Grantee Research Project Results
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Research and Development
Announcement of Opportunity
Innovative Ways of Treating
Spills of Vegetable Oils and Animal Fats in Inland Aquatic Environments
Opening Date: March 23, 1999 Closing Date: May 7, 1999
1. EPA Mission and
R&D Strategy
2. Innovative
Ways of Treating Spills of Vegetable Oil and Animal Fats in Inland Aquatic
Environments
3. Funding
4. Eligibility
5. Standard
Instructions For Submitting An Application
6. How to Apply
7. Guidelines,
Limitations, and Additional Requirements
8. Review and Selection
9. Proprietary Information
10. Funding Mechanism
11. Substantial Government
Involvement
12. Contacts
Get required forms
Introduction
In this announcement the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
Office of Research and Development (ORD), invites research cooperative
agreement applications in the following area of special interest to
its mission:
Innovative
Ways of Treating Spills of Vegetable Oils and
Animal
Fats in Inland Aquatic Environments
This invitation provides relevant background information, summarizes
EPA's interest in the topic areas, and describes the application and review
process.
Background
1. EPA Mission
and R&D Strategy
The mission of EPA is to protect both environmental quality
and human health through effective regulations and other policy initiatives.
Achievement of this mission requires the application of sound science to
assessment of environmental problems and to evaluation of possible solutions.
A significant challenge is to support both long-term research that anticipates
future environmental problems as well as research that fills gaps in knowledge
relevant to meeting current Agency goals.
EPA's research programs focus on reduction of risks to human health and ecosystems and on the reduction of uncertainty associated with risk assessment. Through its laboratories and through grants to academic and other not-for-profit institutions, EPA promotes research in both domains, according the highest priority to those areas in which risk assessors are most in need of new concepts, methods, and data. EPA also fosters the development and evaluation of new risk reduction technologies across a spectrum, from pollution prevention through end-of-pipe controls to remediation and monitoring. In all areas, EPA is interested in research that recognizes issues relating to environmental justice, the concept of achieving equal protection from environmental and health hazards for all people without regard to race, economic status, or culture.
2.
Innovative Ways of Treating Spills of Vegetable Oil and Animal Fats in
Inland Aquatic Environments
Under the Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended by the Oil Pollution
Act of 1990, vegetable oils and animal fats are considered oils. As mandated
by the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990, EPA has developed regulations for
response planning. The Facility Response Plan (FRP) rule requires certain
facilities whose discharge could cause significant environmental harm to
prepare and implement response plans. While the rule applies to facilities
storing petroleum oils and non-petroleum oils, including vegetable oils
and animal fats, it provides greater flexibility to vegetable oil or animal
fat facilities in the development of these plans than what is required
for petroleum facilities.
In the FRP rule, EPA has established different and more flexible response
planning requirements for facilities that handle, store, or transport non-petroleum
oil, including animal fats and vegetable oils. For example, in calculating
required response resources for non-petroleum facilities, the owner/operator
of a facility which handles, stores, or transports animal fats or vegetable
oils is not required to use emulsification or evaporation factors in Appendix
E of the rule. Rather, these facilities need only (1) show procedures and
strategies for responding to the maximum extent practicable to a worst
case discharge; (2) show sources of equipment and supplies necessary to
locate, recover, and mitigate discharges; (3) demonstrate that the equipment
identified will work in the conditions expected in the relevant geographic
area, and respond within the required times; and (4) ensure the availability
of required resources by contract or other approved means. (40 CFR Part
112, Appendix E, section 7.7.) It is important to note that EPA does not
determine the type or amount of equipment that preparers of response plans
for non-petroleum oil discharges must identify.
EPA has considered the physical, chemical, biological, and other properties and environmental effects of petroleum oils, vegetable oils, and animal fats, which are the criteria now to be evaluated under the Edible Oils Regulatory Reform Act of 1995. EPA has found that petroleum oils, vegetable oils, and animal fats share common physical properties and produce similar environmental effects. Like petroleum oils, vegetable oils and animal fats and their constituents can do the following:
Scientific research and experience with actual spills have shown that spills of animal fats and vegetable oils kill or injure fish, birds, mammals, and other species and produce other undesirable effects. Waterfowl and other birds, mammals, and fish that are coated with animal fats or vegetable oils could die of hypothermia, dehydration and diarrhea, or starvation. They can also sink and drown or fall victim to predators. Fish and other aquatic organisms may suffocate because of the depletion of oxygen caused by spilled animal fats and vegetable oils in water. Whether these oils are "toxic" to wildlife or kill wildlife through other processes is not the issue. Spills of animal fats and vegetable oils have the same or similar devastating impacts on the aquatic environment as petroleum oils.
