United States
Environmental Protection
Office of Research and
Washington DC 20460
June 1998
Science To Achieve Results Program
   1999 Grant* ^f Research
      Opening Date: June 30, 1998

      Closing Oats: September 30, 1998


                                     Children's Vulnerability To
                                     Toxic Substances  In  The
                                     Science to Achieve Results Program:
                                     1999 Research Grants
                                     Opening Date: June 30,1998     Closing Date: Sept 30,1998
 Children's Susceptibility to
; •  fajrfc Chemicals ' * ' '
 Funds Available
  ^ubmWng an Application
 Guidelines, Limitations, and

    In this announcement the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), Office of Research and Devel-
opment (ORD), invites research grant
applications in the following area of
special interest to its mission:

Children's Vulnerability to Toxic
Substances in the Environment

    This invitation provides relevant
background information, summarizes
EPA's interest in this topic area, and
describes the application and review
process. This Request for Applications
(RFA) describes a programmatic area
which is a part of the EPA 1999
solicitation. Additional program topic
areas and joint programs with the
National Science Foundation and other
agencies will be announced separately.

EPA Mission and R&D


    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. Requests for Applications issued
by the Science to Achieve Results
(STAR) Program are an important
mechanism for promoting a sound
scientific foundation for environmental

    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 protec-
tion from environmental and health
hazards for all people without regard to
race, economic status, or culture.

    EPA's extramural research grant
programs are administered by ORD's
National Center for Environmental
Research and Quality Assurance
                                                      National Center for Environmental Research and Quality Assurance




    Over the past few years, public
attention has increasingly focused on
potential adverse health effects in
children from exposure to pesticides
and other toxic chemicals in their food,
water, or environment. Public health
officials and physicians are being asked
to assess the significance of a plethora
of possible risks for children. At the
Federal level, recent actions by the
President, the Congress, and the EPA
Administrator have focused attention
on environmental health threats to
children. In 1997, President Clinton
issued an Executive Order addressing
protection of children from environ-
mental health risks. The Food Quality
Protection Act of 1996 and the Safe
Drinking Water Act of 1996 both
require consideration of infants and
children in risk assessments used to
determine acceptable levels of environ-
mental contaminants in food and
drinking water. In 1996, Administrator
Browner issued a report entitled
Environmental Health Threats to
Children1 and set a Children's Agenda
for EPA, calling for consideration of
children's risks in all Agency actions
and a greater emphasis on research to
support children's risk assessments.

    The health impacts of most
concern are respiratory diseases,
childhood cancer, immune system
effects, neurotoxicology, and develop-
mental effects. From 1982 to 1993, the
prevalence, morbidity, and age-adjusted
mortality rates for asthma increased
significantly despite improvements in
asthma diagnosis and management and
improved understanding of the biology
and immunology of the disease.  There
are a limited number of studies that
suggest age-related differences in
cancer susceptibility. However, it is
still difficult to assess the potential
impact of these differences due to a
lack of research. The immune system
is of concern due to the known differ-
ences in immune structure and function
between children and adults2.  Expo-
sure to some toxic chemicals such as
lead, are well known to cause neuro-
logical effects in children*.  However,
the potential neurological effects of
other metals and chemicals such as
solvents, and pesticides3 are not as well
understood. Finally, exposure to a
variety of environmental toxicants can
affect initial growth and development.
In addition, exposure during crucial
periods of development may have
profound effects which may or may not
be reversible in later life. These,
among other concerns, support the need
for additional research on possible
environmental causes of childhood

    In exploring the factors that affect
health risk from exposure to toxic
chemicals,  it must be remembered that
children are a unique sub-population.
Depending on the circumstances,
children may be more or less suscep-
tible to the  toxic effects of these
chemicals than are adults. Risks to
children may differ qualitatively or
quantitatively from those to adults
because of  differences in their imma-
ture physiology, metabolic processes,
respiratory  rates, and differing levels of
exposure4.  Nutritional status, disease,
and genetic variation can affect many
of these processes, increasing or
decreasing  the risk from exposure to
toxic substances5.  The Environmental
Protection Agency will sponsor
research to better understand how these
factors affect risk to children from
exposure to toxic chemicals in the
environment. Of particular interest are
pesticides such as organophosphates,
pyrethroids, and the triazine herbicides.
* Proposals focusing exclusively on lead
poisoning in children will be considered
non-responsive to this RFA.
More specifically, the EPA invites
proposals which explore the assessment
of intermittent and time-varied expo-
sures as well as the biological basis for
increased susceptibility among chil-

Intermittent Exposures in


    The exposure of children to
potentially toxic chemicals is generally
quite different from that of adults
because of differences in physical
environment, activities and diet. The
assessment of exposure in children and
adults depends on first being able to
consider all relevant exposure path-
ways, including dietary, drinking water,
respiratory, dermal, and non-dietary
oral ingestion. Exposures that occur
via some of these pathways can
sometimes be relatively high, but are
usually not persistent and often result
from human activities that are rela-
tively rare (intermittent). Many of the
differences in exposure between
children and adults are associated with
these types of exposure and are most
often linked  with the unique behavior
of children.

