[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 218 (Monday, November 14, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-27680]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: November 14, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Institute of Standards and Technology

15 CFR Part 291

[Docket No. 941097-4297]
RIN 0693-AB36

 

Manufacturing Extension Partnership; Environmental Projects

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology, Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking; Request for Comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The purpose of this proposed rule would be to provide for 
integration of environmental services and resources into the national 
manufacturing extension system and to codify the process by which NIST 
will solicit and select applications for cooperative agreements and 
financial assistance on projects which have the dual benefit of 
promoting the competitiveness and environmental soundness of smaller 
U.S. manufacturers. The intended effect is to increase the scope and 
scale of environmental services provided through the national 
manufacturing extension system.

DATES: Comments on the proposed program must be received no later than 
December 14, 1994.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed program must be submitted in 
writing to: MEP Environmental Projects Rule Comments, Attention David 
Gold, National Institute of Standards and Technology Bldg. 224 Room 
B115, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The Manufacturing Extension 
Partnership Environmental Projects Manager, 301-975-5020.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The purpose of the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology Manufacturing Extension Partnership is to 
promote the competitiveness of smaller U.S. manufacturers. This is done 
primarily through technical assistance provided by a network of 
nonprofit manufacturing extension centers. Proposals from qualified 
organizations will periodically be solicited for projects which 
accomplish any one of the following objectives:
    Integration of Environmental Services Into Manufacturing Extension 
Centers: to support the integration of environmentally-focused 
technical assistance, and especially pollution prevention assistance, 
for smaller manufacturers into the broader services provided by 
manufacturing extension centers.
    Development of Environmentally Related Technical Assistance Tools 
and Techniques: to support the initial development and implementation 
of tools or techniques which will aide manufacturing extension 
organizations in providing environmentally-related services, and 
especially pollution prevention services, to smaller manufacturers and 
which also may be of direct use by the smaller manufacturers 
themselves. Specific industry sectors and categories of tools and 
techniques may be specified in solicitations.
    Pilots for National Industry-Specific Pollution Prevention and 
Environmental Compliance Information Centers: to support the pilot 
implementation of national centers for specific industry sectors 
specified in solicitations. The centers will provide easy access to 
relevant, current, reliable and comprehensive information on innovative 
technologies, pollution prevention opportunities and regulatory 
compliance.
    Integration projects are open to existing manufacturing extension 
affiliates of the NIST Manufacturing Extension Partnership.
    Projects for development of tools or techniques and national 
information centers are open to all nonprofit organizations including 
universities, community colleges, state governments, and independent 
nonprofit organizations.
    Announcements of solicitations will be made in the Commerce 
Business Daily.
    In accordance with the provisions of the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 272(b)(1) and (c)(3) and 2781), 
as amended, NIST will provide assistance to integrate environmentally-
related services and resources into the national manufacturing 
extension system. This assistance will be provided by NIST often in 
cooperation with the EPA. Under the NIST Manufacturing Extension 
Partnership (MEP), NIST will periodically make merit-based awards to 
existing MEP manufacturing extension affiliates for integration of 
environmental services into extension centers and to non-profit 
organizations for development of environmentally-related tools and 
techniques. In addition, NIST will initiate pilot centers providing 
environmental information for specific industrial sectors to be 
specified in solicitations. MEP assumes a broad definition of 
manufacturing, and recognizes a wide range of technology and concepts, 
including durable goods production; chemical, biotechnology, and other 
materials processing; electronic component and system fabrication; and 
engineering services associated with manufacturing, as lying within the 
definition of manufacturing.

Classification

    This notice relating to public property, loans, grants, benefits, 
or contracts is exempt from all requirements of section 553 of the 
Administrative Procedure (5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2)) including notice and 
opportunity for comment. Therefore, a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 
is not required and was not prepared for this notice for purposes of 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 603 and 604). The program is 
not a major Federal action requiring an environmental assessment under 
the National Environmental Policy Act. This notice does not contain 
policies with Federalism assessment under Executive Order 12612. This 
notice contains collection of information requirements subject to the 
Paperwork Reduction Act which have been approved by the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB Control Number 0693-0010, 0348-0042 and 
0348-0046). Public reporting burden for this collection of information 
is estimated to average 40 hours per response, including the time for 
reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering the 
data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of 
information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other 
aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for 
reducing this burden, to (to the address shown above); and to the 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and 
Budget, Washington, DC 20503.
    It has been determined that this rule is not significant for 
purposes of EO 12866.

