United States Science Advisory EPA-SAB-EC-00-014
Environmental Board (1400A) August 2000
Protection Agency Washington DC ww.epa.gov/sab
AN SAB REPORT:
RECOMMENDATIONS ON
THE 1999 SCIENTIFIC AND
TECHNOLOGICAL
ACHIEVEMENT (STAA)
AWARD NOMINATIONS
A REPORT BY THE SCIENTIFIC
AND TECHNOLOGICAL
ACHIEVEMENT AWARDS
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD
-------
August 14, 2000
EPA-SAB-EC-00-014
Honorable Carol M. Browner
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20460
Subject: Science Advisory Board (SAB) Award Recommendations for the 1999
Scientific and Technological Achievement Awards (STAA) Program
Dear Ms. Browner:
The Science Advisory Board's (SAB) Scientific and Technological Achievement Awards
(STAA) Subcommittee has completed its review of the nominations submitted by the Agency for the
1999 awards program. The Subcommittee conducted its review in closed session on June 22-23,
2000 in Washington, DC. The results of the Subcommittee's efforts were reviewed and approved by
the Science Advisory Board's Executive Committee at a public meeting held in the Environmental
Research Center in RTF, NC on July 12-13, 2000.
As you are aware, the STAA program is sponsored by the Office of Research and
Development (ORD), which continues to do a creditable job in soliciting and assembling these
nominations. Each year (except for 1995 during the government-wide shutdown) the Board convenes
a special panel to review nominated papers published by Agency researchers. Our recommendations
for awards and further improvements in the STAA program are discussed in the enclosed report.
The Agency solicited nominations in eleven categories this year: Control Systems & Technology
(CS), Ecology & Ecosystem Risk Assessment (EC), Health Effects & Health Risk Assessment (HE),
Monitoring & Measurement Methods (MM), Transport & Fate (TF), Review Articles (RA), Risk
Management and Policy Formulation (RM), Integrated Risk Management (IR), Environmental Trends
for Drivers of Future Risk (ET), Social Science Research (SS), and Environmental Education (EE).
Agency scientists and engineers submitted a total of 102 nominations from among the first nine
-------
categories. Nominations were not submitted for the last two categories this year (SS, and EE). During
its review, the Subcommittee recommended that several individual nominations be combined and/or re-
categorized. A total of 41 were recommended for an award.
Recommendations are included for awards in seven of the nine categories for which
nominations were submitted. Several nominations were submitted in the Environmental Trends for
Drivers of Future Risk (ET) and Integrated Risk Management (IR) categories, and while awards were
not recommended for these nominations, the Subcommittee was encouraged to see nominations in
these categories and hopes to see additional nominations in the future. In addition, the Subcommittee is
recommending 20 papers for Honorable Mention. The authors recommended for awards this year are
from 12 research laboratories and centers within the Office of Research and Development, and from
Region VI.
The Subcommittee continues to encourage the Agency to nominate peer-reviewed papers from
all programs and areas of scientific and technological research because scientific and technological
achievements in these areas should not be limited to ORD laboratories. The process of publishing EPA
scientific findings in peer reviewed journals enhances the rigor of the science and the reputation of the
Agency and its programs. Managers should encourage and provide the opportunities for their program
scientists and engineers to conduct challenging investigations and publish the data and technical analysis
which address aspects of the Agency's policies and regulations.
As we have pointed out in each of our recent reports, the Subcommittee noted with great
disappointment, the lack of a significant number of nominations from Program areas other than ORD.
Nevertheless, the Subcommittee commends the staff of ORD for administering the STAA program.
The ORD staff has made significant improvements in the program and in the nomination packages
which have facilitated the Subcommittee's review procedures. The Subcommittee strongly
recommends that ORD management continue to solicit participation of other Agency scientists and
engineers as part of the Agency's goals to improve its scientific underpinnings and peer review of
regulatory science. We recommend that ORD continue to announce this program early and that
additional efforts be made to advertise it even more broadly next year to ensure greater participation by
all program areas of the Agency.
The Subcommittee continues to feel that the STAA program is an important mechanism for
recognizing and promoting high quality, peer-reviewed work published in top scientific and
technological journals. This is even more critical as Agency programs continue to improve their overall
commitment to, and compliance with your Peer Review Policy and the Agency's Peer Review
Handbook. Furthermore, it supports your emphasis on sound science forming the basis for sound
decisions.
We are pleased to have participated in this process once again and believe it is appropriate for
the Board to continue this annual review function. We would appreciate being
-------
informed of the final disposition of awards. We look forward to serving the Agency again in this
important activity.
Sincerely,
/s/
Dr. Morton Lippmann, Interim Chair
Science Advisory Board
/s/
Dr. C. H. Ward, Chair
Scientific and Technological Achievement
Awards Subcommittee
Science Advisory Board
-------
NOTICE
This report has been written as part of the activities of the Science Advisory Board, a public
advisory group providing extramural scientific information and advice to the Administrator and other
officials of the Environmental Protection Agency. The Board is structured to provide balanced, expert
assessment of scientific matters related to problems facing the Agency. This report has not been
reviewed for approval by the Agency and, hence, the contents of this report do not necessarily
represent the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor of other agencies in the
Executive Branch of the Federal government, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products
constitute a recommendation for use.
Distribution and Availability: This Science Advisory Board report is provided to the EPA
Administrator, senior Agency management, appropriate program staff, interested members of the
-------
public, and is posted on the SAB website (www.epa.gov/sab). Information on its availability is also
provided in the SAB's monthly newsletter (Happenings at the Science Advisory Board). Additional
copies and further information are available from the SAB Staff.
ABSTRACT
This report represents the conclusions and recommendations of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency's Science Advisory Board regarding the 1999 EPA Scientific and Technological
Achievement Awards (STAA) Program. The STAA Program is an Agency-wide competition to
promote and recognize scientific and technological achievements by EPA employees, fostering a greater
exposure of EPA research to the public. The Program was initiated in 1980 and is managed by the
Office of Research and Development (ORD).
The Agency submitted for review 102 nominations from the first nine of the eleven award
categories this year (Control Systems & Technology, Ecology & Ecosystem Risk Assessment, Health
Effects & Health Risk Assessment, Monitoring & Measurement Methods, Transport & Fate, Review
Articles, Risk Management and Policy Formulation, Integrated Risk Management, Environmental
Trends for Drivers of Future Risk, Social Science Research, and Environmental Education). Of these,
the Subcommittee recommended 41 nominations (40 percent of the nominations) for awards at two of
the three levels and also recommended that twenty additional papers be recognized with Honorable
Mention. The Subcommittee encouraged the Agency to continue support for the STAA program as a
mechanism for recognizing and promoting high quality research in support of the Agency's mission.