    Children's daily activities, proxim-
ity to floors, carpets, lawns, and soils,
the frequency and duration of hand to
mouth behaviors, and many other
factors combine to form a life environ-
ment that varies with age and from
child to child.  Studies suggest, for
example, that children's normal
activities may expose them to higher
levels of pesticides applied in and
around the home*. Children also have
greater average daily food consumption
per unit body weight than do adults,
and children differ in the specific foods
eaten and in  the relative proportions of
various foods7.

    Proposals that are responsive to
this RFA will identify specific pollutant
chemicals, pollutant sources, environ-
mental media, and exposure  pathways
and will attempt to develop novel
1999 Grants for Research

                                                                               United States Environmental Protection Agency
                                                                                       Office of Research and Development
                                                                                       Science To Achieve Results (STAR)
methodologies for quantifying or
assessing intermittent exposures.  The
chemicals and pathways chosen should
represent problems or issues of
environmental relevance. These
proposals might utilize currently
employed techniques such as telephone
surveys, lab experiments, or field
studies.  However, the development of
new and untested approaches is also
encouraged. Topics of interest include,
but are not limited to;

*   Methods to quantify children's
    exposures that occur through
    dermal contact and/or via dietary
    and/or non-dietary ingestion;

•   Approaches for quantifying the
    frequency and duration of
    children's activities in and around
    the home which might lead to
    significant intermittent exposures
    and consider factors such as age,
    sex, culture, geography, and
    climate; and
•   Predictive models for estimating
    total human exposure, which
    incorporate child activity patterns
    and account for intermittent and
    time varied exposures.
    It is especially important to be able
to identify and ultimately characterize
the nature and extent of behavioral
patterns with respect to age/stage of
development since infants, toddlers,
and young children may exhibit great
differences in exposure related to their
mobility and physical development.

Children's Susceptibility to

Toxic Chemicals

    There are several interconnected
factors that may contribute to increased
vulnerability for children, depending on
the toxic substance under consideration
and the age of the child. Children's
tissues, organs, and biological systems
are still developing, with several stages
of rapid growth and development
occurring from infancy to adolescence.
This rapid development and immaturity
of body organs and systems predis-
poses children to potentially more
severe consequences within certain age
ranges and windows of vulnerability.
Differences in the absorption, metabo-
lism, distribution, storage, and elimina-
tion of toxic chemicals that enter the
body at different ages may also
contribute to increased vulnerability
and higher doses to target organs and

    Physiological differences influence
the amount of chemical that is absorbed
into the body.  Children have a greater
surface area to body weight ratio than
adults which may lead to increased
dermal absorption. Comparisons of
absorption through the respiratory and
gastrointestinal tract between children
and adults are complex and could lead
to either increased or decreased risk
depending on the physicochemical
properties of the toxic chemical. The
rate at which a substance is distributed
to various organs in the body may be
influenced by developmental changes.
For example, a child's greater volume
of extracellular water may dilute
substances in this compartment. Also,
circulatory flow rates are generally
higher in children and may impact  the
distribution of toxic chemicals, and
reduced plasma binding may increase a
child's susceptibility to toxic effects.
The metabolism and excretion of toxic
chemicals in a child's body may also
differ from that of adults.  Develop-
mental changes occur in liver enzyme
systems that may increase or decrease
the toxicity of substances in children.
These developmental changes occur at
different rates in the various enzyme
systems with some not being completed
until puberty*. The effects of these
changes also depend on the chemical
and how it is metabolized'.

