted 230 preproposals, requesting $30.2 million in assistance.

Of the Preproposals submitted, 27% were "successful." 45 applicants were asked to submit proposals for 62 projects totaling $4.6 million (http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/fund/98preproposalselection.html ). GLNPO offered assistance for each of these projects for which the Applicant still desired funding. Some projects which were not successful in the GLNPO process were forwarded to other organizations for their consideration.

FY 1999-2000 Assistance Process. With this Great Lakes Funding Guidance, GLNPO is again making "venture capital" available for important, innovative projects to protect and clean up the Great Lakes ecosystem. We are looking for projects in the areas of Contaminated Sediments, Pollution Prevention and Reduction (pursuant to the Binational Toxics Strategy), Habitat (Ecological) Protection and Restoration, Exotic Species, and Emerging Issues. Our criteria specify that we are looking for projects which: (i) are action oriented, (ii) are not clearly the mission of other Federal programs, (iii) are leveraged with other funding sources, (iv) complement, but do not duplicate, other efforts, and (v) were developed through a collaborative, partnership process such as LaMPs or RAPs. We especially welcome projects which address environmental justice and those which have community-based support. Appendices 1 and 2 contain detailed application instructions and criteria. The Roadmap to Federal Funding Opportunities (Appendix 3) references possibilities for other Federal assistance to Great Lakes related activities.

This Great Lakes Funding Guidance asks interested Applicants to submit short Preproposals for Great Lakes projects. We request that Preproposals be developed using the GLNPO Preproposal Submission System (PSS2) contained on the disk on the back page of this document. (PSS2 can also be downloaded from http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/fund/99pss.html). GLNPO will screen preproposals upon receipt to ensure they qualify under the Appendix 2 criteria. Reviewers internal and external to USEPA will also use that criteria to evaluate the remaining Preproposals. Evaluations will take into account recommendations on specific needs and priorities of geographic areas within the Great Lakes, particularly those of: Lakewide Management Plans for Lakes Ontario, Michigan, Erie, and Superior and their included geographic initiatives such as the Remedial Action Plans for Areas of Concern (see the identified priorities in Attachment 2 criteria). To obtain additional information about those needs and priorities, applicants are encouraged to consult with applicable EPA staff. (See Appendix 3 for a listing of the Regional Team Managers for Priority Approaches and Geographic Teams and for contacts in Regions 2 and 3). The GLNPO process will also involve coordination with other Agency priorities such as the Clean Water Action Plan.

Applicants should note that Preproposals will not be treated as confidential information. They may be shared during the evaluation process with partners external to EPA. Information about the Preproposals will be published on the Internet. Applicants should develop their budgets and schedule keeping in mind that extra funds and extra time may be needed for development of a quality assurance project plan (QAPP). Applicants should note that USEPA policy requires them to have an approved QAPP prior to commencement of any environmental data collection.

Applicants will be notified as to whether they should subsequently submit full Assistance Application Packages (full Proposals). Final funding decisions will be based upon the full Proposals. Additional documentation (such as letters of recommendation from LaMP or RAP committees or State Agencies or with respect to quality assurance) may be required as part of the full Proposal. GLNPO intends to make reports and other products of this assistance easily accessible to the public via the Internet and other means.

The schedule for the remainder of this funding cycle is:

Toxics Reduction, Biodiversity, and Emerging Issues. The October, 1998 Great Lakes Planning Meeting verified the importance of strategically focusing on toxics reduction and biodiversity. For FY 1999-2000, GLNPO is targeting $3.8 million(1) in assistance to States, Tribes, and our other partners for projects implementing these priorities. Targets are:

Participants in the October, 1998 Great Lakes Planning Meeting confirmed the importance of GLNPO addressing Exotic Species and Emerging Issues. A Congressional earmark in the USEPA budget for FY 1999 may make that possible. However, funding for these categories is less certain than that for other categories because these are not specific line items in GLNPO's approved budget.

GLNPO is not issuing a general solicitation for Assessment/Indicators this year, but will issue two targeted Requests for Proposals (RFPs) - one for Organic Chemistry and another for a Plankton Index. These targeted RFPs are described in the next section.

See Appendices 1 and 2 for specific instructions and criteria regarding GLNPO's request for Preproposals. Please note our request that Applicants submit Preproposals electronically.

Other GLNPO Programs. GLNPO is actively involved in other program areas in addition to the solicitations previously described in this document. In the areas referenced below, we will coordinate at the Federal, State, Tribal, and local levels to ensure that these projects and resources are appropriately targeted to achieve mutual objectives. Staff are also available for consultation in these areas.

* Lake ecosystem indicators. Through atmospheric deposition monitoring and open lake monitoring in each Great Lake for toxicant and nutrient loadings and concentrations (using EPA's research vessels), GLNPO will provide trend and baseline data to support and target remedial efforts and measure environmental progress. GLNPO and EPA's Office of Research and Development will interpret and report information about Lake Michigan air, water, sediments, and biota through the Lake Michigan Mass Balance Study (LMMB), thus enabling the Agency and its partners to target further pollutant reductions. The joint GLNPO/Canadian atmospheric deposition network (including air monitoring stations on each Great Lake) will provide trend and baseline data to support and target remedial efforts and measure environmental progress under Lakewide Management Plans. In October 1998, GLNPO, with its Canadian counterparts, reported on environmental indicators in the biennial State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference which brought together over 500 representatives of the public and private sectors to facilitate risk- and science-based decision-making.

As part of the Lake ecosystem indicator program, GLNPO will be issuing two targeted Requests for Proposals (RFPs) in FY 1999, one for Organic Chemistry and one for a Plankton Index:

Organic Chemistry. In December, GLNPO will issue a RFP for analysis of a large number of organic contaminants. Including in the list will be the tier one and tier two chemicals from the all Great Lakes Lakewide Management Plans, and organic contaminants that are a part of the BNS. We anticipate analyzing for these chemicals in water (XAD resin), fish, and sediment. Water analysis will require ultra-trace level detection levels (sub part-per-trillion). As part of the request we will also be asking for a "broad scan" analysis of fish tissue to identify contaminants beyond those usually identified. As with previous RFPs, the ranking criteria for the proposals will emphasize demonstrated expertise in analyzing at the concentrations expected in the Great Lakes. If you feel that your laboratory has the demonstrated ability to analyze the above chemicals, please submit your name for inclusion in the mailing list.

Plankton Index. This RFP will be issued in January, 1999. GLNPO has long term plankton records for the lower four Great Lakes. The species composition and biomass information have been published in trend analysis reports and as peer reviewed journal articles. However, we are looking for a collection of metrics similar to those used for the Index of Biotic Integrity so that we can more easily and uniformly report on the health of the open water community. The RFP for this work will emphasize demonstrated expertise in the analysis and interpretation of plankton community data. If you feel that your laboratory has this ability, please submit your name for inclusion in the mailing list.

To be added to the Mailing List for these RFPs, please contact Glenn Warren (312) 886-2405. Additional information is available from Paul Horvatin (312) 353-3612, Chief of GLNPO's Monitoring, Indicators, and Reporting Branch.

* Manage and provide public access to Great Lakes data. EPA's integrated Great Lakes information system, developed by GLNPO and its State and Federal partners, will deliver LMMB, and other, scientifically sound, easily accessible environmental information to decision makers and the public by traditional means and via the Internet. GLNPO will pilot techniques to provide public access to LMMB data via the Internet. Additional information is available from Pranas Pranckevicius (312) 353-3437, leader of GLNPO's Information Management Team.

Appendix 1

Application Instructions for GLNPO Preproposals
January 15, 1999 Deadline

GLNPO requests submission of Preproposals for projects meeting the criteria in Appendix 2. Following evaluations, full proposals will be requested from selected applicants. Final decisions will be based on the full proposals.

Developing Preproposals. We request that Preproposals be developed using the GLNPO Preproposal Submission System (PSS2) contained on the disk on the back page. PSS2 can also be downloaded from http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/fund/99pss.html. The back page includes simple instructions for getting started using PSS2. Detailed information is included in the disk's "read-me" file. We encourage you to call Tony Kizlauskas (312) 353-8773 or Pranas Pranckevicius (312) 353-3437 for technical assistance or if you do not have access to a PC. PSS2 does not work on Macintosh computers.