List of Subjects in 15 CFR Part 291

    Environmental projects, Environmental compliance assistance, 
Manufacturing extension, Pollution prevention assistance, Technical 
assistance.

    Dated: November 3, 1994.
Samuel Kramer,
Associate Director.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, it is proposed that 15 CFR 
part 291 be added as set forth below.

PART 291--MANUFACTURING EXTENSION PARTNERSHIP; ENVIRONMENTAL 
PROJECTS

Sec.
291.1  Program description.
291.2  Environmental integration projects.
291.3  Environmental tools and techniques projects.
291.4  National industry-specific pollution prevention and 
environmental compliance resource centers.
291.5  Proposal selection process.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 272(b)(1) and (c)(3) and 2781


Sec. 291.1  Program description.

    (a) In accordance with the provisions of the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology Act (15 U.S.C. 272(b)(1) and (c)(3) and 2781), 
as amended, NIST will provide financial assistance to integrate 
environmentally-related services and resources into the national 
manufacturing extension system. This assistance will be provided by 
NIST often in cooperation with the EPA. Under the NIST Manufacturing 
Extension Partnership (MEP), NIST will periodically make merit-based 
awards to existing MEP manufacturing extension affiliates for 
integration of environmental services into extension centers and to 
non-profit organizations for development of environmentally-related 
tools and techniques. In addition, NIST will initiate pilot centers 
providing environmental information for specific industrial sectors to 
be specified in solicitations. MEP assumes a broad definition of 
manufacturing, and recognizes a wide range of technology and concepts, 
including durable goods production; chemical, biotechnology, and other 
materials processing; electronic component and system fabrication; and 
engineering services associated with manufacturing, as lying within the 
definition of manufacturing.
    (b) Announcements of solicitations. Announcements of solicitations 
will be made in the Commerce Business Daily. Specific information on 
the level of funding available and the deadline for proposals will be 
contained in that announcement. In addition, any specific industry 
sectors or types of tools and techniques to be focused on will be 
specified in the announcement.
    (c) Proposal workshops. Prior to an announcement of solicitation, 
NIST may announce opportunities for potential applicants to learn about 
these projects through workshops. The time and place of the workshop(s) 
will be contained in a Commerce Business Daily announcement.
    (c) Indirect costs. The total dollar amount of the indirect costs 
proposed in an application under this program must not exceed the 
indirect cost rate negotiated and approved by a cognizant Federal 
agency prior to the proposed effective date of the award or 100 percent 
of the total proposed direct costs dollar amount in the application, 
whichever is less.
    (d) Proposal format. The Proposal must not exceed 20 typewritten 
pages in length for integration proposals. Proposals for tools and 
techniques projects and national information centers must not exceed 30 
pages in length. The proposal must contain both technical and cost 
information. The proposal page count shall include every page, 
including pages that contain words, table of contents, executive 
summary, management information and qualifications, resumes, figures, 
tables, and pictures. All proposals shall be printed such as the pages 
are single-sided, with no more than fifty-five (55) lines per page. Use 
21.6  x  27.9 cm (8 \1/2\''  x  11'') paper or A4 metric paper. Use an 
