Stochastic Programming

s or progress and final reports for any of the STAR grants are available at the NCER Web Site: http://es.epa.gov/ncer/. What Related Research Is Also Funded Under the STAR Program? NCER funds a broad range of research through extramural grants (descriptions available on the NCER Web Site above). However, there are several research areas that are closely related to the Air Research Program and as such, NCER staff coordinate in planning RFAs and monitoring research results. • The Human Health Program funds research related to improving human health risk assessment in areas such as exposure assessment, biomarkers, genetic susceptibility, and asthma. Together with the NIH, the Human Health Program funds several centers of excellence for Children’s Environmental Health Research. • The Global Change Program includes a major focus area exploring the impact of global change on air quality. The projects underway include research linking global models to regional air quality models, forecasting plausible emission scenarios for 50-100 years into the future, and improving models for important emission sources likely to have significant change over the next century. • The Economics and Decision Sciences Program supports research related to the value of reducing adverse health and ecological effects, market mechanisms, compliance decision-making, and benefits of disclosing information. • The Nanotechnology Program supports research on the environmental implications of nanotechnology, including toxicity, exposure, transport, and transformation of manufactured nanomaterials. • Mercury research in NCER includes studies on the atmospheric processes that influence the fate and behavior of mercury. • The Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program was created to strengthen the role of small businesses in federally funded research and development and develop a stronger national base for technical innovation. The SBIR program has addressed issues related to air pollution measurement and control. What Have Been the Findings of Previous External Reviews of the STAR Program? The STAR Program, in general, has been reviewed a number of times (e.g., twice by Subcommittees of the BOSC, the Government Accounting Office, the Agency’s Inspector General). In 2002, NCER asked the National Research Council’s Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology to conduct an independent assessment of the STAR program. A committee was formed and U.S. EPA Science To Achieve Results (STAR) Program 111 The PM Centers Program 2005-2010: Overviews and Abstracts charged with assessing the program’s scientific merit, its demonstrated or potential influence on policies and decisions, and other program benefits that are relevant to EPA’s mission. The committee was asked specifically to examine the program’s research priorities, research solicitations, peerreview process, current research projects, and results and dissemination of completed research in the context of other relevant research conduced or funded by EPA and in comparison with those of other basic and applied research grant programs. In preparing its report, the committee focused on three research programs: Particulate Matter, Ecologic Indicators, and Endocrine Disruptors. They issued a report, “The Measure of STAR,” in May 2003 (www.nap.edu/books/0309089387/html/) concluding: “The STAR program is a crucial element of EPA’s research efforts; and...As the STAR program has evolved, it has developed a grant-award process that in many ways exceeds those in place at other organizations that have extramural research programs.” EPA’s Science Advisory Board conducted a specific review of the STAR PM Centers research program midway through the research grants in 2002. The “Interim Review of the Particulate Matter (PM) Research Centers of the USEPA: An SAB Report” (available at http://www.epa.gov/ sab/pdf/ec02008.pdf) was favorable with major findings stating that the PM Centers have produced benefits above and beyond what might be expected from individual investigator-initiated grants and that they are likely to continue to produce such benefits through the next several years. STAR Air Research Program RFA Topic Areas and Summary of Awarded Grants 1998-2005 RFAYear RFA Topic Areas and Grant Research Area 1998 Health Effects of PM and Associated Air Pollutants (10 grants-Total) • PM and respiratory effects (7 grants) • PM and cardiovascular effects (2 grants) • PM and morbidity/mortality (1 grant) 1999 Airborne Particulate Matter Health Effects (8 grants-Total) • PM dosimetry (1 grant) • PM cardiopulmonary epidemiology (3 grants) • PM controlled exposure studies (3 grants) • Source evaluation of PM effects (1 grant) Airborne Particulate Matter Centers (5 grants-Total) – Overall Themes: • Exposure, susceptibility, and biological mechanisms • Health risks of