KEY WORDS: Awards, Technology, Scientific Achievements, Peer-Review
-------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD
1999 SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL
ACHIEVEMENT AWARDS SUBCOMMITTEE ROSTER
June 22-23, 2000 Meeting
CHAIR
Dr. C. H. (Herb) Ward, Foyt Family Chair of Engineering, Director, Energy & Environmental
Systems Institute, Professor, Departments of Environmental Science & Engineering and
Ecology & Evolutionary Biology, Rice University, Houston, TX
MEMBERS/CONSULTANTS ATTENDING THE MEETING
Dr. Roger Cochran, Staff Toxicologist, Medical Toxicology Branch, Department of Pesticide
Regulation, California EPA, Sacramento, CA
Dr. Fred Pohland, Professor and Weidlein Chair of Environmental Engineering, University of
Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA
Dr. Deborah Cory-Siechta, Professor, Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, and Chair,
Department of Environmental Medicine, University of Rochester Medical School, Rochester,
NY
Dr. Richard T. Di Giulio, Professor, Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University, Durham,
NC
Dr. Allan Legge, President, Biosphere Solutions, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Dr. William Smith, Professor, School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Yale University, New
Haven, CT
Dr. Michael Trehy, Senior Research Specialist, Solutialnc., St. Louis, MO
Dr. Judith S. Weis, Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, Rutgers University, Newark, NJ
SCIENCE ADVISORY BOARD STAFF
Mr. A. Robert Flaak, Designated Federal Officer, Science Advisory Board (1400A), U.S. EPA,
Washington, DC 20460
111
-------
Mrs. Mary Winston, Management Assistant, Science Advisory Board (1400A), U.S. EPA,
Washington, DC 20460
IV
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
2. INTRODUCTION 2
2.1 Request for Science Advisory Board (SAB) Review 2
2.2 Subcommittee Review Procedures 3
3. EVALUATION OF THE 1999 SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL ACHIEVEMENT
AWARD NOMINATIONS 6
3.1 General Findings of the Subcommittee 6
3.2 STAA Program Administrative Recommendations 7
3.3 Award Recommendations 8
3.3.1 Level I Awards 9
3.3.2 Level II Awards 9
3.3.3 Level IE Awards 9
3.3.4 Honorable Mention 10
Appendix A - Re-Categorized Nominations and Combined-Award Recommendations A-1
Appendix B - Nominations Recommended for Awards B-l
TABLES
Table I - Example of how Initial Individual Reviewer Rankings are Compiled 4
Table II - Summary of 1999 Award Recommendations 9
-------
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Scientific and Technological Achievement Awards (STAA) Subcommittee of the Science
Advisory Board (SAB) reviewed and evaluated the 102 nominations for the 1999 program that were
submitted by EPA research laboratory directors and program office directors. The Subcommittee met
in Washington, DC, on June 22-23, 2000, to determine award recommendations.
The STAA review program is a long-standing partnership between the Agency and the Science
Advisory Board. Each year since 1980 Agency scientists and engineers have submitted nominated
scientific and technological papers through an internal Agency review process managed by the Office of
Research and Development (ORD). (Note: The Agency did not conduct the STAA Program during
1995 when there was a government-wide shutdown.) This review process ensures that the best
scientific papers are submitted to the SAB for evaluation in the awards process. The SAB convenes an
experienced group of scientists and engineers who meet in a closed meeting to review and evaluate the
nominations. The SAB review panel produces a set of award recommendations which ORD uses in
preparing the actual awards.
This year, the Subcommittee recommended 41 nominations for awards and recommended that
20 additional papers be recognized with Honorable Mention. The Subcommittee applied the evaluation
criteria evenly across all nomination categories, without attempting to ensure equal numbers or
percentages of awards in each category. The Subcommittee recommended awards for nominations
from 12 research laboratories and centers within the Office of Research and Development, and one
nomination submitted by Region VI.
The Subcommittee recommends that continued attention be paid to providing opportunities for
EPA's scientists, engineers, and other technical personnel to conduct challenging, soundly based studies
that result in peer-reviewed papers having high impact on important scientific issues and issues of
specific importance to EPA
-------
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 Request for Science Advisory Board (SAB) Review
At the request of the Office of Research and Development (ORD), the Science Advisory
Board convened a subcommittee to review and evaluate scientific and technological papers published in
peer-reviewed journals by EPA authors and nominated for the 1999 EPA Scientific and Technological
Achievement Awards (STAA) program. The STAA Subcommittee was asked to evaluate nominated
papers for awards based on the rules developed by ORD. In January 1999, the Office of Research
and Development (ORD) provided the SAB with copies of 102 nominations. The Subcommittee used
the 1998 STAA Nomination Procedures and Guidelines, which describes the award levels, eligibility
criteria (including the minimum EPA contribution and employer status of the principal author), and the
criteria the SAB should use to evaluate the nominations. Although there are eleven nomination
categories, ORD only received nominations in nine categories this year. ORD grouped the papers into
these nine categories of science and technology1, and screened the papers for conformance with the
nomination guidelines. No nominations were submitted in the other two categories this year.2
As described in the 1998 STAA Nomination Procedures and Guidelines, the SAB was asked
to recommend papers for each of three Levels of Award.
a) Level I awards - are for nominees who have accomplished an exceptionally
high-quality research or technological effort with national significance. These
awards recognize the initiation or general revision of scientific/technological
principles or procedures, or highly significant improvement in the value of a
device, activity, program, or service to the public. It must be at least of national
significance or have high impact on a broad area of science/technology. The
nomination must be of far reaching consequences and recognizable as a major
scientific/technological achievement within its discipline or field of study. The
cash award for this level is $5,000 divided among the EPA eligible authors,
based on their individual level of effort as defined in the nomination.
b) Level U awards - are for nominees who have accomplished a notably excellent
research or technological effort that has qualities and values similar to, but to a
lesser degree, than those described under Level I. It must have timely
These categories are: Control Systems & Technology (CS), Ecology & Ecosystem Risk Assessment (EC), Health
Effects & Health Risk Assessment (HE), Monitoring & Measurement Methods (MM), Transport & Fate (TF), Review Articles (RA),
Risk Management and Policy Formulation (RM), Integrated Risk Management (IR), and Environmental Trends for Drivers of Future
Risk (ET).
These categories are: Environmental Education (EE) and Social Science Research (SS).
-------
consequences and contribute as an important scientific/technological
achievement within its discipline or field of study. The cash award for this level
is $2,500 divided among the EPA eligible authors, based on their individual
level of effort as defined in the nomination.
c) Level HI awards - are for nominees who have accomplished an unusually
notable research or technological effort. The nomination can be for a
substantial revision or modification of a scientific/technological principle or
procedure, or an important improvement to the value of a device, activity,
program, or service to the public. Research for this award must relate to a
mission or organizational component of the EPA, or significantly affect a
relevant area of science/technology. The cash award for this level is $1,000
divided among the EPA eligible authors, based on their individual level of effort
as defined in the nomination.
d) Honorable Mention - The Subcommittee has also added a fourth non-cash
level award for nominations which are noteworthy but which do not warrant a
Level I, n or m award. Honorable Mention applies to nominations that: (1)
may not quite reach the level described for a Level m award; (2) show a
promising area of research that the Subcommittee wants to encourage; or (3)
show an area of research that the Subcommittees feels is too preliminary to
warrant an award recommendation (yet).
2.2 Subcommittee Review Procedures
The Review Panel was convened as an ad hoc subcommittee of the Science Advisory Board
(SAB). Membership included a significant number of reluming STAA panelists; consequently, the level
of experience with the process matched the level of scientific and technical expertise. In addition, many
panelists hold editorial positions on highly regarded scientific journals.
Copies of all nominations/papers and the award program guidelines and nomination evaluation
criteria were provided to Subcommittee members in advance of the review meeting. Subcommittee
members selected nominations/papers to review based on their expertise, being sure to select, when
appropriate, papers from across all nomination categories. Typically, each member chose at least 30
nominations to review. Members were encouraged to include nominations from areas of general
expertise as well as areas in which they were most familiar. As part of the evaluation, Subcommittee
members were asked to rank their own expertise in the field of science and technology addressed by
each nomination they selected for review. These rankings were considered by the Subcommittee
during the evaluation of each nomination. Each nomination was reviewed by at least three qualified
Subcommittee members and then presented to the full Subcommittee and discussed during the review
and evaluation meeting that was held in Washington, DC on June 22-23, 2000. Nominations judged to
-------
merit an award at some level were reviewed a second time by the Subcommittee, and in some cases, a
third time, to ensure that a complete evaluation had been made and that the appropriate award level
was recommended. Nominations that were initially not recommended for an award were also re-
reviewed to determine if the nomination might merit either an Honorable Mention or numerical award.