    EPA will support research into
novel methods for studying the
susceptibility of children  to environ-
mentally induced disease. Proposals
that are responsive to this RFA will
incorporate information on biological
and physiological characteristics of
different age groups, the variability
within particular age groups, and the
mechanistic basis for increased
susceptibility of children to the adverse
health effects of environmental
contaminants. Of particular interest are
approaches that will provide a better
understanding of these and other
factors that contribute to increased
susceptibility in children.  This includes
but is not limited to:

•   The development of animal models
    for studying the  toxicity of
    environmental contaminants which
    help us to understand  the unique
    susceptibilities of children to the
    adverse health effects that may
    result  from exposure  to these
    contaminants; and

*   Research on approaches for
    extrapolating from animal models
    to children, including  the develop-
    ment of physiologically based
    pharmacokinetic models for
    animals and humans.
                         end notes
    I. USEPA. Environmental Health
    Threats to Children, EPA Report #

    2. International Life Science Institute
    (1LSI) Research Needs on Age-Related
    Differences in Susceptibility to
    Chemical Toxicants. ILSI Press,
    Washington, DC, 1996.

    3. Chakraborti, T., et al. Comparative
    Neurochemical and Neurobehavioral
    Effects of Repeated Chlorpyrifos
    Exposure in Young and Adult Rats.
    Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 46:219-
    224, 1993.

    4. Guzelian, P.S., et al. (Eds) Similari-
    ties and Differences Between Children
    and Adults: Implications for Risk
    Assessment. ILSI Press, Washington
    DC, 1992.

    5. (a) World Health Organization.
    Principles for Evaluating Health Risks
                                                            National Center for Environmental Research and Quality Assurance

    from Chemicals During Infancy and
    Childhood. Environmental Health
    Criteria 59, Geneva: WHO, 1986. (b)
    Hunt, V.R., et al. Banbury Report 11:
    Environmental Factor in Growth and
    Development. Cold Springs Harbor
    Press, Plainview, NY, 1982. (c) Kacew,
    S. (1992). General Principles in
    Pharmacology and Toxicology
    Applicable to Children. In: Similarities
    and Differences Between Children and
    Adults: Implications far Risk Assess-
    ment. ILSI Press, Washington DC,
    1992. (d) Spielberg, S.P. (1992)
    Subpopulation Risk: Interaction of
    Development and Genetics, In:
    Similarities and Differences Between
    Children and Adults: Implications for
    Risk Assessment. ILSI Press, Washing-
    ton DC, 1992.

    6. Fenske, R. et al. Potential Exposure
    and Health Effects of Infants Follow-
    ing Residential Pesticide Applications.
    Am. J. Public Health 80:689-693,

    7. NAS (1993). Pesticides in the Diets
    of Infants and cChildren. National
    Academy Press, Washington DC.

    8. Bearer, C.F. How are Children
    Different from Adults? Env. Health
    Perspectives.  103 (supplement 6):
    7-12,  1995.

    9. (a) Abel, S.R. et al. (1990).
    Chloramphenicol. In: Kacew, S. (Ed.),
    Drug Toxicity and Metabolism in
    Pediatrics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fl.
    (b) Snodgrass, W.R. (1992) Physi-
    ological and Biochemical Differences
    Between Children and Adults as
    Determinants of Toxic Response to
    Environmental Pollutants, In:
    Similarities and Differences Between
    Children and Adults: Implications for
    Risk Assessment. ILSI  Press, Washing-
    ton DC
Funds Available
    Subject to the availability of funds,
approximately $5 million is expected to
be awarded in fiscal year 1999 in this
program area. The projected award
range is $150,000 to $250,000/year for
up to 3 years.
    Academic and not-for-profit
institutions located in the U.S., and
state or local governments, are eligible
under all existing authorizations.
Profit-making firms are not eligible to
receive grants from EPA under this
program.  Federal agencies, national
laboratories funded by federal agencies
(FFRDCs), and federal employees are
not eligible to submit applications to
this program and may not serve in a
principal leadership role on a grant.

    FFRDC employees may cooperate
or collaborate with eligible applicants
within the limits imposed by applicable
legislation and regulations. They may
participate in planning, conducting, and
analyzing the research directed by the
principal investigator, but may not
direct projects on behalf of the appli-
cant organization or principal investiga-
tor. The principal investigator's
institution may provide funds through
its grant from EPA to a FFRDC for
research personnel, supplies, equip-
ment, and other expenses directly
related to the research. However,
salaries for permanent FFRDC employ-
ees may not be provided through this

    Federal employees may not receive
salaries or in other ways augment their
agency's appropriations through grants
made by this program. However,
federal employees may interact with
grantees so long as their involvement is
not essential to achieving the basic
goals of the grant** The principal
investigator's institution may also
subcontract to a federal agency to
purchase unique supplies or services
unavailable in the private sector.
Examples are purchase of satellite data,
census data tapes, chemical reference
standards, analyses or instrumentation
not available elsewhere,  etc.  A written
justification for federal involvement by
subcontract must be included in the
application, along with an assurance
from the federal agency involved which
commits it to supply the  specified

