Jump to main content or area navigation.

Extramural Research

Scientific and Technological Achievement Awards 2008 Nomination Procedures And Guidelines

STAA Archives

INTRODUCTION

The mission of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to protect public health and safeguard and improve the natural environment–the air, water, and land upon which life depends. Achievement of this mission requires the application of sound science to the assessment of environmental problems and to the evaluation of possible solutions. The Office of Research and Development (ORD) at EPA is committed to providing the best products in high-priority areas of scientific research.

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

The Scientific and Technological Achievement Awards (STAA) program promotes and recognizes scientific and technological achievements by EPA employees. The STAA program began in 1980 and is sponsored by ORD. ORD manages the STAA program and provides administrative oversight. EPA's Science Advisory Board (SAB) provides scientific and technological evaluation. While this program is sponsored by ORD and has considerable ORD participation, this competition is available Agency-wide.

AWARD CATEGORIES

Nominations may be submitted in the following categories.

  1. Control Systems and Technology (CS): This category includes research on the development, design, testing, and deployment of treatment and disposal systems and on the adaptation of existing systems to new uses. The research may include the development of prototypes, model systems, operations and maintenance equipment, pilot systems, or performance evaluations.
  2. Ecological Research (ER): This category includes experimental or field research, structure and functions of ecosystems research, interaction of organisms with their ecosystem, and stressors’ effects and their interaction on ecosystems.
  3. Health Effects Research and Human Health Risk Assessment (HE): This category includes laboratory and epidemiological analytical research for human health risk estimation and studies for improving human health risk assessment.
  4. Monitoring and Measurement Methods (MM): This category includes research on developing indicators, monitoring systems, and designs for measuring the exposures of ecosystems to multiple stressors and the resultant response of ecosystems at local, regional, and national scales.
  5. Transport and Fate (TF): This category includes research on the mechanisms and moderators of the movement of chemicals within and among environmental media, their transformations, and storage in the environment by chemical, physical, and biological processes. The research may include laboratory or field research and models.
  6. Review Articles (RA): A review article may be in any disciplinary area. Review articles should include a synthesis and a critical analysis of previous work that lead to a better understanding and provide new insight into a particular discipline.
  7. Risk Management and Ecosystem Restoration (RM): This category consists of research that evaluates policy initiatives in ways that develop analysis and information to integrate science, engineering, and social science in support of environmental policy and regulatory decisions (e.g., standards). It includes developing prevention, management, adaptation, and remediation technologies to design, manage, restore, or rehabilitate ecosystems to achieve local, regional, and national goals.
  8. Integrated Risk Assessment (IR): This category covers research (observation, experimental, and theoretical) directed towards the goal of integrating human health and ecological risk assessment methods and analysis. It includes processes and modeling research for developing the models to understand, predict, and assess the current and probable future exposure and response of ecosystems to multiple stressors at multiple scales. It also includes risk assessment research for developing and applying assessment methods, indices, and guidelines for quantifying risk to the sustainability and vulnerability of ecosystems from multiple stressors at multiple scales.
  9. Social Sciences (SS): This category covers social science research pertaining to EPA's policy formulation and regulatory and enforcement responsibilities. It specifically includes anthropology, psychology, sociology, decision making, economics, and urban and community planning.
  10. Environmental Futures (EF): This category includes the search for “targets of opportunity” beyond the normal planning horizon with accompanying higher risk.
  11. Environmental Statistics (ES): This category covers statistical research dealing with analytical and modeling techniques that have general applicability to a range of health and environmental issues or topics. It does not include statistical research that is uniquely applicable to one of the other categories listed above.
  12. Other Environmental Research (OR): This category covers other environmental research that does not clearly fit within any of the above-noted disciplinary categories.

AWARD LEVELS

Three levels of monetary awards are available within each research category, with the final award amount for each level determined by ORD and based on availability of funds. The fourth means of recognition is a non-monetary Honorable Mention.

  1. Level I ($10,000) awards are for nominees who have accomplished an exceptionally high-quality research or technological effort. The nomination should recognize the creation or general revision of a scientific or technological principle or procedure, or a 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 a high impact on a broad area of science/technology. The nomination must have far-reaching consequences and be recognizable as a major scientific/technological achievement within its discipline or field of study.
  2. Level II ($5,000) 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, those described under Level I. It must have timely consequences and contribute as an important scientific/technological achievement within its discipline or field of study.
  3. Level III ($2,000) awards are for nominees who have accomplished an unusually notable research or development 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. It must relate to a mission or organizational component of EPA or significantly affect a relevant area of science/technology.
  4. Honorable Mention is a non-monetary award for nominations that are noteworthy but that do not warrant a Level I, II or III award. Honorable Mention applies to nominations that (1) may not quite reach the level described for a Level III award, (2) show a promising area of research that the SAB subcommittee wants to encourage, or (3) show an area of research that the SAB subcommittee feels is too preliminary to warrant an award recommendation (yet).