Preproposal Format. PSS2 generates the correct format. Examples of Preproposals for Sediments, Pollution Prevention and Reduction, and Habitat are available at http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/fund/glf.html. Page 2 of this Appendix gives "line-by line" instructions for the required Preproposal components. Preproposals should not exceed five pages.

Eligibility. Assistance (through grants, cooperative agreements, and interagency agreements) is available pursuant to Clean Water Act §104(b)(3) for activities in the Great Lakes Basin and in support of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. State pollution control agencies, interstate agencies, other public or nonprofit private agencies, institutions, organizations, and individuals are eligible; "for-profit" organizations are not.

Ineligible Activities. Under this solicitation, GLNPO will not fund: "construction grant" projects; basic research; land acquisition; education/outreach or conferences, unless they are a part of a larger project; or general operating support.

Additional Funds. Applicants seeking additional funding under an existing award must also apply through this process.

Matching/Quality Assurance. The minimum non-Federal matching requirement is 5% of total project cost and may be provided in cash or by in-kind contributions and other non-cash support. An approved quality assurance plan will be required prior to the commencement of data collection and reporting.

Project Clarification/Revisions. Applicants may be contacted for clarification and for the purpose of negotiating changes in project terms and amounts.

Confidentiality. Preproposal information will not be kept confidential.

Evaluation. The evaluation process, described in the body of this document, will include the criteria in Appendix 2 and consideration of priorities for geographic areas. Evaluations take into account an Applicant's ranking of its Preproposals and do not penalize Applicants for submitting multiple Preproposals.

Notification: We will confirm Preproposal receipt within: (i) one week for E-Mail submissions or (ii) two weeks for regular mail. Shortly after the Preproposal deadline, we will post Preproposal information (including Applicant, Title, and GLNPO identification number) at: http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/fund/glf.html. This site will be updated with Preproposal review status information. All applicants will be notified about whether they should submit full proposals.

Likelihood of Selection. As an indication of the likelihood of selection, please note that assistance was offered for 27% of the FY 1998 Preproposals and 22% of the FY97 Preproposals.

Deadline for Preproposal Receipt: January 15, 1999.

Preproposal Submission. PSS2 allows paperless submissions. To send your preproposal to us by E-mail, attach a copy of the data file, "APPLY2.TPS," from the subdirectory where PSS2 installs itself (C:\PSS2) and send it to: preproposal@glnts.r5exp.epa.gov . If sending a disk, mail it to:

USEPA - GLNPO (G-17J)
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590
 

Multiple Preproposals. If your organization submits multiple Preproposals, please identify an overall contact (including phone, e-mail, and address) and send a single, coordinated submittal, prioritizing the Preproposals. PSS2 provides this capability. Individuals from the following organizations have offered to serve as their organizations' overall contacts. Please talk with your contact first if you plan on submitting a preproposal:

• Illinois EPA: Robert Schacht (708-338-7900)
• Indiana DEM: Kathy Baird (219-881-6730)
• Indiana DNR: Laurie Rounds (317-570-1554)
• Michigan DEQ: Rick Hobrla (517-335-4173)
• Minnesota PCA: Pat Carey (218-723-4744)
• Minnesota DNR: Pat Collins (218-834-6612)
• New York DEC: Gerry Mikol (716-851-7000)
• Ohio EPA: Julie Letterhos (614-644-2871)
• Pennsylvania DEP: Kelly Burch (814-332-6816)
• Wisconsin DNR: Greg Hill (608-267-9352)
• GL Commission: Michael Donahue (734-665-9135)
• Argonne Nat'l. Lab: Roger Anderson (630-252-6406)
• TNC: Heather Potter (312-759-8017)

Preproposal Components - "Line-by-Line" Instructions

(Tabs refer to data entry in the Preproposal Submission System)

APPLICANT INFORMATION (TAB1)

Applicant. Enter Applicant (Organization) Name, Contact Person's Title (choose one from the drop-down list), Contact Person's Name, Address, City, State (choose one from the drop-down list), Phone, Fax, and E-mail. For Phone and Fax numbers, enter the 10-digit number without any punctuation, spaces, etc.

Type of Organization. Choose one from a drop-down list including: State; Interstate Agency or Commission; Sub-state or special purpose district; County; Municipality; Federal Agency; College or University; Tribal Organization; Individual; Federally funded research and development center; or Other.

PROJECT SUMMARY INFORMATION (TAB 2)

Project Title. No more than 60 characters.

Abstract. One paragraph synopsis.

Duration. Specify project duration from 0.5 years up to 2 years (select from the spin-box list).

Category. Choose only 1 from a drop-down list including: (i) Contaminated Sediments; (ii) Pollution Prevention and Reduction - BNS; (iii) Habitat (Ecological) Protection and Restoration; (iv) Exotic Species; or (vi) Emerging Issues. Submission of a single project to multiple categories may adversely affect your chance of success.

Rank Within Category. Only for multiple preproposals being submitted within the same project category from the same organization. To only be filled in after rank is assigned by the organization's coordinator.

GEOGRAPHIC APPLICABILITY (TAB 3)

Applicable State. Select Great Lakes State(s) which would be most impacted by this project. (Click on appropriate selection boxes).

Applicable Basin. Identify Lake Basin(s) which would be most impacted by this project. (Click on appropriate selection boxes.)

Applicable Areas of Concern. Identify the Areas of Concern affected by the Project: Choose the primary affected Area of Concern from the drop-down list. List any others in the field entitled "Other Affected AOCs".

For Habitat Projects Only: Choose the primary affected Biodiversity Investment Area from the drop-down list. List any others in the field entitled "Other Affected BIAs". Nearshore terrestrial Biodiversity Investment Areas were identified in the Land by the Lakes paper for SOLEC 1996 (http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/solec/96/landbylakes/index.htm). (BIAs for nearshore aquatic and coastal wetlands are being developed through SOLEC, but are not available at this time.)

PROBLEM STATEMENT (TAB 4)

Problem Statement. Describe the issue that will be addressed and its relevance to the Great Lakes, particularly to needs and priorities (especially in LaMPs and RAPs) for Lakes, AOCs, and other geographic initiatives.

Proposed Work/Outcome. Outline what will be done and how. Describe anticipated environmental results, referencing affected pollutants, industry sectors, economic impacts, habitats, and/or species.

PROJECT MILESTONES (TAB 5)

Milestones. Specify milestones and/or final products and projected due dates (Month/Year, in MM/YYYY format). You may describe up to 8 milestones/final products, including Project Start and End. If you would submit a full proposal in April, your project could begin in May or June; however, most usually begin in September or October.

EJ/EDUCATION APPLICABILITY (TAB 6)

Environmental Justice. Check box and include a narrative description if some part of the project addresses "Environmental Justice." Environmental justice is the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Fair treatment means that no group of people, including racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic groups, should bear a disproportionate share of the negative environmental consequences resulting from industrial, municipal, and commercial operations or the execution of federal, state, local, and tribal programs and policies.

Education/Outreach Component. Check box, if the project includes an education/outreach component. If applicable, describe the target audience and how that group would be impacted by the project in the field entitled "Education/Outreach Description".

PROJECT BUDGET (TAB 7)

Budget. Fill in the applicable budget items in the table to show how GLNPO (Federal) funds and non-Federal matching funds will be used for personnel/salaries, fringe benefits, travel, equipment, supplies, contract costs, construction, and other costs. You may include a separate line for indirect costs if your organization has in place (or will negotiate) an "indirect cost rate" from a cognizant Federal agency. Budget should represent the total which would be requested from GLNPO for the project's duration (up to two years). Funding will be awarded as a "lump sum" and is not assured for subsequent years. Do not include commas when entering the budget amounts. Totals will be calculated automatically or by pressing "calculate."

OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDING (TAB 8)

Other Funding. If funds are being pursued or have been committed to your Project by other providers, list the Name of the Providers, Amounts Provided, and Commitments made by each.

COLLABORATION (TAB 9)

Collaboration/Community-based Support. Describe plans and status of collaboration amongst the public, private, and independent sectors. Evidence of support will be required for full proposals.