     **EPA encourages interaction between
its laboratory scientists and grant principal
investigators for the purpose of exchanging
information in research areas of common
interest that may add value to their
respective research activities. However, this
interaction must be incidental to achieving
the goals of the research under a grant. If
the involvement should become substantial,
i.e., essential to achieving these goals, then
the award would become a  cooperative
agreement.  Interaction that is "incidental"
is not reflected in a research proposal and
involves no resource commitments.

Potential applicants who are uncertain
of their eligibility should contact Dr.
Robert E. Menzer in NCERQA, phone
(202)564-6849,  EMail:
7999 Grants for Research

                                                                             United States Environmental Protection Agency
                                                                                     Office of Research and Development
                                                                                     Science To Achieve Results (STAR)
Standard Instructions for

Submitting an Application

    This section contains a set of
special instructions on how applicants
should apply for an NCERQA grant.
Proposed projects must be for research
designed to advance the state of
knowledge in the research areas
described in this solicitation.

Sorting Codes

    In order to facilitate proper
assignment and review of applications,
each applicant is asked to identify the
topic area in which the application is to
be considered. It is the responsibility
of the applicant to correctly identify
the proper sorting code. Failure to do
so will result in an inappropriate peer
review assignment. At various places
within the application, applicants will
be asked to identify this topic area by
using the appropriate Sorting Code.
The Sorting Code for the Children's
Vulnerability to Toxic Substances in the
Environment is 99-NCERQA-B1.
Applications are due by September 30,

    The Sorting Code must be placed
at the top of the abstract (as shown in
the abstract format), in Box 10 of
Standard Form 424 (as described in the
section on SF424), and should also be
included in the address on the package
that is sent  to EPA (see the section on
How to Apply).
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 applica-
tion should not be bound or stapled
in any way. The Application contains
the following:

A.  Standard Form 424: The appli-
    cant 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 repre-
    sentative of the applying institu-
    tion. Please note that both the
    Principal Investigator and an
    administrative contact should be
    identified in Section 5 of the

B.  Key Contacts:  The applicant
    must complete the Key Contacts
    Form (attached) as the second
    page of the submitted application.

C.  Abstract:  The abstract is a very
    important document.  Prior to
    attending the peer review panel
    meetings, some of the panelists
    may read only the abstract.
    Therefore, it is critical that the
    abstract accurately describe the
    research being proposed and
    convey all the essential elements of
    the research. Also, in the event of
    an award, the abstracts will form
    the basis for an Annual Report of
    awards made under this program.
    The abstract should include the
    following information, as indicated
    in the example format provided:

    1.  Sorting Code: Use 99-

    2.  Title:  Use the exact title as it
    appears in  the rest of the applica-

    3.  Investigators: List the names
    and affiliations of each investigator
    who will significantly contribute to
    the project. Start with the Princi-
    pal Investigator.
    4.  Project Summary: This
    should summarize: (a) the objec-
    tives 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,
    and (d) the estimated improve-
    ment in risk assessment or risk
    management that will result from
    successful completion of the work

    5.  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 fifteen
    (15) consecutively numbered
    (center bottom), 8.5x 11 -inch
    pages of single-spaced standard
    12-point type with 1-inch margins.
    The description must provide the
    following information:

    1.  Objectives: List the objec-
    tives 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
    (one to two pages recommended).

    2.  Approach: Outline the
    methods, approaches, and tech-
    niques that you intend to employ in
    meeting the objective stated above
    (five to 10 pages recommended).

    3.  Expected Results or Ben-
    efits: 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
                                                          National Center for Environmental Research and Quality Assurance

    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
    |jtA£^Wi3 1 WV/llllllWltMVUy.

    4.  General Project Informa-
    tion: Discuss othftr inform-;t;on
    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 recom-

    5.  Important Attachments:
    Appendices and/or other informa-
    tion may be included but must
    remain within the 15-page limit.
    References cited are in addition to
    the 15 pages.

E.  Resumes: The resumes of all
    principal investigators and
    important co-workers should be
    presented. Resumes must not
    exceed two consecutively num-
    bered (bottom center), 8.5x11-inch
    pages of single-spaced standard
    12-point type with 1-inch margins
    for each individual.

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 consider-
    ation of your proposal.

