GOVERNMENT
DOE's $50 million grant program Thomas P. Grumbly, assistant secretary for environmental management, and Martha A. Krebs, director of the Office of Energy Research, have announced a new Department of Energy (DOE) program providing $50 million for basic research related to the management and disposal of wastes found at DOE sites. The program marks the first time the Office of Environmental Management, which has been driven by the need for short-term technology development, has provided money for basic research. According to Grumbly and Krebs, approximately $20 million will go to the DOE national research laboratories and to universities and private-sector research groups. The remaining $10 million will be used for future collaborations with organizations such as the National Science Foundation (NSF), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Department of Health and Human Services. A typical award is expected to be $100,000$300,000 per year for a three-year period. All proposals will be subject to peer review, and proposals from the national labs and universities will be judged by the same criteria. "The capability and longterm viability of this program rest on the fact that funding is based on outside merit award," said Krebs. However, federal and nongovernment scientists will compete separately for appropriated funds. According to Carol Henry of the Office of Science and Risk Policy, the program will be administered in consultation with the NSF and the EPA. Because "DOE faces the same costly problems as EPA" she said, an effort will be made to prevent duplication of research. Grumbly sees this program as an opportunity to "bridge the gap" between the environmental and nuclear science communities with a "small but dedicated
Krebs
Grumbley
guild" of scientists who will advance the that community regoals of the regulatory community and sources were being DOE. Krebs believes that the program will severely strained provide an "opportunity to coalesce the by answering CO scientific community around environmen- alarm calls. tal cleanup." At the heart of The Galvin Commission, which rethe controversy is ported its findings in a February 1995 rethe voluntary stanport, found that there was "a particular dard established CPSC head Ann Brown need for long-term basic research in disby Underwriters promises a re ciplines related to environmental cleanLaboratories (UL) P°rt in June. up." However, Grumbly said that DOE for CO monitors. realized the necessity of such a program The standard converts ambient CO conprior to the report and that the program is centrations and exposure times to probalong overdue. "One of the biggest frusble carboxyhemoglobin (COHb) levels. trations for government officials is that The standard requires an alarm if ambicleanup choices are so restricted," said ent CO concentration reaches 10% COHb Grumbly. "Unless we focus on basic rewhich translates to 400 ppm CO for 15 search, 10 to 20 years down the road, offiminutes. On the other hand a monitor can cials will have the limited choicsound an alarm when levels correspond es." to as little as 2.5% COHb. It is this gap between "may" and "must" alarm that The call for proposals appeared in the writ*Federal Register, Feb. 9,1999, pp. 4976-78. ries some. Formal applications are due May 8,1996. Much of the concern stems from a 1994 Information can be obtained on the interrequirement for installation of CO monitors net at http://www.er.doe.gov/producin all Chicago homes heated by fossil fuell tion/grants/grants.html. Consequendy, in a 3-month period, the city responded to about 8600 CO alarm calls, many of them false. An atmospheric inversion forcing outdoor CO concentrations to CO monitors come 10-15 ppm was blamed for the spate of under scrutiny alarms. UL subsequently amended its standards for monitors to ignore 15 ppm CO When is an alarm not an emergency? Too for 30 days rather than the original 8 hours. often, say emergency response services, However, Bloom would like to raise they will answer a 911 call based on a that number to 35 ppm CO for 30 days, home CO monitor alarm, only to find which corresponds to a 5.8% COHb. "The nondetectable or safe levels of the toxic lower the alarm level, the more our rescue gas. These "false" alarms have become so services will be called to homes at which prevalent that the Consumer Product no actual health risk exists," he said. Safety Commission (CPSC) held public "The only [medical] consensus we've hearings in February to review standards heard is that warnings should be available for home CO monitors. Many of the witwhen COHb levels reach approximately nesses called for revisions in the stan2.5%," countered UL's Paul Patty. The dards, but there were differing opinions on lower number, say medical experts, prowhat changes were appropriate. CPSC tects "sensitive" populations such as the chair Ann Brown promised to follow up the elderly and the very young. hearings with a report in June. At the same time, the 10% COHb waa At the hearings there was broad support attacked as too high. Peter McGeehin of for the use of the monitors. CPSC esttmates Capteur Sensors & Analysers reported that monitors are installed in 6% of U.S. that new British standards set the alarm homes; approximately 220 deaths from CO gap at 3-7% COHb. However, he caupoisoning occur each year. liz Wortman tioned that U.S. officials should wait to of the American Lung Association called for see how these numbers worked before high- and low-level alarms with a digital adopting similar regulations. McGeehin readout that would distinguish chronic exalso said that it would be possible for the posure to < 50 ppm. Others, such aa Montmonitor's electronics to calculate COHb gomery County, MD, air resources engi- levels directly based on measured levneer Bernard Bloom, argued for raising els, even in a fluctuating situation, and not the level at which a monitor can sound an rely on precalculated steady-state modalarm. Bloom and several other speakers, els. This technology would add little or including Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA)) worried nothing to the present cost he claimed. Analytical Chemistry News & Features, April 1, 1996 237 A