easy-to-read font of not more than about 5 characters per cm (fixed 
pitch font of 12 or fewer characters per inch or proportional font of 
point size 10 or larger). Smaller type may be used in figures and 
tables, but must be clearly legible. Margins on all sides (top, bottom, 
left and right) must be at least 2.5 cm. (1''). The applicant may 
submit a separately bound document of appendices, containing letters of 
support for the Basic Proposal. The basic proposal should be self-
contained and not rely on the appendices for meeting criteria. Excess 
pages in the Proposal will not be considered in the evaluation. 
Applicants must submit one single original plus six copies of the 
proposal along with Standard Form 424, 424A (Rev 4/92) and Form CD-511.
    (e) Content of basic proposal. The Basic Proposal must, at a 
minimum, include the following:
    (1) An executive summary summarizing the planned project consistent 
with the Evaluation Criteria stated in this notice.
    (2) A description of the planned project sufficient to permit 
evaluation of the proposal in accordance with the proposal Evaluation 
Criteria stated in this notice.
    (3) A budget for the project which identifies all sources of funds 
and which breaks out planned expenditures by both activity and object 
class (e.g., personnel, travel, etc.).
    (4) A description of the qualifications of key personnel who will 
be assigned to work on the proposal project.
    (5) A statement of work that discusses the specific tasks to be 
carried out, including a schedule of measurable events and milestones.
    (6) A Standard Form 424, 424A (Rev 4-92) prescribed by the 
applicable OMB circular and Form CD-511, Certification Regarding 
Debarment, Suspension of Other Responsibility Matters; Drug-Free 
Workplace Requirements and Lobbying. SF-424, 424A (Rev 4-92) and Form 
CD-511 will not be considered part of the page count of the Basic 
Proposal.
    (7) The application requirements and the standard form requirements 
have been approved by OMB (OMB Control Number 0693-0010, 0348-0042 and 
0348-0046).
    (f) Applicable federal and departmental guidance. This includes: 
Administrative requirements, cost principles, and audits. (Dependent 
upon type of Recipient organization: Non-profit, for-profit, state/
local government, or educational institution.)
    (1) Nonprofit organizations.
    (i) OMB Circular A-110--Uniform Administrative Requirements for 
Grants and Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, 
and Other Nonprofit Organizations
    (ii) OMB Circular A-122--Cost Principles for Nonprofit 
Organizations
    (iii) 15 CFR part 29b--Audit Requirements for Institutions of 
Higher Education and Other Nonprofit Organizations (implements OMB 
Circular A-133--Audits for Institutions of Higher Education and Other 
Nonprofit Organizations)
    (2) State/local governments.
    (i) 15 CFR part 24--Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants 
and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments.
    (ii) OMB Circular A-87--Cost Principles for State and Local 
Governments.
    (iii) 15 CFR part 29a--Audit Requirements for State and Local 
Governments (implements OMB Circular A-128--Audit of State and Local 
Governments).
    (3) Education Institutions.
    (i) OMB Circular A-110--Administrative Requirements for Grants and 
Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other 
Nonprofit Organizations.
    (ii) OMB Circular A-21--Cost Principles for Educational 
Institutions.
    (iii) 15 CFR part 29b--Audit Requirements for Institutions of 
Higher Education and Other Nonprofit Organizations (implements OMB 
Circular A-133--Audits for Institutions of Higher Education and Other 
Nonprofit Organizations).


Sec. 291.2  Environmental integration projects.