C.  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.
    Please note that institutional cost
    sharing is not required and,
    therefore, does not have to be
    included in the budget table.  If
    desired, a brief statement concern-
    ing cost sharing can be added to
    the budget justification.

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 num-
    bered (bottom center), 8.5x11-inch
    pages of single-spaced standard
    12-point type with 1-inch margins.

I.   Quality Assurance Narrative
    Statement: For any project
    involving data collection or
    processing, conducting surveys,
    environmental measurements, and/
    or modeling, 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
    15 pages permitted for the Project
    Description.  The  Quality Assur-
    ance 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

1.   The activities to be performed
or hypothesis to be tested (refer-
ence 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.

2.   The study design, including
sample type and location require-
ments 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

3.   The procedures for the
handling and custody of samples,
including sample identification,
preservation, transportation, and

4.   The methods that will be used
to analyze samples or data col-
lected, including a description of
the sampling and/or analytical
instruments required.

5.   The procedures that will be
used in the calibration and perfor-
mance 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.
7999 Grants for Research

                                                                             United States Environmental Protection Agency
                                                                                     Office of Research and Development
                                                                                      Science To Achieve Results (STAR)
    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

    9.  Any plans for peer or other
    reviews of the study design or
    analytical  methods prior to data

ANSf/ASQC E4, "Specifications and Guide-
lines for Quality Systems for Environmental
Data Collection  and Environmental Technol-
ogy 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 nec-
essary to consult this document.

J.  Postcard: The Applicant must
    include with the application a self-
    addressed, stamped  3x5-inch post
    card. This will be used to ac-
    knowledge receipt of the applica-
    tion and to transmit other impor-
    tant information to the applicant.
How to Apply
    The original and ten (10) copies of
the fully developed application and five
(5) additional copies of the abstract (15
in all), must be received by NCERQA
no later than 4:00 P.M. EDT on
September 30,1998.

    The application and abstract must
be prepared in accordance with these
instructions. Informal, incomplete, or
unsigned proposals will not be consid-
ered.  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
Peer Review Division (8703R)
Sorting Code: 99-NCERQA-B1
401 M Street, SW
Washington DC  20460

    For express mail or courier-
delivered applications, the following
address must be used:

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Peer Review Division (8703K)
Sorting Code: 99-NCERQA-B1
1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Room B-10105
Washington, DC 20004

Phone: (202) 564-6939 (for express
mail applications)

The sorting code must be identified in
the address (as shown above).
Guidelines, Limitations, and

Additional Requirements

    Proposals must be submitted to
only one topic area, using a single
sorting code. Proposals submitted to
more than one RFA topic will be
assigned to the topic designated on the
first version received or to the first
sorting code designated on the applica-
tion. If you wish to submit more than
one application to the STAR Program,
you must ensure that the research
proposed in each is significantly
different from any that has been
submitted to this solicitation or from
any other grant you are currently
receiving from EPA or any other
federal government agency.

    Projects which contain
subagreements or subcontracts consti-
tuting 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.

    Researchers will be expected to
budget for and participate in an annual
All-Investigators Meeting with EPA
scientists and other grantees to report
on research activities and to discuss
issues of mutual interest.

Review and Selection

    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 com-
posed 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:
                                                           National Center for Environmental Research and Quality Assurance

    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 informa-
    tion that is self-explanatory and

    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 signifi-
    cant time commitment to the

    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

    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.
    Applications that receive scores of
excellent and very good from the peer
reviewers are subjected to a program-
matic review within EPA, the object
being to assure a balanced research
portfolio for the Agency. Scientists
from the ORD Laboratories and EPA
Program and Regional Offices review
these applications in relation to
program priorities and their
complementarity to the ORD intramu-
ral program and recommend selections

    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. Normally,
applicants are notified about award
decisions within 6 months of the
application deadline.

    Applications selected for funding
will require additional certifications,
possibly a revised budget, and re-
sponses to any comments or sugges-
tions offered by the peer reviewers.
Project officers will contact principal
investigators to obtain these materials.

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 confiden-
tial information will be returned to the
applicant without review.