GLNPO REQUEST FOR PREPROPOSALS

Contaminated Sediments - $1,400,000*

(*Planning Target - subject to change for various reasons, including Congressional and Agency action, such as development and approval of the Agency's annual operating plan.)

GLNPO will provide funding, technical support, and vessel support to assist contaminated sediment work in priority geographic areas in the Great Lakes. GLNPO's emphasis and ultimate objective is to assist in bringing about remediation of contaminated sediments at these sites.

We are particularly interested in the following projects:

• sediment assessments (chemical, physical, biological) to better map contamination at a site.
• sediment assessment in areas where subsistence fishing is high.
• data collection to better understand the relationship between contaminated sediments and fish residues.
• data collection to support the development of risk/hazard assessments.
• bench/pilot studies to support remedial efforts.
• beneficial re-use of sediments.
• assessment of Binational Toxics Strategy Priority Pollutants in Great Lakes sediments.
• development of assessment techniques/methods to determine benefits/impacts of remediation.
• on the ground sediment remediation.

Evaluations will also consider the specific needs and priorities of geographic areas within the Great Lakes, particularly those of Lakewide Management Plans and geographic initiatives such as the Remedial Action Plans for Areas of Concern. Projects dealing with the following topics will receive great consideration:

• Lake Erie and the St. Clair/Lake St. Clair/Detroit River basin. Projects addressing the chemicals associated with the beneficial use impairments as identified by the Lake Erie LaMP (PCBs, mercury, PAHs, lead, chlordane, dioxins, DDE/DDT, mirex), with priority given to projects involving PCBs and mercury.
  
• Lake Ontario, St. Lawrence River, and Niagara River basins. Projects which address the critical pollutants as identified in the 1998 Stage I Lake Ontario LaMP and/or the Niagara River Toxics Management Plan..
  
• Lake Michigan basin. Projects for (i) the possible beneficial reuse of contaminated sediments and (ii) tools and models for public education and involvement in sediment cleanups.
  
• Lake Superior basin. Projects addressing either of the St. Louis River or St. Mary's River Areas Of Concern (AOCs) and their directives to remove impairments of beneficial uses.

Criteria. GLNPO seeks projects which (i) are action oriented, (ii) are not clearly the mission of other Federal programs, (iii) are leveraged with other funding sources, (iv) complement, but do not duplicate, other efforts, and (v) were developed through a collaborative, partnership process such as LaMPs or RAPs. We especially welcome projects which address environmental justice and those which have community-based support. Applicants should have demonstrated expertise. Applicants with existing GLNPO projects should be up-to-date on reporting and other requirements. GLNPO's preproposal evaluation will seek a balance among sediments activities; however, preproposals will be prioritized in the following order: (i) on-the-ground cleanup, (ii) remedial design, and (iii) field work and assessment. Evaluations will also consider:

• support from the local RAP committee.
• availability of other funds to support the work.
• public outreach component of activity.
• availability and assessment of baseline conditions for remediation proposals.
• likelihood that remedial measures, including enforcement, will result.

Contact: Marc Tuchman (312) 353-1369

Pollution Prevention and Reduction (BNS) - $800,000*

(*Planning Target - subject to change for various reasons, including Congressional and Agency action, such as development and approval of the Agency's annual operating plan.)

GLNPO will provide assistance to partners for pollution prevention, reduction, or elimination, focusing on the reduction and elimination of persistent, toxic substances, especially those which bioaccumulate, from the Great Lakes Basin (see list on following page). Projects and activities should support the reduction "challenges," goals, and objectives in, and the implementation of, the Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy: The Canada-U.S. Strategy for the Virtual Elimination of Persistent Toxic Substances in the Great Lakes Basin (BNS). The BNS is on line at http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/bns/strategy.html. GLNPO will also consider projects which target pollutants of concern under LaMPs.

We are particularly interested in the following projects:

• Working with business/industrial sectors to reduce the use or release of BNS-targeted substances, such as mercury reduction with dentists or hospitals, the steel industry, or Great Lakes utilities;
• Demonstrating how economic incentives or voluntary actions can induce companies to reduce or "virtually eliminate" the use and/or release of Level I BNS-targeted substances.
• Demonstrating pollution prevention for Level II BNS targeted substances.
• Implementing on-the-ground actions and projects recommended by State or local task forces on BNS substances;
• Cooperative efforts with industrial/environmental/other sectors that support "Green Technologies" which can be used to reduce persistent toxic substances. Efforts could include demonstrating increased energy efficiency, and replacing PCBs in aging electrical equipment with newer, non-PCB efficient electrical equipment;
• Conducting agricultural clean sweeps or household hazardous waste collections to collect and properly dispose of persistent toxic substances; demonstrating PCB "clean sweep" projects;
• Environmental measures which indicate whether a BNS substance has current sources; and
• Environmental measures which indicate progress toward virtual elimination.

Evaluations will also consider the specific needs and priorities of geographic areas within the Great Lakes, particularly those of Lakewide Management Plans and geographic initiatives (such as the Remedial Action Plans for Areas of Concern). Reviewers associated with each of the Lakes will prioritize pollution reduction or elimination activities targeting critical pollutants and priority toxics identified in the respective LaMP, RAP, or other applicable management plan. Projects dealing with the following topics will receive great consideration:

• Lake Erie and St. Clair/Lake St. Clair/Detroit River basins. Projects (i) addressing the chemicals associated with the beneficial use impairments as identified by the Lake Erie LaMP (PCBs, mercury, PAHs, lead, chlordane, dioxins, DDE/DDT, mirex), with priority given to projects involving PCBs and mercury or (ii) which reduce the release of atrazine to the waters of Lake Erie.
• Lake Ontario, St. Lawrence River, and Niagara River basins. Projects addressing pollutants identified in the 1998 Stage I Lake Ontario LaMP, and other persistent, bioaccumulative toxics, as well as projects along the Niagara River which address the priority toxics identified in the Niagara River Toxics Management Plan.
• Lake Michigan basin. Projects building on or replicating (i) the Cook County, IL PCB/Mercury Clean Sweep Partnership Pilot or (ii) the Lake Michigan Forum's Indiana Steelmills/Mercury Voluntary Reduction Agreement.
• Lake Superior basin. Projects addressing (i) the chemicals identified as critical pollutants; PCBs, dioxins, DDT and metabolites, toxaphene, chlordane, aldrin/dieldrin, mercury, hexachlorobenzene and octachlorostyrene, (ii) with priority given to projects involving PCBs and dioxins (with special emphasis on burn barrels as a source).

Criteria. GLNPO seeks projects which (i) are action oriented, (ii) are not clearly the mission of other Federal programs, (iii) are leveraged with other funding sources, (iv) complement, but do not duplicate, other efforts, and (v) were developed through a collaborative, partnership process such as LaMPs or RAPs. We especially welcome projects which address environmental justice and those which have community-based support. Applicants should have demonstrated expertise. Applicants with existing GLNPO projects should be up-to-date on reporting and other requirements. GLNPO's preproposal evaluation will seek a balance among activities; however, priority will be given to source reduction. Evaluations will also consider:

• furtherance of the goal of virtual elimination of persistent toxic substances, as described in the BNS.
• furtherance of LaMP and RAP environmental goals, especially the reduction of toxic substances which are persistent and bioaccumulate.
• transferability across the Great Lakes Basin and beyond.
• potential to advance government and private partnerships.
• building on lessons learned from past or ongoing similar efforts.
• ability to define measures of success.

Contacts: Elizabeth LaPlante (312) 353-2694; / Danielle Green (312) 886-7594

Under BNS, the following "Level 1 " substances are targeted for virtual elimination:

• Aldrin/dieldrin
• Benzo(a)pyrene {B(a)P}
• Chlordane
• DDT (+DDD+DDE)
• Hexachlorobenzene (HCB)
• Alkyl-lead
• Mercury and mercury compounds
• Mirex
• Octachlorostyrene
• PCBs
• PCDD (Dioxins) and PCDF (Furans)
• Toxaphene

Under BNS, the following "Level 2 " substances are targeted for pollution prevention:

• Cadmium and cadmium compounds
• 1,4-dichlorobenzene 3,3'-dichlorobenzidine
• Dinitropyrene
• Endrin
• Heptachlor (+Heptachlor epoxide)
• Hexachlorobutadiene (+Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene)
• Hexachlorocyclohexane
• 4,4'-methylenebis(2-chloroaniline)
• Pentachlorobenzene
• Pentachlorophenol
• Tetrachlorobenzene (1,2,3,4- and 1,2,4,5-)
• Tributyl tin
• Plus PAHs as a group, including but not limited to: Anthracene, Benzo(a)anthracene, Benzo(g,h,i)perylene, Perylene, and Phenanthrene

Further information is available on the Internet at http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/p2.html

Habitat (Ecological) Protection and Restoration - $1,000,000*

(*Planning Target - subject to change for various reasons, including Congressional and Agency action, such as development and approval of the Agency's annual operating plan.)