In reviewing the nominations, the Subcommittee members qualitatively considered evaluation
criteria factors such as: the overall impact of the nominated paper(s) on scientific knowledge or
technology relevant to environmental issues; the level of effort; the creativity, originality, initiative, and
problem solving exhibited by the researchers; the beneficial impacts of the accomplishments and the
recognition of the results outside the Agency; the extent to which an Agency function, mission, program,
activity, or service is improved; and the nature and extent of the peer review, including the stature of the
journal.3
Prior to the review and evaluation meeting, Subcommittee members forwarded the results of
their review to the Designated Federal Officer (DFO) for the Subcommittee. The initial ranking along
with the self-professed expertise of each reviewer for that particular nomination was compiled by the
DFO in a tabular format (see Table I for an example) and then
Table I - Example of how Initial Individual Reviewer Rankings are
Compiled (Data for illustration purposes only)
Nomination
Number
HE9999
EC9999
RA9999
Title of
Nomination
Health
Assessment:
Trinitrochicken
wire
Ecological
Impacts of
Trinitrochicken
wire
Trinitrochicken
wire - A Review
Reviewer
Name
Dr. Smith
Dr. Jones
Dr. Adams
Dr. Smith
Dr. Jones
Dr. Adams
Dr. Williams
Dr. Black
Dr. Green
Dr. Jackson
Dr. White
Expertise *
2
3
4
4
3
2
3
3
4
2
1
Initial
Individual
Ranking
NR
III
NR
NR
III
III
III
I
I
II
NR
Final Ranking
(at meeting)
NR
III
I
These criteria are discussed more fully in section VII of the 1998 Nomination Procedures and Guidelines provided to
the Subcommittee by the Agency.
-------
* Expertise levels are rated as follows: 1 = not related to major discipline of reviewer; 2 = general
knowledge of research area; 3 = general knowledge of active research; and 4 = specific area of active
research. NR = Not Recommended for an award.
used at the review and evaluation meeting to help focus the discussion on each individual nomination.
Initial individual rankings were subject to change based on discussions at the review and evaluation
meeting. The final ranking agreed to at that meeting is a consensus ranking. The examples given in
Table I are illustrative. All nominations receiving a recommendation for a Level I, n or m award or an
Honorable Mention are listed in Appendix B.
The Subcommittee met on June 22-23, 2000, in Washington, DC in a closed session due to the
discussions of issues concerning personal privacy and potential cash awards. Consistent with the
requirements of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public Law 92-463) 5 U.S.C. App.2, and
sections 552(b)(2) and (b)(6) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(2) and 552(b)(6),
this closed meeting was announced in a Federal Register4 notice signed by the EPA Administrator. All
Subcommittee members were present at the meeting. The Subcommittee developed preliminary ratings
for papers in each category, including discussion of each nominated paper. The Subcommittee made
note of papers that had been incorrectly categorized, so that the final report recommendations would
accurately reflect the subject areas of the nominated papers (see Appendix A). After completing all
preliminary evaluations, the Subcommittee revisited the recommendations category by category to
resolve any final issues and ensure consistency in applying the award criteria across categories.
This Subcommittee report was reviewed and approved by the SAB's Executive Committee
(EC) at its public meeting on July 12-13, 2000 in Research Triangle Park, NC. For that review, the
Subcommittee report, less the actual award recommendations (Appendix B), was made available to the
EC and the interested public.
4 65 Federal Register 36134, June 7, 2000.
-------
3. EVALUATION OF THE 1999 SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL
ACHIEVEMENT AWARD NOMINATIONS
3.1 General Findings of the Subcommittee
Based on the continuing decline of recommendations for Level I awards (four in 1996; three in
1997; one in 1998, and none this year) and Level n awards (16 in 1996; 11 in 1997; seven in 1998,
and five this year), the Subcommittee felt that the overall quality of the papers nominated this year was
not comparable to previous years. Hence, the Agency should view this report as a possible early
warning that efforts are needed to improve the quality of its in-house research. The STAA program is
an important mechanism for recognizing and promoting high quality, peer-reviewed work published in
top scientific and technological journals. The STAA Program can also serve as a benchmark for the
quality of the research produced by the Agency since the same metrics and level and breadth of
expertise of reviewers (Subcommittee members) are used each year. The authors whose papers were
recommended for awards this year represent 12 research laboratories and centers within the Office of
Research and Development, and Region VI.
The Subcommittee recommends that ORD continue to request the submission of nominations
early, and that ORD advertise the program more aggressively, so that Regional and Program offices
have adequate time to prepare their nominations. The limited number of nominations from outside of
ORD was again a disappointment to the Subcommittee; however, the increase to five nominations was
an improvement over last year. While we recognize that most of the in-house research is conducted by
ORD scientists in ORD laboratories, the submission process needs to encourage submissions from
outside of ORD as well.
The Subcommittee also encourages the Agency to continue to broaden the scope of nominated
papers and to promote multi-disciplinary research that directly supports risk management and policy
decisions. In evaluating nominations for awards, the Subcommittee looked for papers with well-
developed hypotheses, good sampling or experimental design, and where the theoretical basis is
verified by field validation or thorough testing of a model. We also looked for innovative applications of
theories from other disciplines and collaborations of interdisciplinary teams of scientists and engineers.
In addition, the Subcommittee encourages the submission of nominations which address exposure
assessment.
In order to evaluate papers that present incremental results in a series of published works, the
Subcommittee recommends that the nomination guidelines prepared by ORD explicitly require
discussion of related research published previously by the lead author(s), including information on any
STAA awards given. When possible, and within the limitations suggested in Section 3.2a), nominations
should include all papers in a series, providing they are within the time limit. This would allow a series
of incremental studies to be evaluated for an award as a package.
-------
Once again this year, the Subcommittee has recommended awards in the Risk Management
and Policy Formulation category. The Subcommittee hopes to see more peer reviewed papers
nominated in this category next year, as this is an important area of research for the Agency. In
addition, two papers were submitted in the Integrated Risk Assessment category, and while an award
was not recommended, the Subcommittee was encouraged to see nominations in this category and
hopes to see additional nominations in the future. The Subcommittee feels that the process of
converting Agency policy analysis and the technical foundations of its rule making into scientific articles
for peer review is essential to maintain the quality in its science. This is also an important way to
improve the Agency's reputation for scientific achievement. Laboratory directors and program
managers should encourage the authors of policy formulation papers and regulatory impact analyses to
develop technical articles for peer reviewed literature.
The focus of nominated papers should be on investigation and the creation of new technology
and scientific and technical knowledge and information, rather than the reporting and communication of
existing information, such as describing environmental regulations or current methods for pollution
control. While such papers are extremely valuable and important for the agency, and the articles may
be well-written and effective, they do not really fit within the purview of achievements in science and
technology. The STAA Program is designed to recognize accomplishments in science and technology,
hence, nominations in these fields and others should be focused on the new significant scientific
knowledge developed by the Agency in these fields. Review articles with new and useful analysis and
synthesis of existing information also are important; and in fact, several were recognized this year.
Finally, the Subcommittee believes that the STAA program provides one view of the technical
and scientific progress that the Agency is making in various areas of research. This year's activities
represent strengths in a variety of technological assessments, analytical measurements, and in certain
areas of human health effects research.