Funding Mechanism

    The funding mechanism for all
awards issued under this solicitation
will consist of grants 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 grant agreement, EPA anticipates that
there will be no substantial EPA
involvement in the design, implementa-
tion, or conduct of the research funded
by the grant. However, EPA will
monitor research progress, based in part
on annual reports provided by


    Additional general information on
the STAR Program, forms used for
applications, etc., may be obtained by
exploring our Web page at . EPA does not
intend to make mass-mailings of this
announcement.  Information not
available on the Internet may be
obtained by contacting:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Center for Environmental
Research and Quality Assurance
401 M Street, SW
Washington DC  20460

    Phone:  1-800-490-9194

    In addition, a contact person has
been identified below for this topic. He
will respond to inquiries regarding the
solicitation and can respond to any
technical questions related to your

Children's Vulnerability to Toxic
Substances in the Environment

• Chris Saint 202-564-6909
1999 Grants for Research

                                                  2. DATE SUBMITTED
                                                                                                           OMB Approval No. 0348-0043
                                                                        Applicant Identifier
   D  Construction

   D  Non-Construction
                                                  3. DATE RECEIVED BY STATE
               D Construction

               O Non-Construction
                                                                        State Applicant Identifier
                                    Federal Identifier
  Legal Name:
                                                       Organizational Unit:
 Address (give city, county, state, and zip code):
                                                       Name and telephone and E-mail number of the person to be contacted on matters
                                                       involving this application (give area code)
                                                                      ADMIN. CONTACT:
                                                       7. TYPE OF APPLICANT: (enter appropriate totter In box)
                                                       i  n

                       o  New     c  Continuation    °  Revision

  If Revision, enter appropriate letter(s) in box(es): |	|     I   I
   A. Increase Award       B. Decrease Award   C. Increase Duration
   D. Decrease Duration     Other (specify):
                                                         A.  State
                                                         B.  County
                                                         C.  Municipal
                                                         D.  Township
                                                         E.  Interstate
                                                         F.  Intermunicipal
                                                         G.  Special District
                                          H.  Independent School Dist.
                                          I.   State Controlled Institution of Higher Learning
                                          J.  Private University
                                          K.  Indian Tribe
                                          L.  Individual
                                          M.  Profit Organization
                                          N.  Other (Specify) 	
                                                       9. NAME OF FEDERAL AGENCY:
                                                                          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - ORD - NCERQA

                                                                    11. DESCRIPTIVE TITLE OF APPLICANT'S PROJECT:
  12. AREAS AFFECTED BY PROJECT IcHles, counties, states, etc.);
                                   14. CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICTS OF:
     Start Date
                    Ending Date
                      a. Applicant
                                   b.  Project
  a. Federal
  b. Applicant
  c. State
  d. Local
  e. Other



                                        16. IS APPLICATION SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY STATE EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372 PROCESS?
                                           a.  YES. THIS PREAPPLICATION/APPLICATION WAS MADE AVAILABLE TO THE
                                                   STATE EXECUTIVE ORDER 12372 PROCESS FOR REVIEW ON:
       b. NO  D  PROGRAM IS NOT COVERED BY E.G. 12372

 f.  Program Income


       D  Yes     If 'Yes,* attach an explanation.             d'  No
 a. Typed Name of Authorized Representative
                                                      b. Title
                                                                                                    c. Telephone number
 d. Signature of Authorized Representative
                                                                                                    e. Date Signed
3revious Editions Not Usable
Prescribed by OMB Circular A-102
                                                                                                   Standard For 424   (REV 4-68)
                                                 Authorized for Local Reproduction

                                   INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE SF 424
This is a standard form used by applicants as a required facesheet for preapplications and applications submitted for Federal
Assistance. It will be used by Federal agencies to obtain applicant certification that States which have established a review
and comment procedure in response to Executive Order 12372 and have selected the program to be included in their process,
have been given an opportunity to review the applicant's submission.
1.    Self-explanatory.

2.    Date application submitted to Federal agency (or
      State, if applicable) & applicant's control number
      (if applicable).

3.    State use only (if applicable).

4.    If this  application  is  to continue or  revise an
      existing award,  enter present Federal  identifier
      number. If for a new project, leave blank.

5.    Legal   name  of  applicant,   name  of primary
      organizational  unit  which  will  undertake  the
      assistance  activity,  complete  address  of  the
      applicant, and name and telephone number of the
      person  to  contact  on  matters  related to  this

6.    Enter Employer  Identification Number (BIN) as
      assigned by the Internal Revenue Service.

7.    Enter the appropriate letter in the space provided.

8.    Check  appropriate  box  and  enter  appropriate
      letters) in the space(s) provided:

      — "New" means a new assistance award.

      — "Continuation"  means  an extension for an
         additional funding/budget period for a project
         with a projected completion date.

      — "Revision" means any change in the Federal
         Government's financial obligation or contingent
         liability from an existing obligation.