In a project currently being conducted by EPA's Office of Research and
Development, preliminary evidence suggests strongly that toxicity (as measured
by the MicrotoxTM assay) of both canola oil and soybean oil increases many-fold
during aerobic biodegradation in laboratory flasks. The mechanism of this
increased toxic response is unknown, but the observation is real. Based
on this, if a large vegetable oil spill were to take place on a lake or
river, the effect could be more devastating than originally thought. This
RFA solicits proposals that focus on the development of innovative, biologically
based methods for the treatment of vegetable oil spills on inland waterways.
Emphasis should be on the development of new methods that reduce the uncertainties
associated with cleanup and the toxic response of the aquatic community.
Studies that propose refinement, validation, or invalidation of existing
methods are also acceptable if they will result in a significant reduction
in uncertainty. Methods development based on biological processes alone
or in combination with physical-chemical systems would be of interest.
A clear and unambiguous demonstration of the removal mechanism should be
a part of the proposed study.
3. Funding: It is anticipated that approximately $100,000, including direct and indirect costs, will be awarded in FY 1999-2000, depending on the availability of funds. Proposals may request funding for projects with a total cost up to $100,000/year with a duration of up to 3 years.
The OPA allows EPA to enter into assistance agreements with universities, research institutions, and other persons. Potential applicants who are uncertain of their eligibility should contact Dr. Albert D. Venosa, National Risk Management Research Laboratory (NRMRL), Cincinnati, OH, at phone: (513)-569-7668 or email: venosa.albert@epamail.epa.gov.
5.
Standard Instructions For Submitting An Application
This section contains a set of special instructions on how applicants
should apply for an EPA competitive cooperative agreement. Proposed projects
must be for research designed to advance the state of knowledge in the
research area described in this solicitation.
The Application
The initial application is made through the submission of the
materials described below. It is essential that the application contain
all the information requested and be submitted in the formats described.
If an application is considered for award, (i.e., after external peer review
and internal review) additional forms and other information will be requested
by the Project Officer. The application should not be bound or stapled
in any way. The Application contains the following:
A. Standard Form 424: The applicant must complete
Standard Form 424 (see attached form and instructions). This form will
act as a cover sheet for the application and should be its first page.
Instructions for completion of the SF424 are included with the form. The
form must contain the original signature of an authorized representative
of the applying institution. Please note that both the Principal Investigator
and an administrative contact should be identified in Section 5 of the
SF424.
B. Key Contacts: The applicant must complete
the Key Contacts Form (attached) as the second page of the submitted application.
C. Abstract: The abstract should include the
following information, as indicated in the example format provided:
1. Title: Use the exact title as it appears in the rest of the application.
2. Investigators: Start with the Principal Investigator. Also list the names and affiliations of each co-investigator who will significantly contribute to the project.
3. Institution: List the name and city/state of each participating university or other applicant institution, in the same order as the list of investigators.
4. Project Period: Provide the proposed project dates.
5. Project Cost: Provide the total request to EPA for the entire project period.
6. Project Summary: This should summarize: (a) the objectives of the study (including any hypotheses that will be tested), (b) the experimental approach to be used (which should give an accurate description of the project as described in the proposal), (c) the expected results of the project and how it addresses the research needs identified in the solicitation, including the estimated improvement in risk assessment or risk management that will result from successful completion of the work proposed.
7. Supplemental Keywords: A list of suggested keywords is provided
for your use. Do not duplicate terms already used in the text of the abstract.
D. Project Description: This description must
not exceed twenty (20) consecutively numbered (center bottom), 8.5x11-inch
pages of single-spaced standard 12-point type (Times New Roman font preferred)
with 1-inch margins. The description must provide the following information:
1. Objectives: List the objectives of the proposed research and
the hypotheses being tested during the project and briefly state why the
intended research is important. This section can also include any background
or introductory information that would help explain the objectives of the
study.
2. Approach: Outline the methods, approaches, and techniques that you intend to use in meeting the objective stated above (five to 10 pages recommended).
3. Expected Results or Benefits: Describe the results you expect to achieve during the project, the benefits of success as they relate to the topic under which the proposal was submitted, and the potential recipients of these benefits. This section should also discuss the utility of the research project proposed for addressing the environmental problems described in the solicitation (one to two pages recommended).