3.2 STAA Program Administrative Recommendations
The Subcommittee commends the staff of ORD for administering the STAA program. The staff
has made significant improvements in the program and the nomination packages that have facilitated the
Subcommittee's review procedures. The Subcommittee recommends that ORD management continue
to solicit participation of other Agency scientists and engineers as part of the Agency's goals to improve
its scientific underpinnings and peer review of regulatory science.
Last year, the Subcommittee made a number of recommendations to ORD staff and managers
that work with the STAA program, and to the authors of the nominated papers. We are pleased to see
that many of these recommendations have already been implemented. In addition, we note that at this
year's review meeting on June 22-23, 2000, ORD provided us with a revised nomination package in
advance of the 2000 Awards program for our review and comment. We note the great improvement in
the package with regard to the guidance supplied and the format of the application form. We
7
-------
appreciate the effort to accommodate our recommendations and, as a result, look forward to an even
more improved program next year. We offer the following additional recommendations and/or
comments:
a) Review articles (Category RA) should continue to include a synthesis and an
analysis, not just a summary of relevant literature. It is clear from the number of
Review Articles that garnered awards this year (six out of the nine submitted)
that the quality of these papers has improved.
b) Regarding the application form itself - the section on "Justification" has eight
numbered sections for information relevant to the author or the nomination. In
previous recommendations, we have suggested certain areas of emphasis and
limitation for these sections, limiting the discussion(s) to about a page. This
suggestion was made to staff when we reviewed the draft FY2000 Nomination
Package.
c) The suggested citations provided for many of the nominations need to reflect
the value of the work to the Agency. Many of this year's submissions merely
contained a statement that reflected the nature of the research without any
indication of the value of the work.
d) The Subcommittee again urges the Agency to publicize the names of the award
winning scientists and engineers and their papers both within the Agency and
outside the Agency in a variety of ways. For example, the Agency should
announce these winners by placing the title and abstract of their papers, along
with the source of the paper, on the Agency's Website. The Agency should
also develop press releases or letters from the Administrator that are targeted
toward the journal that published the articles, professional society newsletters,
and local newspapers in the vicinity of the scientist/engineer's research facility.
To date, the Subcommittee has not received any feedback from the Agency
regarding how this is handled.
3.3 Award Recommendations
The EPA authors recommended for awards include scientists and engineers from 12 research
laboratories and centers within the Office of Research and Development, and from Region VI. See the
detailed breakout of authors in Appendix B for further clarification.
Awards were recommended in seven of the eleven nomination categories, and for seven of the
nine categories for which nominations were submitted. A total of 41 nominations were recommended
for awards. A summary of the distribution of award recommendations
-------
TABLE II - Summary of 1999 Award Recommendations
Nomination Categories *
Control Systems & Technology
Ecology, Ecosystem Risk Assessment
& Protection
Health Effects, Health Risk
Assessment
Monitoring & Measurement Methods
Transport and Fate
Review Articles
Risk Management & Policy
Formulation
Integrated Risk Assessment
Environmental Trends
TOTALS:
#
Nom.
16
20
20
19
13
9
2
2
1
102
Award Levels
I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
II
0
2
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
5
III
3
10
8
7
1
5
2
0
0
36
Tot
3
12
9
7
2
6
2
0
0
41
%
19%
60%
45%
37%
15%
67%
100%
0
0
40%
Hon.
Men.
3
3
2
5
5
0
0
1
1
20
* Categories listed in the "1998 Nomination Procedures and Guidelines.'
among categories is presented in Table n. There were 102 nominations with over 100 individual
papers submitted. The Subcommittee recommended that several individual nominations be combined
and that several be re-categorized. Of those submitted, 61 were recommended for an award (41) or
honorable mention (20). Re-categorized or combined nominations are identified in Appendix A. The
full list of award recommendations is contained in Appendix B. Eligible authors are noted in boldface in
Appendix B. The percentage figure following their names reflects their individual level of effort on a
given nomination as provided by EPA.
3.3.1 Level I Awards
No Level I awards were recommended this year.
3.3.2 Level n Awards
Five Level n awards were recommended. Please see pages B-l through B-2 of Appendix B
for details.
-------
10
-------
3.3.3 Level HI Awards
Thirty-six Level m awards were recommended. Please see pages B-2 through B-l 1 of
Appendix B for details.
3.3.4 Honorable Mention
Twenty nominations were judged as being worthy of an Honorable Mention. Please see pages
B-l 1 through B-17 of Appendix B for details.
A list of acronyms used in Table B is on page B-17.
11
-------
Appendix A - Re-Categorized Nominations and Combined-Award
Recommendations
Original
Category &
Nomination
Number
Recommended
New Category
Remarks/Recommendations
CS0006
RA0006
Change in category only
CS0016
ET0016
ET101
n.c.
We recommend that these two nominations be recognized
together (under category ET) for an Honorable Mention (See
Appendix B).
EC0022
n.c.
EC0026
n.c.
We recommend that these two nominations be recognized
together (under category EC) for a Level in Award (See
Appendix B).
MM0069
n.c.
MM0070
n.c.
We recommend that these two nominations be recognized
together (under category MM) for a Level in Award (See
Appendix B).
RA0090
RM0090
RM0098
n.c.
We recommend that these two nominations be recognized
together (under category RM) for a Level in Award (See
Appendix B).
n.c. - no change
A-l
-------
Appendix B - Nominations Recommended for Awards
This Appendix identifies the 41 nominations recommended for Level n, and m awards (there
were no Level I recommendation) and the 19 nominations recommended for an Honorable Mention.
This Appendix is divided into four parts. The first part (page B-l) provides information on the Level I
award recommendations. The second part (pages B-l to B-2) provides information on the Level n
award recommendations. The third part (pages B-2 to B-l 1) provides information on the Level m
award recommendations. The fourth part (pages B-l 1 to B-l7) provides information on the
Honorable Mention recommendations.
The first column (Nom. #) gives the nomination number as provided by EPA in the original
submission. The second column (Titles and Citations of Submitted Papers) provides the full title
and citation of all papers submitted as part of a given nomination. The third column (Authors and
Nominating Organization) provides the name(s) of the EPA eligible authors (in boldface type) along
with their level of effort (percentage) on the nomination. The primary nominating organization is also
listed. The fourth column (Recommended Award Level) indicates which award is recommended
(Level I, n, or m or Honorable Mention). The last column (Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization) reflects the language of the citation that was provided to the Subcommittee by the
Agency. These are not Subcommittee citations.
-------
Appendix B -
FY1999 Scientific and Technological Achievement Awards (STAA)
Nominations Recommended for Awards
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
Nominations Recommended for a Level I Award ($5,000) - None
None
Nominations Recommended for a Level II Award ($2,500) - Total of Five
EC0018
Potential Relative Future Effects of
Sulfur and Nitrogen Deposition on Lake
Chemistry in the Adirondack Mountains.
Water Resources Research, 35(7):2199-
2211 (1999)
Dr. M. Robbins Church (50%)
NHEERL, CorvaUis, OR
LEVEL H
For outstanding contribution to the comparative
prediction of future effects of acidic deposition on
lake chemistry.
EC0034
GIS-Based Evaluation of Salmon Habitat
in the Pacific Northwest.
Photogrammetric Engineering and
Remote Sensing, 63(10):1219-1229
(1997)
Mr. Ross S. Lunetta (50%)
NERL,RTP,NC
LEVELH
None given
HE0043
AhR, ARNT, and CYP1A1 mRNA
quantitation in Cultured Human
Embryonic Palates Exposed to TCDD and
Comparison with Mouse Palate in vivo
and in Culture. Toxicological Sciences.