9.    Name of Federal agency from which assistance is
      being requested with this application.

10.   Use the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
      number and  title of the program  under  which
      assistance is required.

11.   Enter a brief descriptive title  of the project.  If me
      than one program is involved, you should append
      an explanation on a separate sheet.  If appropriate
      (e.g., construction or real property projects), attach
      a   map  showing   project   location.      For
      preapplications, use a separate sheet to provide  a
      summary description of this project.
                                   12.   List only the largest political entities affected (e.g.,
                                         State, counties, cities.)

                                   13.   Self-explanatory.

                                   14.   List the applicant's Congressional Districts and
                                         any Districts) affected by the program or project.

                                   15.   Amount requested or to be contributed during the
                                         first funding/budget period by  each  contributor.
                                         Value of in-kind contributions should be included
                                         on appropriate lines as applicable. If the action
                                         will result in a dollar change to an existing award,
                                         include only  the  amount  of the change.   For
                                         decreases, enclose the amounts in parentheses.  If
                                         both basic and supplemental amounts are included,
                                         show breakdown  on  an  attached sheet.   For
                                         multiple program funding, use totals  and  show
                                         breakdown using same categories as item 15.

                                   16.   Applicants should contact the State Single Point of
                                         Contact (SPOC) for Federal Executive Order 12372
                                         to determine whether the application is subject to
                                         the State intergovernmental review process.

                                   17.   This    question   applies    to    the   applicant
                                         organization,  not the person who signs as the
                                         authorized representative.    Categories  of  debt
                                         include delinquent  audit  allowances, loans and

                                   18.   To be signed  by the authorized represwrt
                                         the applicant. A copy of the  governing body's
                                         authorization for you to sign this application as
                                         official  representative must  be  on  file in the
                                         applicant's office. (Certain Federal agencies may
                                         require  that this authorization be submitted as part
                                         of the application.
                                                                                          SF424  (REV 4-88) Back


     Authorized Representative: Original awards and amendments will be sent
     to this individual for review and acceptance, unless otherwise indicated.
        Complete Address:

        Phone Number:
     Payee: Individual authorized to accept payments.
        Complete Address:
        Phone Number:
     Administrative Contact: Individual from Sponsored Programs Office to
     contact concerning administrative matters (i.e., indirect cost rate computation,
     rebudgeting requests etc.)
        Name: _ . __ _^_ _ _^___ _ _
        Complete Address:
        Phone Number:

        FAX Number:
        E-Mail Number:
     Principal Investigator: Individual responsible for the technical completion of
     the proposed work.
        Name: 	.	
        Complete Address:
        Phone Number:
        FAX Number:
        E-Mail Number:
NCERQA Form 1 (9/96) For use with EPA STAR Grant Applications


                    EPA STAR Grant Abstract (Example Format)
   Sorting Code:  99-NCERQA-XX (use the correct code that corresponds to the appropriate RFA topic)
   Title:  Use the exact title as it appears in the rest of the application.
   Investigators: List the names and affiliations of each investigator who will significantly contribute to the
                  project.  Start with the Principal Investigator.
   Institution:  Name of university or other applicant.
   Project Period:  October 1, 1999-September 30, 2001, for example.
   Research Category:  Enter your research topic name.

   Project Summary:
          Objectives/Hypothesis: include a short statement on the context of the proposed research in
          relation to other environmental research in the particular area of work
          Approach: outline the methods, approaches, and techniques you intend to employ in meeting the
          Expected Results:
          including a brief description of the
          Improvements in Risk Assessment or Risk Management
          that will be realized if the expected results are achieved
   Supplemental Keywords: see attached suggestions. Do not duplicate terms used in the text of the abstract.
NCERQA Form 2 (7/97) For use with EPA STAR Gram Applications

                           SUGGESTED KEYWORDS
     Media: (media, air, ambient air, atmosphere, ozone, water, drinking water, watersheds, groundwater,
land, soil, sediments, acid deposition, global climate, indoor air, mobile sources, CASTNET, strato-
spheric ozone, tropospheric, marine, estuary, precipitation, leachate, adsorption, absorption, chemical

     Risk Assessment: (exposure, risk, risk assessment, effects, health effects, ecological effects, human
health, bioavailability, metabolism, vulnerability, sensitive populations, dose-response, carcinogen,
teratogen, mutagen, animal, mammalian, organism, cellular, population, enzymes, infants, children,
elderly, stressor, age, race, diet, metabolism, genetic pre-disposition, genetic polymorphisms, sex, ethnic
groups, susceptibility, cumulative effects)