GLNPO will assist its partners by funding activities which demonstrate practices and develop tools for protecting and restoring aquatic, terrestrial, and wetland ecosystems. When developing preproposals, partners should consider (i) concepts, such as biodiversity investment areas (BIA), discussed in the 1996 and 1998 State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference papers; (ii) new ideas generated from projects described in the1996 GLNPO Mining Ideas Report; and (iii) the 1994 report prepared by The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and funded in part by USEPA, The Conservation of Biological Diversity in the Great Lakes: Issues and Opportunities. (The above documents can be found on the GLNPO web site at http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/ecopage.html or contact Larry Brail at (312) 886-7474 for copies.)

Projects will be evaluated in one of the following three geographic venues:

1. Basinwide: Basinwide projects are those that have large-scale implications for the Great Lakes ecosystem. The project may fill a gap, such as TNC's Aquatic Classification System project (1998), or the project may pilot new techniques, such as the Center for Compatible Economic Development's Forest Bank project (1998). It is not sufficient to say the project could be used as a model basinwide - the Preproposal must indicate what will occur basinwide as a result of the demonstration, as well as how this will be accomplished. New ideas are encouraged, however, the following basinwide topics will receive great consideration:

• Projects which improve the health of aquatic resources of the Great Lakes and their tributaries.
• Projects which encourage stewardship of public and private property to preserve biodiversity and stimulate economic sustainability.
• Projects which stimulate growth, marketing, and distribution of a wider variety of local plant genotypes.
• Projects which re-establish critical habitat for native, non-game fish species.

2. Regional: Regional projects are those that demonstrate protection and restoration of significant ecosystems at a lakewide, AOC, or biodiversity investment area scale. Projects may initiate actions consistent with LaMP or RAP priorities or which address needs identified in the SOLEC 1998 BIA papers. New ideas are encouraged, however, regional projects dealing with the following topics will receive great consideration:

General: Projects which restore the biodiversity of coastal wetlands, aquatic, and terrestrial communities within a cooperative agency/organizational framework.

Lake Ontario, St. Lawrence River, and Niagara River basins: Projects which will assist the Four Parties to address the loss of fish and wildlife habitat use impairment identified in the 1998 Stage I Lake Ontario LaMP. Potential projects include an inventory of existing natural resources, an inventory of existing restoration/protection/enhancement projects, and on the ground projects which address a gap in existing restoration activities or proposed in partnership with existing restoration/protection enhancement activities. Projects in the Niagara River and St. Lawrence River drainage basin could address the loss of fish and wildlife habitat, including an inventory of existing resources and on the ground projects to restore/protect/enhance habitat.

Lake Erie and the St. Clair/Lake St. Clair/Detroit River basins. Projects which (i) address the loss of fish and wildlife habitat or (ii) demonstrate innovative technologies for control of pollutant loadings from the watershed.

Lake Huron basin. Projects which (i) support the goals and objectives outlined by the International Alvar Initiative or (ii) demonstrate the connection between coastal marshes and the fishery.

Lake Michigan basin. Projects which (i) identify or demonstrate brownfield to habitat restoration, possibly with attention to establishing native vegetation on steel slag areas, (ii) protect or restore sand dunes with native vegetation, or (iii) protect critical habitats from destruction or degradation, i.e. wetlands.

Lake Superior basin. Projects which (i) address the gaps in species and ecological community inventories, (ii) further resource assessment at a more local level, or (iii) protect or restore biodiversity as a result of innovative techniques and partnerships.

3. Local: Local projects are those that remind us that biodiversity needs to be protected wherever possible and that, with deliberate and sensitive planning, biodiversity can and should exist in urban/suburban areas. We are particularly interested in small ($10 thousand to $25 thousand) projects with land trusts and local planning organizations which:

• stimulate assessments of biodiversity in local areas,
• interpret the assessments for local community decision-makers,
• are likely to spur local decision-makers to implementation,
• inform and gain the support of community members, and
• report on the successes and failures of the tools and techniques used in implementation.

Criteria. GLNPO seeks projects which (i) are action oriented, (ii) are not clearly the mission of other Federal programs, (iii) are leveraged with other funding sources, (iv) complement, but do not duplicate, other efforts, and (v) were developed through a collaborative, partnership process such as LaMPs or RAPs. We especially welcome projects which address environmental justice and those which have community-based support. Applicants should have demonstrated expertise. Applicants with existing GLNPO projects should be up-to-date on reporting and other requirements. GLNPO's preproposal evaluation will also consider the factors described above for the three geographic venues and whether the proposed project:

• is located in an area supporting significant biodiversity.
• has biological importance on a regional or global scale.
• could lead to new ways of integrating economic growth with conservation.
• has a capability for replicating success and fostering similar actions elsewhere, creating new partnerships, and testing new techniques or approaches.
• tests new biological management practices and new restoration techniques.
• leverages additional resources.
• has potential for identifying and reporting demonstrated environmental results.
• incorporates an education/outreach component.

Contact: Karen Rodriguez (formerly Holland) (312) 353-2690

Notes: Biodiversity Investment Areas (BIA) are clusters of places that have exceptional biodiversity value. Nearshore terrestrial Biodiversity Investment Areas were identified in the Land by the Lakes paper for SOLEC 1996. Similar areas were developed for nearshore aquatic and coastal wetlands at SOLEC 1998.

A description of alvars can be found in the SOLEC 1996 paper Land by the Lakes (http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/solec/96/landbylakes/index.htm).

Exotic Species - $300,000*

(*Planning Target - subject to change for various reasons, including Congressional and Agency action, such as development and approval of the Agency's annual operating plan.)

GLNPO will provide assistance to address exotic (non-indigenous) aquatic and terrestrial species in the Great Lakes Basin with an emphasis on prevention. Applicants should note, however, that funding for this category is less certain than that for other categories. There is currently not a specific line item in GLNPO's budget for "Emerging Issues," but this priority is proposed to be funded using a Congressional earmark.

We are particularly interested in the following projects:

• development and demonstration of strong and innovative programs (education and outreach, new technology, or biological) to prevent the introduction of new nuisance exotic species (aquatic or terrestrial) into the Great Lakes Basin.
• development and demonstration of strong and innovative programs to control the spread of exotic species within and from the Great Lakes Basin.
• identification of the ecological effects the current suite of exotics are having on nutrients and contaminants cycling in the Great Lakes Basin ecosystem.
• documenting ecological impacts of exotic species on the Great Lakes Basin food web.
• documenting the economic impacts or potential economic impacts of exotic species already in the Great Lakes Basin.
• projects which identify chemical, physical, and biological conditions that promote the establishment of exotic species.

Criteria. GLNPO seeks projects which (i) are action oriented, (ii) are not clearly the mission of other Federal programs, (iii) are leveraged with other funding sources, (iv) complement, but do not duplicate, other efforts, and (v) were developed through a collaborative, partnership process such as LaMPs or RAPs. We especially welcome projects which address environmental justice and those which have community-based support. Applicants should have demonstrated expertise. Applicants with existing GLNPO projects should be up-to-date on reporting and other requirements. GLNPO's preproposal evaluation will consider priorities associated with exotic species for geographic areas within the Great Lakes, particularly those of Lakewide Management Plans. However, as funding for this category is limited, emphasis will be placed on projects of Great Lakes Basin-wide applicability. Evaluations will also consider:

• design, objectives, and scientific viability of the project.
• reasonableness of project scope and budget.
• potential for project to benefit the Great Lakes ecosystem.
• transferability across the Great Lakes Basin and beyond.
• potential to advance government and private partnerships and community involvement.