47(l):62-75 (1999)
(Three additional papers were part of this
nomination)
Dr. Barbara D. Abbott (20%)
Ms. Angela R. Buckalew (20%)
Ms. Carmen R. Wood (10%)
Dr, Gary A. Held (10%)
Dr. Linda S. Birnbaum (5%)
Ms. Janet J. Diliberto (20%)
Ms. Judith E. Schmid (5%)
NHEERL, RTF, NC
LEVELH
Interspecies comparison of developmental toxicity
for human and mouse embryonic tissue: correlation
of tissue does and gene expression.
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-1
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
TF0079
Molecular Probe Techniques for the
Identification of Reductants in
Sediments: Evidence for Reduction of 2-
Chloroacetophenone by Hydride
Transfer. ES&T. 33(3):440-445 (1999)
Dr. Eric J. Weber (30%)
NERL, Athens, GA
LEVEL H
For development of a new technique for identifying
naturally occurring reductants in anoxic
environments.
RA0091
Controlling Emissions from Fuel and
Waste Combustion. Controlling
Emissions from Fuel and Waste
Combustion 106(l):82-88 (1999)
Mr. Charles B. Sedman (100%)
NRMRL, RTF, NC
LEVELH
Promoting technical innovations to reduce toxic anc
acid gas emissions from combustion sources in a
simplified scheme.
Nominations Recommended for a Level HI Award ($1,000) - Total of Thirty-Six
CS0004
Scale model Studies of Mixing in
Drinking Water Storage Tanks. Jour.
Environ. Engineering. 125(8):755-761
(1999)
Dr. Lewis A. Rossman (80%)
NRMRL, Cincinnati, OH
LEVELm
For contributions to our understanding of how high
quality drinking water can be maintained in
distribution system storage facilities
CS0010
Evaluation of Tire-Derived Fuel for Use
in Nitrogen Oxide Reduction by
Reburning. J. Air & Waste MgmtAssoc.
48:729-735(19)
Dr. Charles A. Miller (45%)
Dr. Paul M. Lemieux (35%)
NRMRL, RTF, NC
LEVELm
For success in demonstrating tire-derived fuel as a
reburning fuel to lower both NO emissions and
scrap tire stocks
CS0014
Nanofiltration Foulants from a Treated
Surface Water. ES&T 32(22):3612-
3617(1998)
Dr. Thomas F. Speth (75%)
NRMRL, Cincinnati, OH
LEVELm
For excellence in environmental engineering
research
EC0017
Methodology for the Evaluation of
Cumulative Episodic Exposure to
Chemical Stressors in Aquatic Risk
Assessment. Environ. ToxicoL and
Chem. 19(4k):In Press (2000)
Dr. Michael G. Morton (60%)
Dr. Foster L. Mayer (20%)
EPA REGION 6, Dallas, TX
LEVELm
Advancement in Probabilistic Ecological Risk
Assessment Methodology
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-2
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
EC0020
Vitellogenin induction and reduced
serum testosterone concentrations in
feral male carp (Cvprinus carpio)
captured near a major metropolitan
sewage treatment plant. Environmental
Health Perspectives 104(10):1096-1101
(1996)
Dr. Leroy C. Folmar (50%)
LEVEL m
For outstanding research in documenting endocrine
disrupting effects in wild populations
NHEERL, Gulf Breeze, FL
EC0022
Refinement, Validation, and Application
of a Benthic Condition Index for
Northern Gulf of Mexico Estuaries.
Estuaries 22(3A):624-634 (1999)
Virginia D. Engle (60%)
J. Kevin Summers (40%)
NHEERL, Gulf Breeze, FL
LEVELm
Development of an indicator of biological condition
for estuaries using benthic macroinvertebrate
community parameters
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-3
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
EC0023
a) Reproductive Toxicity and Disposition
of 2,3,7,8 Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin in
Adult Brook Trout (Salvelinus
fontinalis) Following a Dietary Exposure.
Environ. ToxicoL Chem. 17(12) :2395-
2407(1998)
b) Toxicity of 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin to Early Life
stage Brook Trout Following Parental
Dietary Exposure. Environ. ToxicoL
Chem. 17(12):2408-2421 (1998)
c) Physiologically Based Toxicokinetic
Model for Maternal Transfer of 2,3,7,8
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin in Brook
Trout Environ. ToxicoL Chem.
17(12):2422-2434 (1998)
d) Comparative Toxicity of 2,3,7,8-
Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dixion to Seven
Freshwater Fish Species During Early
Life-Stage Development. Environ.
ToxicoL Chem. 17(3):472-483 (1998)
Dr. Rodney D. Johnson (17%)
Mr. Joseph E. Tietge (17%)
Dr. John W. Nichols (10%)
Dr. Philip M. Cook (10%)
Mr. Robert L. Spehar (7%)
Ms. Kathleen M. Jensen (6%)
Mr. Gary W. Holcombe (5%)
Dr. Joseph D. Fernandez (5%)
Dr. Russell J. Erickson (5%)
Mr. Douglas B. Lothenbach (5%)
Ms. Ann Linnum (3%)
Mr. David L. Lattier (2%)
Ms. Suzanne A. Christ (2%)
Ms. Denise A. Gordon (1%)
LEVEL m
A comprehensive reduction of uncertainties for the
prediction of the toxicity of TCDD to fish in
ecological risk assessments
NHEERL, Duluth, MN
EC0026
Estimating the ecological condition of the
estuaries of the Gulf of Mexico.
Environmental Monitoring and
Assessment. 57:59-83 (1999)
John M. Macauley (40%)
J. Kevin Summers (30%)
Virginia Engle (30%)
NHEERL, Gulf Breeze, FL
LEVELm
For creating the Nation's first comprehensive
assessment of the ecological condition of the Gulf oi
Mexico estuaries
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-4
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
EC0028
Nondestructive Indicator of
Ethoxyresorufin-o-deethylase Activity In
Embryonic Fish. Environ. ToxicoL
Ghent. 17(12).-2481-2486(1998)
Ms. Diane Nacci (20%)
Ms. Laura Coiro (20%)
Ms. Anne Kuhn (20%)
Ms. Denise Champlin (20%)
Dr. Wayne Munns (10%)
NHEERL, Naragansett, RI
LEVEL m
A simple, fluorescence method as a successful in
vivo indicator of Ah-receptor medicated effects in ar
embryonic fish
EC0029
An Integrated Evaluation of the
Persistence and Effects of 4-Nonylphenol
in an Experimental Littoral Ecosystem
Environ. ToxicoL Chem. 18(3):357-362
(1999)
Mr. Michael L. Knuth (331/3%)
Mr. Frank S. Stay (33 1/3%)
NHEERL, Duluth, MN
LEVELm
The study of the environmental distribution and
ecological effects of 4-nonylphenol in freshwater
habitats
EC0031
Soil-atmosphere exchange of methane in
adjacent cultivated and floodplain forest
soils. J. Geophysical Res.
104(D7):8161-8171 (1999)
Dr. Roger A. Burke (60%)
NERL, Athens, GA
LEVELm
For research on the impacts of landscape position
and disturbance on soil-atmosphere exchange of
methane in forest soils
EC0032
Peroxidases in Grass Dew Derived from
Guttation: Possible Role n
Polymerization of Soil Organic Matter.
Biogeochemistry 42(3):311-323 (1998)
Dr. Richard Zepp (40%)
NERL, Athens, GA
LEVELm
For innovative research into the role of atmospheric
hydrogen peroxide in the polymerization of organic
matter
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-5
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
EC0035
a)Effects of a Mixture of Non-ortAo-and
Mono-ortAo-polychlorinatedBiphenyis
on Reproduction in Fundulm
heteroclitm (Linnaeus) Environ.