     Chemicals, toxics, toxic substances: (chemicals, toxics, particulates, ODS, VOC, CFC, PAH, PNA,
PCB, dioxin, metals, heavy metals, solvents, oxidants, nitrogen oxides, sulfates, organics, DNAPL,
NAPL, pathogens, viruses, bacteria, acid rain, effluent, discharge, dissolved solids, intermediates)

     Ecosystem Protection: (ecosystem, indicators, restoration, regionalization, scaling, terrestrial,
aquatic, habitat, integrated assessment)

     Risk Management: pollution prevention (green chemistry, life-cycle analysis, alternatives, sustain-
able development, clean technologies, innovative technology, renewable, waste reduction, waste minimi-
zation, environmentally conscious  manufacturing); treatment (remediation, bioremediation, cleanup,
incineration, disinfection, oxidation, restoration)

     Public Policy: (public policy, decision making, community-based, cost-benefit, conjoint analysis,
observation, non-market valuation, contingent valuation, survey, psychological, preferences, public good,
Bayesian, socio-economic, willingness-to-pay, compensation, conservation, environmental assets, socio-

     Scientific Disciplines: (environmental chemistry, marine science, biology, physics, engineering,
social science, ecology, hydrology, geology, histology, epidemiology, genetics, pathology, mathematics,
limnology, entomology, zoology)

     Methods/Techniques: (EMAP, modeling, monitoring, analytical, surveys, measurement methods,
general circulation models, climate models, satellite, landsat, remote sensing)

     Geographic Areas: (Northeast, central, Northwest, Chesapeake Bay, Great Lakes, Midwest, Mid-
Atlantic, states: {use both full name and two letter abbreviation}, EPA Regions 1 through 10)

     Sectors: (agriculture, business, transportation, industry {petroleum, electronics, printing,
etc}:{identify 4 digit SIC codes}, service industry, food processing, etc)
 NCERQA Form 3 (8/97)  For use with EPA STAR Grant Applications

                                   Current and Pending Support
         The following information should be provided for aacfi investigator and other senior personnel. Failure to provide tho nforrrialion may delay comideration of Ida proposal.
                                               Other agencies (including NSF) to which this proposal has been/mil be submitted.
Support:      D Current     D  Pending    D Submission Planned in Near Future   D Transfer of Support
Project/Proposal Title:
Source of Support:
Total Award Amount: $
Location of Project:
Person-Months Per Year Committed to the Project.
              Total Award Period Covered:
Support:      D Current
Project/Proposal Title:
D Pending    D Submission Planned in Near Future  D Transfer of Support
Source of Support:
Total Award Amount: $
Location of Project:
Person-Months Per Year Committed to the Project.
              Total Award Period Covered:
Support:      D Current
Project/Proposal Title:
D Pending    D Submission Planned in Near Future  D Transfer of Support
Source of Support:
Total Award Amount:  $
Location of Project:
Person-Months Per Year Committed to the Project.
              Total Award Period Covered:
Support:      D Current
Project/Proposal Title:
D Pending    D Submission Planned in Near Future  D Transfer of Support
Source of Support:
Total Award Amount: $
Location of Project:
Person-Months Per Year Committed to the Project.
              Total Award Period Covered:
Support:      D Current     D Pending    D  Submission Planned in Near Future   D Transfer of Support
Project/Proposal Title:
Source of Support:
Total Award Amount:  $
Location of Project:
Person-Months Per Year Committed to the Project.
              Total Award Period Covered:
*lf this project has previously been funded by another agency, please list and furnish information tor immediately preceding funding period.
NSF Form 1239 (7/95) For use with EPA STAR Grant Applications
                                           USE ADDITIONAL SHEETS AS NECESSARY


Itemized Budget for EPA STAR Grant Applications (Example Format)
a. Personnel
Principal Investigator
Research Scientists
Postdoctoral Scientists
Other Personnel
b. Fringe Benefits

c. Travel
Trip 1
Trip I
Trip 1
d. Equipment
Item 1
Item 2
Item 3
e. Supplies
Item I
Item 2
Item 3
f. Contracts
g. Other
Item 1
Item 2
Item 3
I (sum of a-g)
I i. Indirect Costs/Charges
• % of (base)

1 (sum of h & i)




NCERQA Form 4 (4/97) For EPA STAR Gram Applications
                        DO NOT USE THIS FORM -- Example Only -


? o
o 3
3 ?
6) O