Contact: Marc Tuchman (312) 353-1369

Emerging Issues - $300,000

(*Planning Target - subject to change for various reasons, including Congressional and Agency action, such as development and approval of the Agency's annual operating plan.)

In order to better fulfill its mission under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement for the restoration and maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem, GLNPO is seeking innovative Great Lakes environmental projects which deal with emerging issues of basin-wide strategic importance. Comments from participants in Great Lakes planning meetings and evaluations of the results of previous GLNPO funding processes demonstrate the continued importance of a solicitation of this sort. Prior to last year, important projects which did not fit neatly in the requested categories could not be systematically addressed. Applicants should note, however, that funding for this category is less certain than that for other categories. There is currently not a specific line item in GLNPO's budget for "Emerging Issues," but this priority is proposed to be funded using a Congressional earmark.

We expect that strategic projects in this area would:

• include efforts in Contaminated Sediments, Pollution Prevention and Reduction, Habitat (Ecological) Protection and Restoration, or Exotic Species which do not meet GLNPO criteria for those areas,
• cut across or overlap two or more of the foregoing areas, or
• address Assessment/Indicators or some other unanticipated area.

We especially encourage projects which identify and propose solutions/mitigation for emerging issues (including economic issues) of Great Lakes Basin-wide applicability, particularly if they are being identified through the Lakewide Management Plans and geographic initiatives (such as the Remedial Action Plans for Areas of Concern).

Criteria. GLNPO seeks projects which (i) are action oriented, (ii) are not clearly the mission of other Federal programs, (iii) are leveraged with other funding sources, (iv) complement, but do not duplicate, other efforts, and (v) were developed through a collaborative, partnership process such as LaMPs or RAPs. We especially welcome projects which address environmental justice and those which have community-based support. Applicants should have demonstrated expertise. Applicants with existing GLNPO projects should be up-to-date on reporting and other requirements. Evaluations will also depend on the type of projects submitted, as well as:

• potential to further the restoration and maintenance of the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem.
• availability of other funds to support the work.
• demonstrated expertise to conduct the project.
• technical merit of the project.
• demonstration of adequate laboratory facilities and instrumentation to complete the proposed work.
• project costs.

Contacts: Paul Horvatin (312) 353-3612; Michael Russ (312) 886-4013

ROADMAP to FEDERAL FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES

The Great Lakes Program brings together Federal, state, tribal, local, and non-governmental partners in an integrated, ecosystem approach to protect, maintain, and restore the chemical, biological, and physical integrity of the Great Lakes. The Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 and the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) with Canada provide the basis for our international efforts to manage this shared resource. Additional responsibilities are defined in Section 118 of the Clean Water Act, Section 112 of the Clean Air Act Amendments, and the Great Lakes Critical Programs Act of 1990. The 1992 Great Lakes 5-Year Strategy, developed jointly by EPA and its multi-state, multi-Agency partners and built on the foundation of the GLWQA, provides the agenda for Great Lakes ecosystem management: reducing toxic substances; protecting and restoring important habitats; and protecting human/ecosystem species health.

Various USEPA and other Federal programs are involved in this effort. GLNPO provides this Roadmap to assist organizations and programs as they target their Great Lakes activities during program planning processes. Contacts can provide additional information about their programs. This is not a comprehensive list, identifying activities and funding for some of the key Federal organizations (USEPA, NRCS, USFWS, USACE, and FHWA) participating in the Great Lakes Program. Information regarding Federal funding opportunities for water quality programs at the National level can be found in the June, 1996 GAO report Water Quality A Catalog of Related Federal Programs (GAO/RCED-96-173). The GAO information is also available via GAO's World Wide Web Home Page ( http://www.gao.gov/ ). The Catalog of Federal Funding Sources for Watershed Protection (http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/watershed/wacademy/fund.html ) highlights Federal grants and loans that may be used at the local level to support watershed projects, and contains references to many of the other good publications and websites on funding and technical assistance. Information about Federal opportunities can also be found at http://www.nonprofit.gov/index.html . Applicants considering Foundation funding may be interested in information at http://fdncenter.org/ . Programs participating in the NOAA-funded Great Lakes Sea Grant Network may also provide helpful information. They can be reached at: http://seagrant.wisc.edu/GreatLakes/GLnetwork/OVERVIEW.html.

On request, GLNPO would be pleased to include additional funding information in this "Roadmap".

USEPA

USEPA's role in the Great Lakes is to steer this effort and to provide timely technical support and assistance, coordinating not only with U.S. partners, but also with Canadian counterparts. Our Great Lakes efforts are thus organized in a nested structure. USEPA's Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) steers and coordinates activities at a Great Lakes Basin-wide level. Regional Teams and programs steer and coordinate activities focusing on Lakes Ontario, Michigan, Erie, and Superior and their Areas of Concern, as well as other targeted geographic areas (including Niagara River, Northwest Indiana, Greater Chicago, Southeast Michigan, and Northeast Ohio). Coordination and integration of State, Tribal, and Federal environmental programs is intended to be accomplished through the development of annual Environmental Performance Partnership Agreements (EnPPAs). Specific projects can also be developed outside of the EnPPA structure.

The USEPA section of this Appendix includes information about the following programs:

• GLNPO
• Region 5 Teams
• Water (Regions 5 and 3)
• Region 2
• Air
• Superfund
• RCRA
• Pesticides/Toxics
• Environmental Education
• Research

GLNPO. GLNPO's annual Great Lakes Priorities and Funding Guidance (Great Lakes Funding Guidance) spells out GLNPO's role in the Great Lakes and identifies FY 1999-2000 funding opportunities. GLNPO is currently soliciting preproposals for projects in the areas of contaminated sediments, pollution prevention, assessment/indicators, habitat protection and restoration, exotic species, and emerging issues. Interested organizations should submit their Preproposals by no later than January 15, 1999 in order to be considered for the FY 1999 funding cycle. Additional information can be obtained at http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/fund/glf.html.

REGION 5 TEAMS. USEPA Region 5, covering Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin, includes media programs as well as Teams focused on particular topics and geographic areas. The Regional Teams serve leadership and coordinating roles to ensure that their functional priorities are addressed. In this role, they influence funding decisions of USEPA media programs, such as Air, Water, and Waste, as well as National Initiatives, such as Brownfields. Regional Teams may also be helpful in identifying sources of funding and in identifying priorities for LaMPs, RAPs, and other initiatives. The Regional Teams and Regional Team Managers having the most direct connection to Great Lakes issues are:

"Priority Approach" Teams

• Sediments: Bonnie Eleder (312-886-4885) / eleder.bonnie@epamail.epa.gov
• Toxics Reduction: Dan Hopkins (312-886-5994) / hopkins.dan@epamail.epa.gov
• Ecosystem: John Perrecone (312-353-1149) / perrecone.john@epamail.epa.gov
• Environmental Justice: Karla Johnson (312-886-5993) / johnson.karla@epamail.epa.gov

Priority "Geographic/Principal Place" Teams

• L. Erie: Francine Norling (312-886-0271) / norling.francine@epamail.epa.gov
• L. Michigan: Judy Beck (312-353-3849) / beck.judy@epamail.epa.gov
• L. Superior: Janet Pellegrini (acting) (312-886-4298) / pellegrini.janet@epamail.epa.gov
• Northeast Ohio: Rich Winklhofer (440-835-5200) / winklhofer.alfons@epamail.epa.gov
• Greater Chicago: Mardi Klevs (312-353-5490) / klevs.mardi@epamail.epa.gov
• NW Indiana: Sally Swanson (312-353-8512) / swanson.sally@epamail.epa.gov
• SE Michigan: Laura Lodisio (312-886-7090) / lodisio.laura@epamail.epa.gov