ToxicoL Chem. 17(7): 1396-1404 (1998)
b)Reproduction and Polychlorinated
Biphenyls in Fundulm heteroclitus
(Linnaeus) from New Bedford Harbor,
MA, USA. Environ. ToxicoL Chem.
17(7):1405-1414 (1998)
Dr. Dianne E. Black (50%)
Dr. Richard J. Pruell (20%)
LEVEL m
PCB Effects on Fish Survival and Reproduction: A
Laboratory and Field Investigation ofFundulus
heteroclitus
NHEERL, Narragansett, RI
HE0039
Lung Tumorigenic Interactions in
Strain A/J Mice of Five Environmental
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons.
Environ. Health Perspectives. 106:1337-
1346(1998)
Dr. Stephen C. Nesnow (80%)
Dr. Marc J. Mass (10%)
Dr. Jeffrey A. Ross (10%)
Mr. Guy R. Lambert (10%)
NHEERL, RTF, NC
LEVELm
For reducing the uncertainties in default
assumptions and improving PAH risk assessment
HE0041
a)Increased specific airway reactivity of
persons with mild atopic allergic asthma
following 7.6 hr exposures to 0.16 ppm
ozone. J. Allergy and Clinical
Immunology (1999) In Press
b)Prolonged acute exposure to 0.16 ppm
ozone induces eosinophilic airway
inflammation in asthmatic subjects with
allergies. J. Allergy and Clinical
Immunology 100(6):802-808 (1997)
Dr. Howard Hehrl (20%)
Dr. Don Horstman (20%)
Dr. Lawrence Folinsbee (15%)
Dr. Robert Devlin (15%)
LEVELm
Asthmatics are more sensitive to ozone than healthy
individuals
NHEERL, RTF, NC
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-6
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
HE0046
Assessment of Human Exposure to
Ambient Particulate Matter. J. Air and
Waste Management Association
49(11): 174-185 (1999)
Dr. David T. Mage(50%)
Dr. William E. Wilson (25%)
Dr. Lester D. Grant (10%)
NCEA, RTP,NC
LEVEL m
For demonstrating that exposure to PM of ambient
origin is critical for understanding the health
effects of ambient PM
HE0049
Pulmonary Responses to Oil Fry Ash
Particles in the Rat Differ by Virtue of
Their Specific Soluble Metals. Toxicol.
Sci. 43(2):204-212 (1998)
Dr. Urmila P. Kodavanti (50%)
Mr. John K. McGee(10%)
Mr. Allen D.Ledbetter(5%)
Ms. Judy E. Richards (5%)
Dr. Daniel L. Costa(10%)
NHEERL, RTF, NC
LEVELm
Specificity of PM-Associated Metals in Determining
the Nature of Pulmonary Health Effects
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-7
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
HE0051
a)Long-term Ambient Ozone
Concentration and the incidence of
Asthma in Nonsmoking Adults: the
Ahsmog Study. Environ. Res. 80:110-
121 (1999)
b)Long-term inhalable particles and
Other Air Pollutants Related to
Mortality in Nonsmokers. Am. J. Respir.
and Critical Care Medicine 159:373-
282 (1999)
c)Long-term particulate and Other Air
Pollutants and Lung Function in
Nonsmokers. Ant. J. Respir. and
Critical Care Medicine 158:289-298
(1998)
d)Development of Chronic Productive
Cough as Associated with long-term
ambient inhalable Particulate Pollutants
in nonsmoking adults: the Ahsmog
Study. AppL Occupational and
Environ. Hygiene 13:444-452 (1998)
Dr. William F. McDonnell(35%)
LEVEL m
Epidemiologic Studies of the Health Effects of Long-
term Exposure to Ambient Air Pollutants
NHEERL, RTF, NC
HE0052
Distribution of Pesticides and Polycyclic
Aromatic Hydrocarbons in House Dust
as a Function of Particle Size. Environ.
Health Perspect. 107(9):721-726 (1999)
Dr. Robert G. Lewis (80%)
NERL, RTP,NC
LEVELm
For significant contributions to the characterizatior
of residential household dust and advancement of th
understanding of the associataed human exposure
risks, especially for small children
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-8
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
HE0054
a) Repeated Exposure of Adult Rate to
Aroclor 1254 Causes Brain Region-
Specific Changes in Intracellular Ca2+
Buffering and Protein Kinase C Activity
in the Absence of Changes in Tyrosine
Hydroxylase. ToxicoL AppL Pharmacol.
153(2):186-198 (1998)
b)Congener-Specific Distribution of
Polychlorinated Biphenyls in Brain
Regions, Blood, Liver, and Fat of Adult
Rats Following Repeated Exposure to
Aroclor 1254. ToxicoL AppL
Pharmacol 153(2)-.199-210 (1998)
Dr. Prasada Rao Kodavanti (30%)
Ms. Ethel C. Derr-Yellin(15%)
Dr. William R. Mundy (5%)
Dr. Timothy J. Shafer (5%)
Dr.DaveW.Herr(5%)
Dr. Stanley Barone, Jr. (5%)
Dr. Robert C. MacPhail (5%)
Mr. Thomas R. Ward (5%)
Dr. Hugh A. Tilson (5%)
LEVEL m
For highlighting the biological activity of individual
PCBs and PCB mixtures in the nervous system
NHEERL, RTF, NC
HE0056
Effects from environmental manganese
exposure: A review of the evidence fron
non-occupational exposure studies.
Neurotox. 20(2/3):379-400 (1999)
Dr. H. Kenneth Hudnell(50%)
NHEERL, RTF, NC
LEVELm
Adverse human-health effects from environmental
exposure to airborne manganese
MM0059
Near-real-time measurement of trace
volatile organic compounds from
combustion processes using an on-line
gas chromatograph. Waste
Management 18:403-410 (1998)
Mr. Jeffrey V. Ryan (60%)
Dr. Paul M. Lemieux (35%)
NRMRL, RTP,NC
LEVELm
Advancing the technology for monitoring trace level
VOCs from combustion sources
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-9
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
MM0068
Biogenic Fraction of Ambient VOC:
Comparison of Radiocarbon,
Chromatographic, and Emissions
Inventory Estimates for Atlanta, Georgia.
J. Air and Waste Management
Association 49(3).-299-30 7 (1999)
Dr. Charles W. Lewis (30%)
Mr. Robert K. Stevens (30%)
LEVEL m
For advancing the use of radiocarbon in quantifying
the contribution of biogenic emissions to ambient
VOC
NERL, RTF, NC
MM0069
Trends in Atmospheric Sulfur and
Nitrogen Species in the Eastern United
States for 1989-1995. Atmospheric
Environ. 33(l):37-49 (1998)
Dr. David M. Holland (40%)
Mr. Peter P. Principe (40%)
Dr. Joseph E. Sickles (20%)
NERL, RTF, NC
LEVELm
Estimation of emission-related trends in air quality
data
MM0070
Spatial Prediction of Sulfur Dioxide in
the Eastern United States. In: Spatial
Prediction of Sulfur Dioxide in the
Eastern United States, geoENVII -
Geostatistics for Environmental
Applications. Amsterdam, Khiwer
Academic Publishers (1999)pg 65-76.