PM components • Combustion-derived fine particle composition, exposures and health effects • Mobile source pollution and health effects • Health effects of ultrafine particles 2001 Health Effects of Particulate Matter (4 grants-Total) • Mechanisms of PM respiratory effects (3 grants) • Air pollutants and emergency room visits (1 grant) U.S. EPA Science To Achieve Results (STAR) Program 112 The PM Centers Program 2005-2010: Overviews and Abstracts 2002 Airborne PM Health Effects: Cardiovascular Mechanisms (4 grants-Total) • Diesel exposures (3 grants) • Concentrated airborne particulate and ozone (1 grant) Epidemiologic Research on Health Effects of Long-Term Exposure to Ambient PM and Other Air Pollutants (4 grants-Total) Four Cohorts: • Seventh Day Adventists (California) • Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) • Medicare Database • U.S. Nurses’ Health Study 2003 Measurement, Modeling, and Analysis Methods for Airborne Carbonaceous Fine PM (16 grants-Total) • Emission source estimates of primary organic aerosol and secondary organic aerosol precursors (3 grants) • Secondary organic aerosol formation mechanisms (4 grants) • Next generation receptor model (1 grant) • Advanced measurement techniques for source apportionment of organic PM (5 grants) • Differences in EC/OC measurement methods (2 grants) • Organic aerosol sampling artifacts (1 grant) Epidemiologic Research on Health Effects of Long-Term Exposure to Ambient PM and Other Air Pollutants (1 grant-Total) • MESA – Air The Role of Air Pollutants in Cardiovascular Disease (6 grants-Total) • Animal models of human disease to evaluate mechanisms (3 grants) • PM effects on regulation of heart rhythm (1 grant) • PM effects on the function of tissue lining blood vessels (2 grants) 2004 Source Apportionment of Particulate Matter (11 grants-Total) • Receptor modeling (3 grants) • Integration of receptor, source-based and inverse modeling (4 grants) • Measurement methods for molecular tracer species and identification of new molecular tracers (4 grants) 2005 Airborne Particulate Matter Centers (5 grants-Total) – Overall Theme • Linking health effects with PM from sources and components Measurement Methods for Particulate Matter Composition Attachment: Process for Selecting STAR RFA Topics and Reviewing Applications How Are the Topics for the Science To Achieve Results (STAR) Solicitations Selected? Research Coordination Teams (RCTs) • RCTs are composed of representatives from ORD’s laboratories and centers and EPA’s program and regional offices; they develop a plan for research to be done intramurally in ORD laboratories and extramurally through STAR. • The research plan is based on the EPA and the ORD Strategic Plans, as well as specific program needs identified through the RCT process. U.S. EPA Science To Achieve Results (STAR) Program 113 The PM Centers Program 2005-2010: Overviews and Abstracts • A series of criteria are used to decide whether research would best be accomplished internally at ORD or externally through grants, cooperative agreements or contracts. These criteria include: • Which organization has the most appropriate expertise? • How urgently is the research needed? What is our available in-house capacity? • Does the proposed extramural research complement the intramural program? • NCER staff work with the RCTs to write the Request for Applications (RFAs). What Is the Review Process That NCER Uses for All Assistance Applications? Peer review is the cornerstone of high-quality scientific research. Because all NCER applications are subjected to a rigorous, independent peer review, the program funds only the most scientifically meritorious research. The external peer review process is managed entirely by a separate division of NCER, preserving independence from the NCER staff who prepare RFAs and manage grants. External Peer Review • NCER staff determines the types of expertise reviewers must possess given the technical requirements of the solicitation. • Each application is reviewed and critiqued in-depth by at least three expert panelists and discussed by the full review panel. • For all applications, each principal reviewer is required to, and non-principal reviewers may elect to, provide an overall rating of Excellent, Very Good, Good, Fair, or Poor. • Ratings are tallied and averaged, and the lead principal reviewer prepares a summary evaluation that is consistent with this average rating. • Applications receiving a Very Good or Excellent are sent to ORD’s Programmatic Review Panel. Programmatic Review Panel • ORD’s Programmatic Review Panel recommends proposals on the basis of relevancy to EPA’s mission, balance of research portfolio, and capacity to complement in-house research. • ORD’s Programmatic Review Panel consists of members from ORD, Program and Regional Offices. U.S. EPA Science To Achieve Results (STAR) Program 114