4. General Project Information: Discuss other information relevant to the potential success of the project. This should include facilities, personnel, project schedules, proposed management, interactions with other institutions, etc. (one to two pages recommended).
5. Important Attachments: Appendices and/or other information
may be included but must remain within the 20-page limit. References cited
are in addition to the 20-page limit.
E. Resumes: The resumes of all principal investigators
and important co-workers should be presented. Resumes must not exceed two
consecutively numbered (bottom center), 8.5x11-inch pages of single-spaced
standard 12-point type (preferably Times New Roman font) with 1-inch margins
for each individual. These resumes are in addition to the 20-page limit.
F. Current and Pending Support: The applicant
must identify any current and pending financial resources that are intended
to support research related to that included in the proposal or which would
consume the time of principal investigators. This should be done by completing
the appropriate form (see attachment) for each investigator and other senior
personnel involved in the proposal. Failure to provide this information
may delay consideration of your proposal.
G. Budget: The applicant must present a detailed,
itemized budget for the entire project. This budget must be in the format
provided in the example (see attachment) and not exceed two consecutively
numbered (bottom center), 8.5x11-inch pages with 1-inch margins. A brief
statement concerning cost sharing must be added to the budget justification.
For proposed cost sharing, the estimated dollar amounts should be included
in the appropriate categories in the budget table. This section is in addition
to the 20-page limit specified for the project description.
H. Budget Justification: This section should
describe the basis for calculating the personnel, fringe benefits,
travel, equipment, supplies, contractual support,
and other costs identified in the itemized budget and explain the
basis for their calculation (special attention should be given to explaining
the travel, equipment, and other categories). This
should also include an explanation of how the indirect costs were calculated.
This justification should not exceed two consecutively numbered (bottom
center), 8.5x11-inch pages of single-spaced standard 12-point type with
1-inch margins. This is in addition to the 20-page limit.
I. Quality Assurance Narrative Statement: For
any project involving data collection or processing, conducting surveys,
environmental measurements, and/or modeling, or the development of environmental
technology (whether hardware-based or via new techniques) for pollution
control and waste treatment, provide a statement on how quality processes
or products will be assured. This statement should not exceed two consecutively
numbered, 8.5x11-inch pages of single-spaced standard 12-point type with
1-inch margins. This is in addition to the 20 pages permitted for the Project
Description. The Quality Assurance Narrative Statement should, for each
item listed below, either present the required information or provide a
justification as to why the item does not apply to the proposed research.
For awards that involve environmentally related measurements or data generation,
a quality system that complies with the requirements of ANSI/ASQC E4, "Specifications
and Guidelines for Quality Systems for Environmental Data Collection and
Environmental Technology Programs," must be in place.
1. The activities to be performed or hypothesis to be tested (reference
may be made to the specific page and paragraph number in the application
where this information may be found); criteria for determining the acceptability
of data quality in terms of precision, accuracy, representativeness, completeness,
comparability. (Note: these criteria must also be applied to determine
the acceptability of existing or secondary data to be used in the project.)
2. The study design, including sample type and location requirements and any statistical analyses that were used to estimate the types and numbers of samples required for physical samples or similar information for studies using survey and interview techniques.
3. The procedures for the handling and custody of samples, including sample identification, preservation, transportation, and storage.
4. The methods that will be used to analyze samples or data collected, including a description of the sampling and/or analytical instruments required.
5. The procedures that will be used in the calibration and performance evaluation of the sampling and analytical methods used during the project.
6. The procedures for data reduction and reporting, including a description of statistical analyses to be used and of any computer models to be designed or utilized with associated verification and validation techniques.
7. The intended use of the data as they relate to the study objectives or hypotheses.
8. The quantitative and or qualitative procedures that will be used to evaluate the success of the project.
9. Any plans for peer or other reviews of the study design or analytical
methods prior to data collection.
ANSI/ASQC E4, "Specifications and Guidelines for Quality Systems for
Environmental Data Collection and Environmental Technology Programs"
is available for purchase from the American Society for Quality Control,
phone 1-800-248-1946, item T55. Only in exceptional circumstances should
it be necessary to consult this document. There are EPA requirements (R-series)
and guidance (G-series) documents available for potential applicants which
address in detail how to comply with ANSI/ASQC E4. These may be found on
the Internet at https://www.epa.gov/research-grants/.
R-5, "EPA Requirements for Quality Assurance Project Plans,"
and G-4, "Guidance for the Data Quality Objectives Process,"
are particularly pertinent to this RFA's QA requirements.
6. How to Apply
The original and three (3) copies of the fully developed application must be received by EPA- NRMRL no later than 4:00 P.M. EDT, May 7, 1999.