Dr. David M. Holland (30%)
Dr. Lawrence H. Cox (30%)
LEVELm
Prediction of Spatial Patterns of Air Pollution
NERL, RTF, NC
MM0072
Isotope Dilution Analysis of Bromate in
Drinking Water Matrices by Ion
Chromatography with Inductively
Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometric
Detection. Anal Chem. 71(3):722-726
(1999)
Dr. John T. Creed (50%)
Ms. Carol A. Schwegel (50%)
NERL, Cincinnati, OH
LEVELm
None listed
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-10
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
MM0073
Identification of putative sequence
specific PCR primers for detection of the
toxigenic fungal species Stachybotys
chartarum. Molecular and Cellular
Probes 12:387-396 (1998)
Dr. Richard A. Haugland (90%)
NERL, Cincinnati, OH
LEVEL m
In recognition of research leading to the
development of improved technology for the detectioi
of hazardous microorganisms in the environment
MM0075
a)Analyses of Fish Tissue by Vacuum
Distillation/Gas Chromatography/ Mass
Spectrometry. Anal Chem. 69(6):1127-
1134(1997)
b)Bioconcentration Factors for Volatile
Organic Compounds in Vegetation.
Anal Chem. 70(5):851-856 (1998)
c)Leaves as an Indicator of Exposure to
Airborne Volatile Organic Compounds.
ES&TIn Press. (1999)
Dr. Michael H. Hiatt (100%)
LEVELm
Successfully applied vacuum distillation to
analyzing biota. Demonstrated its utility for
determining exposure to volatile pollutants
NERL, Las Vegas, NV
TF0076
An Assessment of Mercury-Species-
Dependent Binding with Natural
Organic Carbon. Speciation and
Bioavailability 10(4):127-136 (1999)
Dr. Nicholas T. Loux (100%)
NERL, Athens, GA
LEVELm
For contributing to the elucidation of the modes of
interaction of Mercury with natural organic matter
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-11
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
RA0090
Perchlorate Chemistry: Implications for
Analysis and Remediation.
Bioremediation Journal 2(2):81-95
(1998)
Mr. Edward T. Urbansky (100%)
NRMRL, Cincinnati, OH
LEVEL m
In recognition of reviewing the fundamental
chemistry of perchlorate, in furtherance of potable
water quality and safety
RA0093
a) Combining Environmental Information
I: Environmental Monitoring,
Measurement and Assessment.
Envirometrics 7(3):299-308 (1996)
b) Combining Environmental Information
II: Environmental Epidemiology and
Toxicology. Envirometrics 7(3):309-324
(1996)
Dr. Lawrence H. Cox (50%)
LEVELm
For advancing development and use of rigorous
quantitative methods for efficient combination of
environmental data and analyses
NERL, RTF, NC
RA0094
Biosensors for Field Analytical
Monitoring. Field Anal. Chem. &
Technol 2(6):317-331 (1998)
Dr. Kim R. Rogers (90%)
NERL, Las Vegas, NV
LEVELm
For contributions in the application of biosensors to
environmental monitoring
RA0095
Rodent Models of Cardiopulmonary
Disease: Their Potential Applicability in
Studies of Air Pollutant Susceptibility.
Environ. Health Perspect. 106(Suppl
1):111-130 (1998)
Dr. Urmila P. Kodavanti (60%)
Dr. Daniel L. Costa (30%)
NHEERL, RTF, NC
LEVELm
For the preparation of a comprehensive and critical
assessment of rodent models of carcinogenicity.
RA0096
Water Analysis. Anal. Chem.
71(12):181-215 (1999)
Dr. Susan D. Richardson (100%)
NERL, Athens, GA
LEVELm
State-of-science review of significant and new
analytical methods and studies related to Water
Analysis
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-12
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
RM0097
a)Salmon Policy: Science, Society,
Restoration, and Reality. Renewable
Resources Journal 17(2):6-16 (1999)
b)Fisheries Management: Integrating
Societal Preferences, Decision Analysis,
and Ecological Risk Assessment.
Environ. Science & Policy l(4):329-335
(1998)
Dr. Robert T. Lackey (100%)
LEVEL m
For scientific and technical achievement in
advancing understanding of salmon policy and
ecological risk assessment
NHEERL, Corvallis, OR
RM0098
Issues in Managing the Risks
Associated with Perchlorate in Drinking
Water. Jour. Environ. Manage. 56:79-
95 (1999)
Mr. Edward T. Urbansky (65%)
Mr. Michael Schock (35%)
NRMRL, Cincinnati, OH
LEVELm
For assessing technologies for treating perchlorate
tainted waters with respect to a comprehensive risk
management
Nominations Recommended for Honorable Mention (No Cash Award)- Total of Twenty
CS0002
Low Concentration Mercury Sorption
Mechanisms and Control by Calcium-
Based Sorbents: Application in Coal-
Fired Processes. JAWMA 48(1):1191-
1198 (1998)
Charles B. Sedman (75%)
NRMRL, RTF, NC
Honorable
Mention
Developing modified lime-based sorbents and
supporting the Agency in developing new mercury
emissions control strategies
CS0003
Mechanical Properties of Blends of
PAMAM Dendrimers with Poly(vinyl
chloride) and Poly(vinyl acetate). Jour.
Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer
Chemistry 36:2111-2117 (1998)
Mr. Carlos M. Nunez (70%)
NRMRL, RTF, NC
Honorable
Mention
Conducted innovative and cutting edge research on
the use of dendrimers, a unique and emerging class
of polymer structure, as rheology modifers in
coating formulations
CS0016
Photocatalytic Selective oxidation of
hydrocarbons in the aqueous phase.
Journal of Catalysts 183:159-162
(1998)
Michael Gonzalez (80%)
Subhas K. Sikdar (10%)
S. Garry Howell (10%)
NRMRL, Cincinnati, OH
Honorable
Mention
For demonstrating alternative environmentally
friendly chemical processes for the synthesis of
oxygenated chemicals
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-13
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
EC0019
a) Field Evaluation of the EPA (Kenga)
momogram, a method for estimating
wildlife exposure to pesticide residues on
plants. Environ. Toxicol. Ghent.
15(4):534-543 (1996)
b) Literature review and evaluation of the
EPA food-chain (Kenaga) nomogram, an
instrument for estimating pesticide
residues on plants. Environ. Toxicol.
Ghent. 13(9)-.1383-1391 (1994)
Dr. Thomas Pfleeger (35%)
Dr. John Fletcher (30%)
Honorable
Mention
Validation of the Kenaga Nomogram: A tool used in
ecological risk assessment
NHEERL, Corvallis, OR
EC0025
An analysis of the influence of annual
thermal variables on the occurrence of
fifteen warmwater fishes. Trans, of Ant.
Fish. Soc. 128(2):257-264 (1999)
Ms. Virginia M. Snarski (35%)
Mr. John G. Eaton (25%)
NHEERL, Duluth, MN
Honorable
Mention
Empirical models for predicting presence or absenc
of warmwater fishes from derived thermal regime
variables
EC0027
Emergy Analysis of Human Carrying
Capacity and Regional Sustainability:
An Example Using the State of Maine.
Environ. Monitor. & Assess. 51:531-569
(1998)
Dr. Daniel E. Campbell (100%)
NHEERL, Narragansett, RI
Honorable
Mention
For analysis of the sustainable human carrying
capacity of regions as illustrated by the State of
Maine
HE0045
In vitro methylation of inorganic arsenic
in mouse intestinal cecum. Toxicol.