    (a) Eligibility criteria. Eligible applicants for these projects 
are manufacturing extension centers or state technology extension 
programs which at the time of solicitation have cooperative agreements 
with the NIST Manufacturing Extension Partnership. Only one proposal 
per organization per solicitation is permitted in this category.
    (b) Project objective. The purpose of these projects is to support 
the integration of environmentally-focused technical assistance, and 
especially pollution prevention assistance, for smaller manufacturers 
into the broader services provided by existing MEP manufacturing 
extension centers. Proposers are free to structure their project in 
whatever way will be most effective and efficient in increasing the 
ability of the center to deliver high quality environmental and 
pollution prevention technical assistance (either directly or in 
partnership with other organizations). Following are some examples of 
purposes for which these funds could be used. This list is by no means 
meant to be all inclusive. A center might propose a set of actions 
encompassing several of these examples as well as others.
    (1) Environmental needs assessment. Detailed assessment of the 
environmentally-related technical assistance needs of manufacturers 
within the state or region of the manufacturing extension center. This 
would be done as part of a broader plan to incorporate environmentally 
related services into the services of the manufacturing extension 
center. The center might propose to document its process and findings 
so that other centers may learn from its work.
    (2) Partnership with another organization. The center might propose 
to partner with an existing organization which is providing 
environmentally-focused technical assistance to manufacturers. The 
partnership would lead to greater integration of service delivery 
through joint technical assistance projects and joint training.
    (3) Accessing private-sector environmental resources. The center 
might propose to increase its ability to access environmental technical 
services for smaller manufacturers from environmental consultants or 
environmental firms.
    (4) Training of field engineers/agents in environmental topics. 
Funding for training which empowers the field engineer/agent with the 
knowledge needed to recognize potential environmental, and especially 
pollution prevention, problems and opportunities. In addition, training 
might be funded which empowers the field engineer/agent with the 
knowledge needed to make appropriate recommendations for solutions or 
appropriate referrals to other sources of information or expertise. The 
over-arching goal is for the field engineer/agent to enable the 
manufacturer to be both environmentally clean and competitive.
    (5) Access to environmentally related information or expertise. A 
center might propose to fund access to databases or other sources of 
environmentally-related information or expertise which might be 
necessary to augment the environmentally focused activities of the 
manufacturing extension center.
    (6) Addition of environmentally focused staff. It may be necessary 
for manufacturing extension centers to have an environmental program 
manager or lead field engineer/agent with environmental training and 
experience. Funds could be requested to hire this person. However, the 
proposer would have to demonstrate a clear and reasonable plan for 
providing for the support of this person after the funds provided under 
this project are exhausted since no commitment is being made to on-
going funding.
    (c) Award period. Projects initiated under this category may be 
carried out over multiple years. The proposer should include optional 
second and third years in their proposal. Proposals selected for award 
may receive one, two or three years of funding from currently available 
funds tat the discretion of DOC. If an application is selected for 
funding, DOC has no obligation to provide any additional future funding 
in connection with that award. A separate cooperative agreement will be 
written with winning applicants. Renewal of an award to increase 
funding or extend the period of performance is at the total discretion 
of DOC. It is anticipated that successful projects will be given the 
opportunity to roll the funding for these efforts into the base funding 
for the extension center. Such a roll-over will be based on a 
performance review and the availability of funds.
    (d) Matching requirements. No matching funds are required for these 
proposals. However, the presence of matching funds (cash and in-kind) 
will be considered in the evaluation under the Financial Plan criteria.
    (e) Environmental integration projects evaluation criteria. In most 
solicitations, preference will be given to projects which are focused 
on a single industry sector. This is desired to build on the expertise 
and resources which are being built in tools and resources projects in 
these industry sectors. Industry focus will be specified in the 
solicitation announcement. However, actual services need not be limited 
exclusively to this sector. In addition preference may be given to 