Environmental Justice. The Agency has designated the pursuit of environmental justice one of its top priorities. As part of its commitment, the Headquarters Office of Environmental Justice (OEJ) created the Environmental Justice (EJ) Small Grants Program, the Community University Partnership (CUP) Grants Program, and the State and Tribal Environmental Justice (STEJ) Grants Program. The EJ Small Grants Program is intended to help community-based/grass-roots organizations, non-profit organizations and Tribal governments address environmental justice issues and concerns. The purpose of the CUP grants program is to facilitate partnerships between universities and communities/Tribal governments on EJ concerns with a primary emphasis on universities providing technical assistance to communities/Tribes. Due to the lack of funding the CUP program is not being offered in FY 1999. The STEJ Grants Program is intended to help States and Tribes effectively comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and provide for environmental justice in the development and implementation of their environmental programs. In FY 1998, EPA awarded $2.4 million in EJ small grants, $0 in CUP grants, and $500,000 in STEJ grants nationwide. The request for applications for the EJ Small Grants and STEJ Grants Programs for FY 1999 grants, is expected to be published in the Federal Register in mid-December 1998. Contacts for additional information are:

• Region 5: Karla Johnson (312-886-5993); EJ Small Grants - Margaret Millard (312-353-1440)
• Region 3: Reginald Haris (215-814-2988)
• Region 2: Melva Hayden (212-637-5027)
• Danny Gogal in OEJ (202-564-2576) for STEJ grants program

WATER. Region 5 Coastal Environmental Management (CEM) funds are used to continue implementation of Lakewide Management Plans (LaMPs), encourage broad public participation throughout the LaMP program, and support Remedial Action Plans (RAPs) in Areas of Concern. The Agency may use these funds: to enter into Cooperative Agreements with State, Tribal, and local governments and other non-for-profit organizations; to enter into Interagency Agreements (IAGs) with other Federal agencies; and to contract for necessary services.

Specific projects and personnel resources to be supported with CEM funds are identified by the Region 5 teams for Lakes Michigan, Erie, and Superior and the teams for smaller geographic areas bordering the lakes. The Region's Senior Leadership Team makes final project selection decisions. With the Regional Teams identifying projects, there is no general solicitation of proposals for CEM funding.

Cooperative Agreements, IAGs and contracts funded with CEM are managed by the Water Division's State and Tribal Programs Branch (STPB). The STPB also administers grants to States, Tribes, and local planning agencies under various other sections of the Clean Water Act. Individuals interested in more information regarding CEM funds may call Matt Didier (312) 886-6711.

Nonpoint Source Pollution is the largest source of water quality problems facing the United States today. Nonpoint source pollution occurs when rainfall, snowmelt, or irrigation runs over land or through the ground, picks up pollutants, and deposits them into rivers, lakes, or coastal waters or introduces them into ground water. Nonpoint source pollutants include nutrients, soils, pesticides, pathogens, salts, oil, grease, toxic chemicals, and heavy metals. Approximately forty percent of surveyed rivers, lakes, and estuaries are not clean enough to meet basic uses (fishing, swimming).

Clean Water Act Section 319 addresses this water quality problem in a three stage process: (i) conduct statewide assessments of the State's (Tribe's) waters to identify those that are impaired or threatened because of nonpoint sources; (ii) develop nonpoint source management programs to address the identified impaired or threatened waters; and (iii) award funds to States and Tribes to implement EPA approved nonpoint source management programs.

States manages their own nonpoint source programs, including the solicitation of proposals from local governmental and nongovernmental organizations to develop and implement water quality management plans. These plans identify nonpoint sources of pollution and recommend nonpoint source controls. States submit their selected proposals to EPA and, following review and comment, EPA awards Section 319 funds. Awards are made using an allocation formula based upon population, cropland acreage, critical aquatic habitats, pasture and rangeland acreage, forest harvest acreage, wellhead protection areas, mining, and pesticide use. Each State or Tribe is required to provide a 40-percent nonfederal match. The amount of 319 funding available in FY 1999 has been increased to $200 million. The incremental 319 funds, which were proposed as part of the Clean Water Action Plan (CWAP), are to be targeted toward those watersheds in need of restoration, as defined by each State's Unified Watershed Assessment, which was called for in CWAP. Contacts: Ernesto Lopez (312) 886-3017; Karen Bell (312) 353-8640; and Tom Davenport (312) 886-0209.

Water Pollution Control - State and Interstate Program Support. Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 106, 40 CFR 31, 35, Subpart 35.250-265 provides support for administration of programs for the prevention, reduction and control of pollution to ground and surface waters. Eligible are the States, Interstate, certain Tribal Water Pollution Control Agencies, U.S. Territories. Assistance period is one (1) year. Required expenditure of at least the amount spent in 1971 (the minimum level of effort). A five percent match is required for Tribes. The type of assistance is a formula grant based on the extent of water pollution problems. For Tribes, HQ allocates funds to the Region based on: (1) a base amount (currently $60,000) for each Tribe eligible for Section 106 funding under the CWA; and (2) a variable distribution formula considering Tribal water resources (50 percent), population (25 percent), and land base (25 percent). The FY 1999 estimated budget is $20,645,766. Contacts: Headquarters - Carol Crow (202) 260-6742; Regional - Gene Wojcik (312) 886-0174;

The Region 5 Water Division also administers grants to States, Tribes, and local planning agencies under Sections 104 and 604(b) of the Clean Water Act. At this time, none of these funding sources are anticipated to be directly available to other entities. Contact Mary Pat Tyson (312) 886-3006 for additional information.

Region 3 Great Lakes priorities pertain to: Presque Isle Bay (investigation of sediment remediation, analyzing additional RAP data to complete areal extent of use impairment and viable remediation techniques, Stage II RAP preparation, and initiating appropriate remedial actions); Lake Erie LaMP development (estimating/reporting critical pollutant loadings and completing/implementing lake and tributary monitoring plans); Phosphorus Reduction Plan implementation; and the Great Lakes Water Quality Guidance (commitment to adopting regulations). Contact Charles Sapp (215) 814-2311 for additional information.

REGION 2. Great Lakes priorities are set according to the implementation needs of the Lake Ontario LaMP, Niagara River Toxics Management Plan (NRTMP), and New York State RAPs. The Region and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation work together (along with Canadian agencies) to identify ecological and human health problems in the Great Lakes, target cross-media pollutants responsible for the problems, and act to reduce sources of those pollutants. Contact: Barbara Spinweber (212) 637-3848 or Seth Ausubel (212) 637-3793 for additional information.

AIR PROGRAM. USEPA's Office of Air and Radiation conducts the Great Waters Program, an integrated media program charged with examining deposition of air pollutants to the Great Lakes, Chesapeake Bay, Lake Champlain, and coastal waters. This program includes monitoring, modeling, emission inventories, effects assessment, policy development, and other subjects. While most work is conducted under routine mechanisms, the Great Waters program is open to leveraging complementary projects with States coordinating with or through the Regions or GLNPO.

USEPA has designated the Great Lakes a national program for funding under §105 of the Clean Air Act. Efforts will continue to focus on Lake Michigan. Approximately $1.3 million should be available for air toxics source identification and inventory work; process characterization studies; dispersion, deposition, and transport modeling; and air toxics monitoring. The core group for the Great Waters Study (which includes State and Federal representatives) will determine how this funding will be utilized to meet mutual objectives. Proposals are not being solicited at this time. USEPA contacts for additional information are: Region 5 - Carlton Nash (312) 886-6030); Region 2 - Ron Borsellino (212) 637-3705); and HQ - Dale Evarts (919) 541-5535).

SUPERFUND PROGRAM. Superfund's major role in the Great Lakes may potentially be in their ability to obtain contaminated sediment clean-ups. CERCLA provides one of the most comprehensive authorities available to USEPA to obtain sediment clean-up, reimbursement of USEPA clean-up costs, and compensation to natural resource trustees for damages to natural resources affected by contaminated sediments. Under CERCLA, USEPA may initiate response actions or compel potentially responsible parties to undertake clean-up of contaminated sediment sites. Remedial efforts have proven successful utilizing both the removal and remedial CERCLA authorities at priority contaminated sediment sites. In addition, CERCLA may provide the foundation for partnership approaches leading to remedial efforts.

Superfund may also provide technical support in the form of site assessments for potential removal efforts, human health and ecological risk assessment, support to innovative technological development through the Superfund Innovative Technologies Evaluation Program, and technical expertise in development of cost estimates and design development.

Additional information about the USEPA Region 5 Superfund program is available at www.epa.gov/R5Super/ or from James Hahnenberg (312) 353-4213 or Kenneth Klewin (312) 886-4794.