All awards are distributed on the basis of the nominees' designated percentage of contribution. Any number of coauthors may share a single award. For example, if there are two eligible EPA authors (eligible to receive monetary awards) and two ineligible authors (ineligible to receive monetary awards) who each contributed 25% on a $5,000 award, the two eligible authors will each receive 25% of $5,000, or $1,250, in award money. An author’s minimum monetary award will automatically be $250.

CRITERIA FOR ELIGIBILITY

All nominations must meet the following criteria:

  1. Papers nominated in any earlier STAA competition are not eligible.
  2. The nominated publication(s) must have been published in a high-quality peer reviewed journal or (for reviews articles) in a suitable book. A paper should stand on its own merits. Work should be published in journals that are professionally relevant to the field of work.
  3. An eligible author is an EPA employee or a Public Health Service (PHS) employee assigned to EPA when the relevant research was conducted. Although PHS employees working at EPA are considered eligible employees, they may not receive monetary awards.
  4. The principal author must be an EPA employee (or a PHS employee assigned to EPA) when the relevant research was conducted. A principal author of a paper is the primary writer, leader, integrator, and creator of the paper. The principal author is responsible for the quality assurance, quality control, presentation, and defense of everything contained in the paper.
  5. The eligible author(s) must have contributed collectively a minimum of 50% toward the publication(s). A contributing author is a major substance provider to the research product. A contributing author is responsible for the quality assurance, quality control, and integrity of the input to the paper but does not have primary responsibility for the overall paper. A contributing author may or may not write the paper in part but must be a substantive expert reviewer for the representations made in the paper. The Nominating Official must verify this information.
  6. Contractors, grantees, and their employees, as well as all other persons NOT directly employed by EPA when the relevant research was conducted, are not eligible for awards through this program.
  7. The nominated paper must have been published within three years prior to the 2008 award program, i.e., after January 1, 2005.
  8. Nominations should identify any related research published previously by the principal author.
  9. Nominations should include no more than three eligible papers.

REQUIRED APPROVALS

Nomination packages may be initiated and prepared by any EPA scientist or engineer (or PHS employee assigned to EPA) at any organizational level, including the publication author(s), but an author cannot serve as a Nominating Official or an Approving Official for their own paper.

Within ORD, the Nominating Official must be the Division Director, and the Approving Official must be the Laboratory or Center Director. If the Division Director is an author, the Laboratory or Center Director must be the Nominating Official, and the Approving Official is the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Science. If the nomination is from an ORD headquarters office, the Nominating Official must be the Office or Center Director, and the Approving Official is the Assistant Administrator or the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Science. If the Office Director is an author, the Nominating and Approving Official must be the Assistant Administrator.

Outside of ORD, the Nominating Official must be at the Division Director level or equivalent, and the Approving Official must be at the Office Director level or equivalent. If the Division Director or Office Director is an author, then the office must select appropriate Nominating and Approving Officials.

NOMINATION PROCEDURES

The following procedures must be followed to accurately and completely prepare and submit a STAA nomination package.

After the call letter is issued by the Assistant Administrator for Research and Development (AA/ORD), any EPA employee (or PHS employee assigned to EPA) may initiate the preparation of a nomination package. Nomination packages may only be submitted electronically. A nomination package consists of all requested materials, with all of the required signatures included. The original component of the package contains the following three items:

Nomination Form

Nominated Publication(s)–no more than three

Supplemental Item(s)–no more than four items when applicable

  1. Nomination Form: The nomination form must be filled in completely and accurately, following the instructions included on the form. The nomination form must have the signatures of both the Nominating Official and the Approving Official.
    • Record of Percentage Agreement: The nomination package must include a Record of Percentage Agreement document from each eligible and ineligible author listed on the nomination form. This document may be submitted in the form of an e-mail or signed letter which states that the co-author agrees with the total percentage of effort listed beside his or her name on the nomination form. The document should list “Record of Percentage Agreement” in the subject line, followed by the co-author’s first and last name. The body of the document should contain the co-author’s name, organization, and contact information; nominee’s name; the title(s) of the nominated publication(s); and a brief paragraph stating that the author is in agreement with his or her designated percentage of contribution. (Note: A Record of Percentage Agreement document is not required for single-author nominations.)
    • Justification: Provide a brief outline of why the achievement deserves recognition. Justification answers should not summarize the paper. Substantial evidence should be presented to support statements describing the scientific merit of the nominated paper or the importance of the applicability of the research.
    • If applicable, nominations must be written to help the SAB subcommittee understand the relationship of the subject nomination to any previous nomination(s) with similar subjects and authors. (Note: Papers nominated in any earlier STAA competition are not eligible for this year’s competition.)