AppL PharmacoL 147:101-109 (1997)
Dr. Larry L. Hall (25%)
Dr. S. Elizabeth George (25%)
Mr. Michael J. Kohan (25%)
Dr. David J. Thomas (10%)
NHEERL, RTF, NC
Honorable
Mention
For research on the metabolism of arsenicals by the
anaerobic microflora of the cecum of the mouse
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-14
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
HE0048
a) Ad m i n 1st ration of potentially
antiandrogenic pesticides (procymidone,
linuron, iprodione, chlozolinate, p,p'-
DDE, and ketoconazole) and toxic
substances (dibutyl- and diethylhexyl
phthalate, PCB 169, and ethane
dimethane sulphonate) during sexual
differentiation produces diverse profiles
of reproductive malformations in the
male rat. Toxicol. & Indmt. Health
15(1-2):94-118 (1999)
b)The fungicide procymidone alters
sexual differentiation in the male rat by
acting as an androgen-receptor
antagonist in vivo and in vitro. Toxicol.
& Indmt. Health 15(l-2):80-93 (1999)
c)Environmental antiandrogens: Low
doses of the fungicide vinclozolin alter
sexual differentiation of the male rat.
Toxicol & Indmt. Health 15(l-2):48-64
(1999)
d)Peripubertal exposure to the
antiandrogenic fungicide, vinclozolin,
delays, puberty, inhibits the development
of androgen-dependent tissues, and
alters androgen receptor function in the
male rat. Toxicol. & Indust. Health
15(l-2):65-79 (1999)
Dr. L. Earl Gray, Jr. (50%)
Ms. Cynthia Wolf (5%)
Ms. Christy Lambright (5%)
Mr. Matthew Price (5%)
Dr. Ralph L, Cooper (5%)
Mr. Joseph Ostby (20%)
Honorable
Mention
Antiandrogen pesticides and toxic substances indue
malformations and delay pubertal developent
NHEERL, RTF, NC
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-15
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
MM0061
Abbreviated Microwave Extraction of
Pesticides and PCBs in Soil.
Spectroscopy 13(10):41-50 (1997)
Mr. RickMcMillin (33%)
Mr. L. C. Miner (33%)
Mrs. Lisa Wool (33%)
Region 6, Houston, TX
Honorable
Mention
For the Recognition of the Contributions to the Fiel
of Microwave Extraction and Pollution Prevention
MM0064
Remediation at a Marine Superfund Site:
Surficial Sediment PCB Congener
Concentration, Composition, and
Redistribution. ES&T32:3496-3501
(1998)
Dr. Barbara J. Bergen (60%)
Dr. William G. Nelson (20%
NHEERL, Narmgansett, RI
Honorable
Mention
A novel approach to examine the spatial and tempora
variability in sediment PCB concentrations at a
marine Superfund site
MM0065
Benthic Biology Processes and E as a
Basis for a Benthic Index. Environ.
Monitoring and Assessment 51:259-268
(1998)
Dr. Wayne R. Davis (75%)
Dr. John P. Paul (10%)
NHEERL, Narmgansett, RI
Honorable
Mention
A novel approach to estimating benthic community
condition using sediment porewater EH profiles
MM0066
Identification of Drinking Water
Contaminants in the Course of a
Childhood Cancer Investigation in Toms
River, New Jersey. J. Exposure Analysis
and Environ. Epid. 9(3).-199-216 (1999)
Dr. Susan D. Richardson (35%)
Dr. Timothy W. Collette (35%)
Mr. Alfred D. Thruston, Jr. (5%)
Dr. Jackson Ellington (5%)
NERL, Athens, GA
Honorable
Mention
Identification of drinking water contaminants linke
to elevated levels of childhood cancer in Toms River
New Jersey
MM0067
A Field Study to Compare Performance
of Stainless Steel Research Monitoring
Wells with Existing on-Farm Drinking
Water Wells in Measuring Pesticide and
Nitrate Concentrations. Chemosphere
38(4): 875-889 (1999)
Mr. Charles N. Smith (35%)
Mr. William R. Payne, Jr. (25%)
Mr. John D. Pope (25%)
NERL, Athens, GA
Honorable
Mention
For research comparing the use of research and
drinking water wells and to document the extent of
nitrate and pesticide contamination
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-16
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
TF0078
Sorption Kinetics of PAHs in Methanol -
Water Systems. J. Contaminant
Hydrology 34(1&2):107-120 (1998)
Dr. Dermont C. Bouchard (100%)
NERL, Athens, GA
Honorable
Mention
For advancing knowledge and modeling capabilities
of kinetically constrained desorption of hydrophobic
compounds
TF0083
Environmental Isotopes for Resolution of
Hydrology Problems. Environ.
Modeling and Assessment 52:389-410
(1998)
Dr. William C.Sidle (90%)
NRMRL Cincinnati, OH
Honorable
Mention
Development of a new isotope chemistry technique
for tracing leaks in SO and CSO distribution
systems
TF0085
The Conformational Dynamics of Humic
Polyanions in Model Organic and
Organo-mineral Aggregates. J.
Molecular Structure 460:179-190
(1999)
Dr. George W. Bailey (35%)
NERL, Athens, GA
Honorable
Mention
For application of computational chemistry to a
better understanding of the conformational
dynamics of humic materials
TF0086
Factors Influencing Photoeactions of
Dissolved Organic Matter in a Coastal
River of the Southeastern United States.
ES&T32(19) -.2940-2946 (1998)
Dr. Richard G. Zepp (50%)
NERL, Athens, GA
Honorable
Mention
For innovative research on factors influencing
photoreactions of dissolved organic matter in coasta
ecosystems
TF0087
Evaluation of Mass Flux to and from
Ground Water Usisng a Vertical Flux
Model (VFLUX): Application to the Soil
Vacuum Extraction Closure Problem.
Ground Water Monitoring and
Remediation 96-104 (1999)
Mr. Dominic C. DiGiulio (50%)
Honorable
Mention
Development of a Strategy for Assessment of Soil
Venting Performance and Closure andSupporting
Mass Flux Assessment
NRMRL, Ada, OK
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-17
-------
Nom. #
Titles and Citations of
Submitted Papers
Eligible Authors* and
Nominating Organization
Recommende
d Award
Level
Suggested Citation from Nominating
Organization
IRQ 100
a)Genotoxicity of Bioremediated Soils
from the Reilly Tar Site, St. Louis Park,
Minnesota. Environ. Health Perspect.
106(86)-.1427-1431 (1998)
b) Bioassay-Directed Fractionation and
Chemical Identification of Mutagens in
Bioremediated Soils. Environ. Health
Perspect. 106(S6):1435-1440 (1998)
Dr. Larry D. Claxton (20%)
Mr. Thomas J. Hughes (20%)
Mr. Lance Brooks (20%)
Ms. Sarah Warren (10%)
Dr. Fran Kremer (10%)
Dr. Richard Brenner (10%)
Mr. Barry Austern (10%)
NHEERL, RTF, NC
Honorable
Mention
Research that aids the integrated risk assessment
of bioremediation processes and soils
ET0101
Synthesizing Alcohols and Ketones by
Photoinduced Catalytic Partial-Oxidation
of Hydrocarbons on Tio2 Film Reactors
Prepared by Three Differenct Methods.
Indust. and Engineering Chemistry Res.
38(9):3276-3284 (1999)
Dr. E. Sahle-Demessie (45%)
Dr. Michael A. Gonzalez (20%)
Honorable
Mention
For developing new catalytic materials capable of
eliminating or minimizing pollution for
safeguarding the environment
NRMRL, Cincinnati, OH
Key to Acronyms used in the above Table:
NCEA National Center for Environmental Assessment
NERL National Exposure Research Laboratory
NHEERL National Health and Environmental Effects Laboratory
NRMRL National Risk Management Research Laboratory
OPPT Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
RTP Research Triangle Park
G:\SAB\REPORTS\2000report\Ec.014
* NOTE: The percentages given after each name represent the percent of the total level of effort as documented in the EPA nomination.
Page B-18
------- |