Brownfields. The goal of USEPA's Brownfields Initiative is to empower states, communities, and other stakeholders in economic redevelopment to work together in a timely manner to prevent, assess, safely clean up, and sustainably reuse brownfields. Brownfields are abandoned, idled, or under-utilized industrial and commercial facilities where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived environmental contamination. Nationally, support will be available in FY 1999-2000 for brownfields pilots to test redevelopment models, direct special efforts toward removing regulatory barriers without sacrificing protectiveness, and facilitate coordinated environmental cleanup efforts at the Federal, State and local levels. Over 200 grants have been awarded and 100 or more pilots are anticipated to be funded nationally in FY'99. Each pilot can be for up to $200,000 over a two year period. The program has a "rolling submission schedule" with application deadlines of December 11, 1998 and March 22, 1999. Applications are reviewed and ranked by representatives from EPA and other Federal Agencies. A selection committee reviews all applications and selects finalists. EPA upper management makes final selections. Additional information, including brownfields funding sources, can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/brownfields. Interested applicants should contact their Regional Brownfields Coordinators. The Coordinator can help with development of an applicant's Brownfields program, thus strengthening the application and making it more competitive. Regional Coordinators are:

• Region 5: James Van der Kloot (312) 353-3161
• Region 3: Tom Stolle (215) 814-3129
• Region 2: Larry D'Andrea (212) 637-4314

REGIONAL RCRA PROGRAM. The amount of §3011 funding available to each State has thus far been based on the number of hazardous waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities in that State which were in the Great Lakes Basin. Great Lakes RCRA resources under §3011 ($2,058000 through Region 5, $90,000 through Region 3, and $390,000 through Region 2) was targeted for the States in FY 1998. Updated information can be obtained from the contacts identified below.

RCRA criteria are expected to require that funding for RCRA hazardous waste activities to improve the environmental quality of the Great Lakes Basin would need to be matched by the State, subject to the same matching provisions as the rest of the §3011 State grants. These grants go to the State Environmental Agency authorized for the RCRA hazardous waste program. Highest priority would be given to accelerating work at sites having an impact or potential impact on the Great Lakes ecosystem, especially where toxic substances may be impacting the waters of the Lakes or tributaries. Activities could include:

• Increased inspections and enforcement actions.
• Closure work.
• Permitting and corrective action based on priority ranking.
• Hazardous waste minimization and pollution prevention activities.
• Other activities which the State demonstrates are beneficial to environmental quality.
• Activities would need to be related to hazardous waste.
• Activities in support of the Binational Toxics Strategy, Lakewide Management Plans, and Remedial Action Plans.

Great Lakes RCRA §3011 projects would be incorporated into a State's hazardous waste workplan or Environmental Performance Partnership Agreement. USEPA contacts for additional information are:

• Region 5: Richard Traub (312) 353-8319 for general §3011 questions; Mary Setnicar (312) 886-0976 for P2, hazardous waste minimization, solid waste management
• Region 3: Paul Gotthold (215) 814-3410
• Region 2: Ray Basso (212) 637-4109 and Michael Infurna (212) 637-4177

PESTICIDES/TOXIC SUBSTANCES. USEPA's Pesticides/Toxic Substances Programs have primary responsibility for programs under TSCA, FIFRA, and EPCRA §313, which provide for regulation of chemicals (including bioaccumulative chemicals of concern such as PCBs and certain pesticides) and of annual reporting by industry of toxic releases and pesticide production. Principal activities targeted to the Great Lakes which will continue in FY 1998 include: PCB equipment phasedown, waste pesticide collections, and agricultural clean sweeps. Other activities include performing inspections or outreach for the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), promoting the reduced use of pesticides, including pollution prevention supplemental environmental projects (SEPs) in our enforcement actions, and supporting lead-based paint (certification and accreditation) activities. USEPA contacts for additional information are:

• Region 5: Tony Martig (312-353-2291) for Toxics; Margaret Jones (312-353-5790) for Ag. Clean Sweeps
• Region 3: Donald Lott (215-814-2041) for pesticides, lead, and asbestos ; John Ruggero (215-814-2142) for PCBs and EPCRA
• Region 2: Fred Kozak (908-321-6769) for Pesticides; Dave Greenlaw for Toxics (908-321-6817)

ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION. The 1990 National Environmental Education Act (NEEA) gives USEPA authority to issue grants to stimulate environmental education by supporting projects to design, demonstrate, or disseminate practices, methods, or technologies related to environmental education or training. Tribal or local education agencies, colleges or universities, state education or environmental agencies, nonprofit organization or noncommercial educational broadcasting entities are eligible to compete for funding under this national program by submitting pre-applications. Applicants requesting less than $25,000 apply and compete in EPA's Regional offices; applicants requesting between $25,000 and $250,000 apply and compete at EPA Headquarters in Washington, D.C. Most grants are awarded by the Region for $5,000 or less.

In the 1998 competition, EPA Headquarters awarded more than $1 million and each Region awarded $190,000. Following rigorous evaluation processes involving internal and external reviewers, Regions 2 and 5 used their FY 1998 NEEA funds to grant approximately 25 awards a piece. Applications are judged against the criteria published in the annual Request for Proposal (RFP) for environmental education grants. The FY 1999 RFP was published in the Federal Register on August 25, 1998. Proposals were accepted until November 16th and funding decisions will be made in the Spring of 1999. The target date for publishing the RFP for the 1999-2000 environmental education grants program in the Federal Register is late Summer/early Fall 1999. If you would like to receive a RFP directly, please contact the environmental education coordinator in your Region, or call (202) 260-8619 to be added to EPA's national mailing list.

GLNPO does not separately solicit environmental education projects; therefore, applicants who propose education projects with a Great Lakes focus are encouraged to submit and compete in the NEEA program.

USEPA contacts for additional information are:

• Headquarters: Diane Berger/Sheri Jojokian (202) 260-8619
• Region 5: Julie Moriarty (312) 353-5789
• Region 3: Larry Brown (215) 814-5527
• Region 2: Terry Ippolito (212) 637-3671

GREAT LAKES RESEARCH. The US/Canadian Great Lakes research strategy guides USEPA Great Lakes research through its efforts to use an ecosystem focus on research activities. These activities support a risk-based approach geared to the identification and targeting of problems for initial emphasis. In addition, USEPA's Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (EMAP) plays a role in developing approaches and techniques for monitoring status and trends as well as helping to set priorities. The following areas are currently being emphasized by USEPA's inhouse research program:

• Development of mass balance and food web models to establish and predict relationships of chemical loadings to residues and effects on aquatic life and wildlife.
• Determining the ecological effects of exposure to chemicals and to changes in habitat conditions on Great Lakes watersheds, wetlands, and the Lakes.
• Identification and development of indicators for quantitatively measuring the status and trends of the ecological condition of Great Lakes ecosystems.

For additional information on USEPA's inhouse research program, please contact Steven Bradbury (218) 529-5025.

Science to Achieve Results (STAR). The Office of Research and Development's extramural "STAR" program funds competitive research grants, centers of excellence, and fellowships. Requests for proposals are solicited from academic and not-for-profit institutions located in the U.S. and state or local governments. In FY 1998 the budget for STAR was approximately $108 million. STAR supports research in areas such as endocrine disruptors, human health risk assessment, ecological indicators, air particulates, drinking water, and water and watersheds, all relevant to the needs of the Great Lakes region. For more information about funding opportunities please check http://es.epa.gov/ncerqa/. A searchable database of research projects also can be accessed from this site.

OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES

NRCS

Natural Resource Programs of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) offer landowners financial, technical, and educational assistance to implement conservation practices on privately owned land. Using this help, farmers and ranchers apply practices that reduce soil erosion, improve water quality, and enhance forest land, wetlands, grazing lands, and wildlife habitat. Incentives offered by USDA promote sustainable agricultural practices, which protect and conserve valuable farmland for future generations. USDA assistance also helps individuals and communities restore natural resources after floods, fires, or other natural disasters. Certain programs give the Great Lakes Basin a high priority when ranking requests for funding. These are noted with a (GLB) after the title. The following are brief overviews of cost-share programs managed by USDA's Farm Service Agency (FSA), Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS), and Forest Service. For more details, contact your local USDA Service Center.