extension centers which do not have extensive environmentally-related 
services already in place. In addition to these preferences, the 
criteria for selection of awards will be as follows in descending order 
of importance:
    (1) Demonstrated commitment to incorporating environmentally 
related services. The extension center must demonstrate its commitment 
to incorporate environmentally-related technical services into its 
overall manufacturing extension services even after funding for this 
project is exhausted. It is not the objective of this effort to 
establish completely autonomous environmentally focused extension 
centers. Rather, the goal is to ensure that such service are integrated 
directly with general manufacturing extension services focused on 
competitiveness. The center must demonstrate that such integration will 
take place. Factors that may be considered include: The amount of 
matching funds devoted to the efforts proposed as demonstration of the 
center's commitment to the activity; Indication that environmental 
services are a significant aspect of the organization's long range 
planning; Strength of commitment and plans for continuing service 
beyond funding which might be awarded through this project; The degree 
to which environmental services will become an integral part of each 
field engineers' portfolio of services; The level of current or planned 
education and training of staff on relevant environmental issues; and 
The extent of environmentally related information and expert resources 
which will be easily accessible by field engineers.
    (2) Demonstrated understanding of the environmentally related 
technical assistance needs of manufacturers in the target population. 
Target population must be clearly defined. The manufacturing center 
must demonstrate that it understands the populations environmentally 
related needs or include a coherent methodology for identifying those 
needs. The proposal should show that the efforts being proposed will 
enable the center to better meet those needs. Factors that may be 
considered include: A clear definition of the target population, its 
size and demographic characteristics; Demonstrated understanding of the 
target population's environmental technical assistance needs or a plan 
to develop this understanding; and Appropriateness of the size of the 
target population and the anticipated impact for the proposed 
expenditure.
    (3) Coordination with other relevant organizations. Wherever 
possible the project should be coordinated with and leverage other 
organizations which are providing high quality environmentally-related 
services to manufacturers in the same target population or which have 
relevant resources which can be of assistance in the proposed effort. 
If no such organizations exist, the proposal should build the case that 
there are no such organizations. Applicants will need to describe how 
they will coordinate to allow for increased economies of scale and to 
avoid duplication of services in providing assistance to small and 
medium-sized manufacturers. Factors that may be considered include: 
Demonstrated understanding of existing organizations and resources 
relevant for providing technology assistance related services to the 
target population; Adequate linkages and partnerships with existing 
organizations and clear definition of those organizations' roles in the 
proposed activities; and That the proposed activity does not duplicate 
existing services or resources.
    (4) Program evaluation. The applicant should specify plans for 
evaluation of the effectiveness of the proposed program and for 
ensuring continuous improvement of program activities. Factors that may 
be considered include: Thoroughness of evaluation plans, including 
internal evaluation for management control, external evaluation for 
assessing outcomes of the activity, and ``customer satisfaction'' 
measures of performance.
    (5) Management experience and plans. Applicants should specify 
plans for proper organization, staffing, and management of the 
implementation process. Factors that may be considered include: 
Appropriateness and authority of the governing or managing organization 
to conduct the proposed activities; Qualifications of the project team 
and its leadership to conduct the proposed activity; Soundness of any 
staffing plans, including recruitment, selection, training, and 
continuing professional development; Appropriateness of the 
organizational approach for carrying out the proposed activity; 
Evidence of involvement and support by private industry.
    (6) Financial plan. Applicants should show the relevance and cost 
effectiveness of the financial plan for meeting the objectives of the 
project; the firmness and level of the applicant's total financial 
support for the project; and a plan to maintain the program after the 
cooperative agreement has expired. Factors that may be considered 
include: Reasonableness of the budget, both in income and expenses; 
Strength of commitment and amount of the proposer's cost share, if any; 
Effectiveness of management plans for control of budget; 
Appropriateness of matching contributions; and Plans for maintaining 
the program after the cooperative agreement has expired.