  2. Nominated Publication(s): There should be no more than three nominated papers. Multiple-paper (not to exceed 3) nominations should be indicated on the nomination form.

    Bibliometric journal statistics (i.e., impact factor, immediacy index, and citation half-life) are required for all nominated publications and must be recorded on Page 3 of the nomination form. Most journals are listing the impact factors on their Web sites. Thomson’s Science Citation Index and Journal Citation Reports are also useful tools for obtaining this data. The EPA Library in Research Triangle Park (RTP) has access to these resources and can assist with obtaining this bibliometric information. Requests for this information may be submitted through their Web site at http://intranet.epa.gov/rtplibrary/staaprogram.html. You may also reach them at (919) 541-2777.

  3. Supplemental Items: Supplemental material may be included with the nomination package to provide background information and perspective. There should be no more than four supplemental items; they may include patent documents, other publications relating to the nominated paper’s achievement, other papers published from the series but not part of the nominations, or selected excerpts or abstracts from other sources relevant to the achievement.

ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION

The following procedures must be followed for electronic submission of nominations:

  • The complete nomination package must be submitted via e-mail to Nominations.STAA@epa.gov.
  • Each component of the nomination package (i.e., nomination form, publication(s), supplemental item(s), and record-of-percentage agreement documents) must be saved in Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) prior to submission. See EPA’s PDF page to learn more and for free download of the Adobe Acrobat Reader program at https://www.epa.gov/home/pdf-files.
  • Each item in the nomination package component must be named as follows:
    • Nomination Form (Nominee’s first and last name)
    • Record of Percentage Agreement (Co-author’s first and last name)
    • Publication1, Publication2, etc. (up to three)
    • Supplemental1, Supplemental2, etc. (up to four)
  • The nomination package components should be zipped into one attachment bearing the first and last name of the nominee. WinZip, a software program which can be used to compress multiple attachments to create a single zipped file, can be downloaded from the following site: http://www.winzip.org/ exit EPA. Additional information on using the WinZip software can be found in the WinZip Quick Start Guide. (Note: Zipped files sent from outside of the Agency firewall may be rejected.)
  • The subject line of the submission e-mail must include the nominee’s first and last name.

All nomination packages are due to the National Center for Environmental Research (NCER) by midnight EST on Wednesday, January 23, 2008. Due to the extensive processing requirements, no extensions will be permitted. If incomplete packages are received, they will be returned to the contact person. Returned material may be resubmitted; however, NCER is not responsible for incomplete packages that are submitted or returned too late to be included in the current year's program.

EVALUATION GUIDELINES

The nomination packages are received by NCER’s Peer Review Division (PRD) in ORD. After the nomination packages are screened for completeness by NCER, the packages are forwarded to the SAB. The SAB convenes a subcommittee to review the nominations. The subcommittee members are selected on the basis of their expertise in the categories of science and technology addressed by the nominated publications, and they serve for approximately three years. When necessary, the subcommittee obtains additional reviews from experts to ensure the credibility of the review process. The SAB reviews the nomination packages according to the following factors:

  • The extent to which the work reported in the nominated paper resulted in either new or significantly revised knowledge. The accomplishment should represent an important advancement of scientific knowledge or technology relevant to environmental issues.
  • The degree to which the accomplishment is a product of the originality, creativeness, initiative, and problem-solving ability of the researchers as well as the level of effort required to produce the results.
  • The extent to which environmental protection has been strengthened or improved, whether of local, national, or international importance.
  • The extent of the beneficial impact of the accomplishment and the degree to which the accomplishment has been favorably recognized from outside EPA.
  • The nature and extent of peer review, including stature and quality of the peer-reviewed journal or the publisher of a book for a review chapter published therein.

Note: Nominations that are submitted to more than one category or to the wrong category will not be disqualified. Nominations that have been incorrectly categorized will be placed in the appropriate category by the SAB subcommittee.

Jump to main content.