Conservation Reserve Program (Great Lakes Basin). The Conservation Reserve Program reduces soil erosion, protects the Nation's ability to produce food and fiber, reduces sedimentation in streams and lakes, improves water quality, establishes wildlife habitat, and enhances forest and wetland resources. It encourages farmers to convert highly erodible cropland or other environmentally sensitive acreage to vegetative cover, such as tame or native grasses, wildlife plantings, trees, filter strips, or riparian buffers. Farmers receive an annual rental payment for the term of the multi-year contract. Cost sharing is provided to establish the vegetative cover practices.

Emergency Conservation Program. The Emergency Conservation Program (ECP) provides financial assistance to farmers and ranchers for the restoration of farmlands on which normal farming operations have been impeded by natural disasters. ECP. also helps with funds for carrying out emergency water conservation measures during periods of severe drought. Emergency conservation assistance is available for removing debris and restoring permanent fences, terraces, diversions, irrigation systems, and other conservation installations. Conservation problems that existed before a disaster are not eligible.

Emergency Watershed Protection Program. The Emergency Watershed Protection (EWP) program is designed to reduce threats to life and property in the wake of natural disasters. It provides technical and cost sharing assistance. Assistance includes both removing and establishing vegetative cover; gully control, installing streambank protection devices; removing debris and sediment; and stabilizing levees, channels, and gullies. In subsequent storms, EWP projects protect homes, businesses, highways, and public facilities from further damage. The Secretary of Agriculture may purchase floodplain easements under EWP.

Environmental Quality Incentives Program (Great Lakes Basin). The Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) works primarily in locally identified conservation priority areas where there are significant problems with natural resources. High priority is given to areas where State or local governments offer financial, technical, or educational assistance, and to areas where agricultural improvements will help meet water quality objectives. Activities must be carried out according to a conservation plan. EQIP offers contracts that provide incentive payments and cost sharing for conservation practices, such as manure management systems, pest management, erosion control, and other practices to improve and maintain the health of natural resources.

Farmland Protection Program. The Farmland Protection Program provides funds to help purchase development rights to keep productive farmland in use. Working through existing programs, USDA joins with State, tribal, or local governments to acquire conservation easements or other interests from landowners. USDA provides up to 50 percent of the costs of purchasing the easements. To qualify, farmland must: be part of a pending offer from a State, tribe, or local farmland protection program; be privately owned; have a conservation plan; be large enough to sustain agricultural production; be accessible to markets for what the land produces; have adequate infrastructure and agricultural support services; and have surrounding parcels of land that can support long-term agricultural production.

Forestry Incentives Program. The Forestry Incentives Program (FIP) supports good forest management practices on privately owned, nonindustrial forest lands nationwide. FIP is designed to benefit the environment while meeting future demands for wood products. Eligible practices are tree planting, timber stand improvement, site preparation for natural regeneration, and other related activities. FIP is available in counties designated by a Forest Service survey of eligible private timber acreage.

Small Watershed Program. The Small Watershed Program works through local government sponsors and helps participants solve natural resource and related economic problems on a watershed basis. Projects include watershed protection, flood prevention, erosion and sediment control, water supply, water quality, fish and wildlife habitat enhancement, wetlands creation and restoration, and public recreation in watersheds of 250,000 or fewer acres. Both technical and financial assistance are available.

Stewardship Incentive Program. The Stewardship Incentive Program provides technical and financial assistance to encourage nonindustrial private forest landowners to keep their lands and natural resources productive and healthy. Qualifying land includes rural lands with existing tree cover or land suitable for growing trees and which is owned by a private individual, group, association, corporation, Indian tribe, or other legal private entity. Eligible landowners must have an approved Forest Stewardship Plan and own 1,000 or fewer acres of qualifying land. Authorizations may be obtained for exceptions of up to 5,000 acres.

Wetlands Reserve Program (Great Lakes Flyway). The Wetlands Reserve Program is a voluntary program to restore wetlands. Participating landowners can establish conservation easements of either permanent or 30-year duration or can enter into restoration cost-share agreements where no easement is involved. In exchange for establishing a permanent easement, the landowner receives payment up to the agricultural value of the land and 100 percent of the restoration costs for restoring the wetland. The 30-year easement payment is 75 percent of what would be provided for a permanent easement on the same site and 75 percent of the restoration cost. The voluntary agreements are for a minimum 10-year duration and provide for 75 percent of the cost of restoring the involved wetlands. Easements set limits on how the lands may be used in the future. Restoration cost-share agreements establish wetland protection and restoration as the primary land use for the duration of the agreement. In all instances, landowners continue to control access to their land.

Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program (State-set Priority Areas) The Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program provides financial incentives to develop habitat for fish and wildlife on private lands. Participants agree to implement a wildlife habitat development plan and USDA agrees to provide cost-share assistance for the initial implementation of wildlife habitat development practices. USDA and program participants enter into a cost-share agreement for wildlife habitat development. This agreement generally lasts a minimum of 5 years from the date that the contract is signed.

For Additional Information:

Contact Roger Nanney, NRCS Liaison to the GLNPO (312) 353-7979 or Percy Magee, Great Lakes Water Quality Coordinator (419) 245-2804. Visit the NRCS web site http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/.

U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is actively involved in addressing the protection, restoration, and enhancement of fish and wildlife resources throughout the Great Lakes Basin.

One part of this effort is the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) - Great Lakes Status and Trends Study. FWS has recognized the Great Lakes Watershed as a priority resource area and has begun to analyze wetland changes that help define linkages among aquatic, wetland, and upland landscape systems. Land-based GIS coverages are being integrated and analyzed to identify important habitat types and interactions. FWS is monitoring urban and rural growth patterns, agriculture and silviculture, and their interactions to as an aide to land management decisions and actions. NWI opportunities include:

• Lake Erie Wetland Mapping Pilot. The NWI is conducting a pilot study on six coastal wetland maps along Lake Erie in New York and Ohio. NWI maps from the 1980's were updated using 1990's era photography, and areas of wetland change were identified as a separate overlay showing what the original wetland was classified as, and then what it changed to. This also included areas where upland areas changed to wetlands, or in most cases to some type of excavated open water area. The updated NWI maps have descriptors added to the NWI classification label to characterize the wetlands by landscape position, land form, and water flow path. This will help to provide a general functional assessment of each wetland. Hard copy and digital products will be available, as well as a report on the findings, including an acreage report.

• Lake County Cross-Correlation Analysis of Wetland Change. The Service is a partner, along with EPA, NRCS, and Earth Satellite Corporation (EarthSat) in this pilot study which includes over 200 NWI maps in the Chicago Metro Area, and surrounding counties. The procedure uses Landsat Thematic Mapper (TM) imagery and NWI digital data to identify wetland changes that have occurred since the wetlands were originally delineated. Several pilot studies are planned across the country, and the procedure holds promise for identifying areas that are experiencing heavy or rapid changes in wetlands. In October, 1998, participants met with the University of Illinois, and State agencies to the present the technique, field test the results of the study, and discuss the utility of the data. The initial analysis identified wetlands that had experienced significant changes and newly created open water areas. The data will be used to prioritize NWI maps in need of updating, and further research will determine the applicability of the procedure for monitoring wetland losses and restorations.

• Coastal Wetlands Indicators. Service personnel are currently serving on the SOLEC '98 Coastal Wetlands Indicators Task Force as technical experts in the fields of wetlands, wildlife, land use, and vegetation. There are several products, and projects the NWI can initiate in the Great Lakes that may help provide better assessment of SOLEC indicators: wetland trend studies, or historical assessment; updated NWI large scale hard copy and digital maps providing information on wetland extent, size, type diversity, abundance, habitat, position, and improved characterization of wetlands by adding descriptors for landscape position, land form, and water flow path; identification of potential restoration sites for individual watersheds and coastal wetlands; develop wetland spacial database to monitor wetland losses, restorations, and assess degraded wetlands over time; and coastal wetland buffers characterization to identify vegetated vs. developed buffers around coastal wetlands.

Additional NWI information is available from Kim Santos (813) 570-5428 or the National Wetlands Inventory Internet home page (http://www.nwi.fws.gov/).

FWS funding for States and Tribes includes:

• Coastal Wetlands. Under the Coastal Wetland Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act, FWS provides up to 75% Federal share for grants to coastal states, including Great Lakes States, to acquire