Sec. 291.3  Environmental tools and techniques projects.

    (a) Eligibility criteria. Eligible applicants for these projects 
include all nonprofit organizations including universities, community 
colleges, State governments, State technology programs and independent 
nonprofit organizations. Organizations may submit multiple proposals 
under this category for unique projects in each solicitation.
    (b) Project objective. The purpose of these projects is to support 
the initial development and implementation of tools or techniques which 
will aide manufacturing extension organizations in providing 
environmentally-related services to smaller manufacturers and which may 
also be of direct use by the smaller manufacturers themselves. Specific 
industry sectors to be addressed and categories of tolls and techniques 
may be specified in solicitations. Those sectors will be specified in 
the solicitation. Examples of tools and techniques include, but are not 
limited to, manufacturing assessment tools, environmental benchmarking 
tools, training delivery programs, electronically accessible 
environmental information resources, environmental demonstration 
facilities, software tools, etc. Projects must be completed within the 
scope of the effort proposed and should not be on-going endeavors.
    (c) Award period. Projects initiated under this category may be 
carried out over up to three years. Proposals selected for award will 
receive all funding from currently available funds. If an application 
is selected for funding, DOC has no obligation to provide any 
additional future funding in connection with that award. Renewal of an 
award to increase funding or extend the period of performance is at the 
total discretion of DOC.
    (d) Matching requirements. No matching funds are required for these 
proposals. However, the presence of matching funds (cash and in-kind) 
will be considered in the evaluation under the Financial Plan criteria.
    (e) Environmental tools and techniques projects evaluation 
criteria. Proposals from applicants will be evaluated and rated on the 
basis of the following criteria listed in descending order of 
importance:
    (1) Demonstrated understanding of the environmentally-related 
technical assistance needs of manufacturers and technical assistance 
providers in the target population. Target population must be clearly 
defined. The proposal must demonstrate that it understands the 
population's environmentally related tool or technique needs. The 
proposal should show that the efforts being proposed meet the needs 
identified. Factors that may be considered include: A clear definition 
of the target population, size and demographic distribution; 
Demonstrated understanding of the target population's environmental 
tools or technique needs; and Appropriateness of the size of the target 
population and the anticipated impact for the proposed expenditure.
    (2) Technology and information sources. The proposal must delineate 
the sources of technology and/or information which will be used to 
create the tool or resource. Sources may include those internal to the 
center (including staff expertise) or from other organizations. Factors 
that may be considered include: Strength of core competency in the 
proposed area of activity; and Demonstrated access to relevant 
technical or information sources external to the organization.
    (3) Degree of integration with the manufacturing extension 
partnership. The proposal must demonstrate that the tool or resource 
will be integrated into and will be of service to the NIST 
Manufacturing Extension Centers. Factors that may be considered 
include: Ability to access the tool or resource especially for MEP 
extension centers; Methodology for disseminating or promoting use of 
the tool or technique especially within the MEP system; and 
Demonstrated interest in using the tool or technique especially by MEP 
extension centers.
    (4) Coordination with other relevant organizations. Wherever 
possible the project should be coordinated with and leverage other 
organizations which are developing or have expertise on similar tools 
or techniques. If no such organizations exist, the proposal should show 
that this is the case. Applicants will need to describe how they will 
coordinate to allow for increased economies of scale and to avoid 
duplication. Factors that may be considered include: Demonstrated 
understanding of existing organizations and resources relevant to the 
proposed project; Adequate linkages and partnerships with existing 
organizations and clear definition of those organizations' roles in the 
proposed activities; and That the proposed activity does not duplicate 
existing services or resources.
    (5) Program evaluation. The applicant should specify plans for 
evaluation of the effectiveness of the proposed tool or technique and 
for ensuring continuous improvement of the tool. Factors that may be 
considered include: Thoroughness of evaluation plans, including 
internal evaluation for management control, external evaluation for 
assessing outcomes of the activity, and ``customer satisfaction'' 
measures of performance.
    (6) Management experience and plans. Applicants should specify 
plans for proper organization, staffing, and management of the 
implementation process. Factors that may be considered include: 
Appropriateness and authority of the governing or managing organization 
to conduct the proposed activities; Qualifications of the project team 
and its leadership to conduct the proposed activity; Soundness of any 
staffing plans, including recruitment, selection, training, and 
continuing professional development; and Appropriateness of the 
organizational approach for carrying out the proposed activity.
    (7) Financial plan: Applicants should show the relevance and cost 
effectiveness of the financial plan for meeting the objectives of the 
project; the firmness and level of the applicant's total financial 
support for the project; and a plan to maintain the program after the 
cooperative agreement has expired. Factors that may be considered 
include: Reasonableness of the budget, both in income and expenses; 
Strength of commitment and amount of the proposer's cost share, if any; 
Effectiveness of management plans for control of budget; 
Appropriateness of matching contributions; and Plan for maintaining the 
program after the cooperative agreement has expired.


Sec. 291.4  National industry-specific pollution prevention and 
environmental compliance resource centers.

