Manufacturing Extension Partnership; Environmental Projects

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