The application and abstract must be prepared in accordance with these instructions. Informal, incomplete, or unsigned proposals will not be considered. The application should not be bound or stapled in any way. The original and copies of the application should be secured with paper or binder clips. Completed applications should be sent via regular mail to:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
c/o Dr. Albert D. Venosa
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
26 W. Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
For express mail or courier-delivered applications, the same address should be used. The telephone number required for delivery is 513-569-7668.
7. Guidelines, Limitations, and Additional Requirements
Projects that contain subagreements or subcontracts constituting more than 40% of the total direct cost of the grant for each year in which the subcontract is awarded will be subject to special review and may require additional justification.
All grant applications are initially reviewed by EPA to determine their legal and administrative acceptability. Acceptable applications are then reviewed by an appropriate technical peer review group. This review is designed to evaluate each proposal according to its scientific merit. In general, each review group is composed of non-EPA scientists, engineers, social scientists, and/or economists who are experts in their respective disciplines and are proficient in the technical areas they are reviewing. The reviewers use the following criteria to help them in their reviews:
1. The originality and creativity of the proposed research, the appropriateness and adequacy of the research methods proposed, and the appropriateness and adequacy of the Quality Assurance Narrative Statement. Is the research approach practical and technically defensible, and can the project be performed within the proposed time period? Will the research contribute to scientific knowledge in the topic area of the solicitation? Is the proposal well-prepared with supportive information that is self-explanatory and understandable?
2. The qualifications of the principal investigator(s) and other key personnel, including research training, demonstrated knowledge of pertinent literature, experience, and publication records. Will all key personnel contribute a significant time commitment to the project?
3. The availability and/or adequacy of the facilities and equipment proposed for the project. Are there any deficiencies that may interfere with the successful completion of the research?
4. The responsiveness of the proposal to the research needs identified for the topic area. Does the proposal adequately address all of the objectives specified for this topic area?
5. Although budget information is not used by the reviewers as the basis
for their evaluation of scientific merit, the reviewers are asked to provide
their view on the appropriateness and/or adequacy of the proposed budget
and its implications for the potential success of the proposed research.
Input on requested equipment is of particular interest.
Funding decisions are the sole responsibility of EPA. Grants are selected
on the basis of technical merit, relevancy to the research priorities outlined,
program balance, and budget. A summary statement of the scientific review
by the peer panel will be provided to each applicant. Customarily, applicants
are notified about award decisions within 6 months of the application deadline.
The application selected for funding will require additional certifications,
possibly a revised budget, and responses to any comments or suggestions
offered by the peer reviewers. The Project Officer will contact the Principal
Investigator to obtain these materials.
9. Proprietary
Information
By submitting an application in response to this solicitation,
the applicant grants EPA permission to share the application with technical
reviewers both within and outside of the Agency. Applications containing
proprietary or other types of confidential information will be returned
to the applicant without review.
10. Funding Mechanism
The funding mechanism for the award issued under this solicitation
will consist of a cooperative agreement from EPA and depends on the availability
of funds. In accordance with Public Law 95-224, the primary purpose of
a grant is to accomplish a public purpose of support or stimulation authorized
by Federal statute rather than acquisition for the direct benefit of the
Agency. In issuing a cooperative agreement, EPA anticipates that there
will be substantial EPA involvement in the design, implementation, or conduct
of the research funded.
11.
Substantial Government Involvement
In carrying out this cooperative agreement, EPA will be substantially
involved in the study. Details about the nature of the collaboration between
EPA scientists and the cooperator will be negotiated following award of
the cooperative agreement. Cultures of petroleum-degrading microorganisms
developed in previous EPA studies will be available from EPA if desired
by the cooperator.
12. Contacts
Additional general information on the grants program, forms
used for applications, etc., may be obtained by exploring our Internet
page at www.epa.govhttps://www.epa.gov/research-grants. EPA does not intend to make mass-mailings of
this announcement. Information not available on the Internet may be obtained
by contacting:
Dr. Albert D. Venosa
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
26 W. Martin Luther King Drive
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Phone: 513-569-7668
Email: venosa.albert@epamail.epa.gov
End of File
Get Required Application Forms
Get Adobe Reader first to be able to read PDF files
Go to Download Page to get required forms (Forms are available in MSWord and PDF format)
![NCERQA Bottom Bar](https://www.epa.gov/research-grantshttps://www.epa.gov/research-grants_btm.gif)
Last Updated: March 23, 1999
The perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.