    (a) Eligibility criteria. Eligible applicants for these projects 
include all nonprofit organizations including universities, community 
colleges, state governments, state technology programs and independent 
nonprofit organizations. Only one proposal per organization is 
permitted in this category.
    (b) Project objective. These centers will provide easy access to 
relevant, current, reliable and comprehensive information on pollution 
prevention opportunities, regulatory compliance and technologies and 
techniques for reducing pollution in the most competitive manner for a 
specific industry sector or industrial process. The sector or 
industrial process to be addressed will be specified in the 
solicitation. The center will enhance the ability of small businesses 
to implement risk based pollution prevention alternatives to increase 
competitiveness and reduce adverse environmental impacts. The center 
should use existing resources, information and expertise and will avoid 
duplication of existing efforts. The information provided by the center 
will create links between relevant EPA Pollution Prevention programs, 
EPA and other technical information, NIST manufacturing extension 
efforts, EPA regulation and guidance, and state requirements. The 
center will emphasize pollution prevention methods as the principal 
means to both comply with government regulations and enhance 
competitiveness.
    (c) Project goal. To improve the environmental and competitive 
performance of smaller manufacturers by:
    (1) Enhancing the national capability to provide pollution 
prevention and regulatory requirements information (federal, state and 
local) to specific industries.
    (2) Providing easy access to relevant and reliable information and 
tools on pollution prevention technologies and techniques that achieve 
manufacturing efficiency and enhanced competitiveness with reduced 
environmental impact.
    (3) Providing easy access to relevant and reliable information and 
tools to enable specific industries to achieve the continued 
environmental improvement to meet or exceed compliance requirements.
    (d) Project customers. (1) The customers for this center will be 
the businesses in the industrial sector or businesses which use the 
industrial process specified as the focus for the solicitation. In 
addition, consultants providing services to those businesses, the NIST 
Manufacturing Extension Centers, and federal, state and local programs 
providing technical, pollution prevention and compliance assistance.
    (2) The center should assist the customer in choosing the most cost 
effective, environmentally sound options or practices that enhance the 
company's competitiveness. Assistance must be accessible to all 
interested customers. The center, wherever feasible, shall use existing 
materials and information to enhance and develop the services to its 
customers. The centers should rarely, if ever, perform research, but 
should find and assimilate data and information produced by other 
sources. The center should not duplicate any existing distribution 
system. The center should distribute and provide information, but 
should not directly provide on-site assistance to customers. Rather, 
referrals to local technical assistance organizations should be given 
when appropriate. Information would likely be available through 
multiple avenues such as phone, fax, electronically accessible 
databases, printed material, networks of technical experts, etc.
    (e) Award period. The pilot initiated under this category may be 
carried out over multiple years. The proposer should include optional 
second and third years in their proposal. Proposals selected for award 
may receive one, two or three years of funding from currently available 
funds at the discretion of DOC. If an application is selected for 
funding, DOC has no obligation to provide any additional future funding 
in connection with that award. Renewal of an award to increase funding 
or extend the period of performance is at the total discretion of DOC. 
Successful centers may be given an opportunity to receive continuing 
funding as a NIST manufacturing center after the expiration of their 
initial cooperative agreement. Such a roll-over will be based upon the 
performance of the center and availability of funding.
    (f) Matching requirements. A matching contribution from each 
applicant will be required. NIST may provide financial support up to 
50% of the total budget for the project. The applicant's share of the 
budget may include dollar contributions from state, county, industrial 
or other non-federal sources and non-federal in-kind contributions 
necessary and reasonable for proper accomplishment of project 
objectives.
    (g) Resource center evaluation criteria. Proposals from applicants 
will be evaluated and rated on the basis of the following criteria 
listed in descending order of importance:
    (1) Demonstrated understanding of the environmentally-related 
information needs of manufacturers and technical assistance providers 
in the target population. Understanding the environmentally-related 
needs of the target population (i.e., customers) is absolutely critical 
to the success of such a resource center. Factors that may be 
considered include: A clear definition of the target population, size 
and demographic distribution; Demonstrated understanding of the target 
population's environmentally-related information needs or a clear plan 
for identifying those customer needs; and Methodologies for continually 
improving the understanding of the target population's environmentally-
related information needs.
    (2) Delivery mechanisms. The proposal must set forth clearly 
defined, effective mechanisms for delivery of services to target 
population. Factors that may be considered include: Potential 
effectiveness and efficiency of proposed delivery systems; and 
Demonstrated capacity to form the effective linkages and partnerships 
necessary for success of the proposed activity.
    (3) Technology and information sources. The proposal must delineate 
the sources of information which will be used to create the 
informational foundation of the resource center. Sources may include 
those internal to the center (including staff expertise), but it is 
expected that many sources will be external. Factors that may be 
considered include: Strength of core competency in the proposed area of 
activity; Demonstrated access to relevant technical or information 
sources external to the organization.
    (4) Degree of integration with the manufacturing extension 
partnership and other technical assistance providers. The proposal must 
demonstrate that the resource center will be integrated into the system 
of services provided by the NIST Manufacturing Extension Partnership 
and other technical assistance providers. Factors that may be 
considered include: Ability of the target population including MEP 
Extension Centers to access the resource center; and Methodology for 
disseminating or promoting use of the resource center especially within 
the MEP system.
    (5) Coordination with other relevant organizations. Whenever 
possible the project should be coordinated with and leverage other 
organizations which are developing or have expertise on similar tools 
or techniques. If no such organizations exist, the proposal should show 
that this is the case. Applicants will need to describe how they will 
coordinate to allow for increased economies of scale and to avoid 
duplication. Factors that may be considered include: Demonstrated 
understanding of existing organizations and resources relevant to the 
proposed project; and Adequate linkages and partnerships with existing 
organizations and clear definition of those organizations' roles in the 
proposed activities.
    (6) Program evaluation. The applicant should specify plans for 
evaluation of the effectiveness of the proposed resource center and for 
ensuring continuous improvement. Factors that may be considered 
include: Thoroughness of evaluation plans, including internal 
evaluation for management control, external evaluation for assessing 
outcomes of the activity, and ``customer satisfaction'' measures of 
performance; and The proposer's plan must include documentation, 
analysis of the results, and must show how the results can be used in 
improving the resource center.
    (7) Management experience and plans. Applicants should specify 
plans for proper organization, staffing, and management of the 
implementation process. Factors that may be considered include: 
Appropriateness and authority of the governing or managing organization 
to conduct the proposed activities; Qualifications and experience of 
the project team and its leadership to conduct the proposed activity; 
Soundness of any staffing plans, including recruitment, selection, 
training, and continuing professional development; and Appropriateness 
of the organizational approach for carrying out the proposed activity.
    (8) Financial plan. Applicants should show the relevance and cost 
effectiveness of the financial plan for meeting the objectives of the 
project; the firmness and level of the applicant's total financial 
support for the project; and a plan to maintain the program after the 
cooperative agreement has expired. Factors that may be considered 
include: Reasonableness of the budget, both in income and expenses; 
Strength of commitment and amount of the proposer's cost share; 
Effectiveness of management plans for control of the budget; and 
Appropriateness of matching contributions.


Sec. 291.5  Proposal selection process.

    The proposal evaluation and selection process will consist of three 
principal phases: Proposal qualification; Proposal review and selection 
of finalists; and Award determination.
    (a) Proposal qualification. All proposals will be reviewed by NIST 
to assure compliance with the proposal content and other basic 
provisions of this notice. Proposals which satisfy these requirements 
will be designated qualified proposals; all others will be disqualified 
at this phase of the evaluation and selection process.
    (b) Proposal review and selection of finalists. NIST will appoint 
an evaluation panel composed of NIST and in some cases other federal 
employees to review and evaluate all qualified proposals in accordance 
with the evaluation criteria and values set forth in this notice. A 
site visit may be required to make full evaluation of a proposal. From 
the qualified proposals, a group of finalists will be numerically 
ranked and recommended for award based on this review.
    (c) Award determination. The Director of the NIST, or her/his 
designee, shall select awardees based on total evaluation scores, 
geographic distribution, and the availability of funds. All three 
factors will be considered in making an award. Upon the final award 
decision, a notification will be made to each of the proposing 
organizations.

[FR Doc. 94-27680 Filed 11-10-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-13-M