Ebook Environmental policy and public health (2/E): Part 2

220 10 0

Vn Doc 2 Gửi tin nhắn Báo tài liệu vi phạm

Tải lên: 57,242 tài liệu

  • Loading ...
1/220 trang
Tải xuống

Thông tin tài liệu

Ngày đăng: 22/01/2020, 21:24

(BQ) Part 2 book “Environmental policy and public health” has contents: Hazardous chemical substances, waste generation and management, energy production and associated policies, genetically modified organisms, biodiversity and endangered species,…. And other contents. 11 Hazardous Chemical Substances 11.1  INTRODUCTION This chapter describes the five major U.S policies on control of hazardous chemical substances in the general environment While other chapters have discussed chemical pollutants in air, water, food, and waste, this chapter deals with policies that are specific to hazardous substances found in general commerce The five U.S policies specific to control of toxic substances will be discussed, along with those of the EU and World Health Organization (WHO) Associations between hazardous substances and effects on human and ecosystem health are presented herein It needs to be noted that the terms hazardous and toxic are distinct terms with somewhat different meanings, but are often used as synonyms by policymakers As background, humankind has known since antiquity that some substances possess harmful properties For instance, ancient peoples gradually learned which noxious plants to avoid eating; in effect, practicing the core principle of public health, prevention of disease and disability Similarly, humankind learned to avoid venomous creatures whose bites could cause harmful health effects The common factor between noxious plants and venomous creatures would over time become revealed to be chemical substances that possess toxic properties, one of which, asbestos, is illustrated in Figure 11.1 In time, the study of chemical substances’ harmful properties would be called toxicology The Industrial Revolution led to the manufacture of machines and products that involved the use of metals In the process, metals had to be mined, smelted, forged, and fabricated into machinery for uses in agriculture, industrialization, transportation, and consumer commerce In the nineteenth century, through the mid-twentieth century, industrial processes often exposed workers to metal fumes and other harmful substances, and if exposure levels were sufficiently great, adverse health consequences occurred While acute exposures to high levels of toxic substances certainly occurred, there was also a gradual shift to exposure to substances that manifested their toxicity over long periods of time For example, lead poisoning and metal fume fever were occupational health outcomes for many workers As workplace conditions gradually improved in the industrialized countries, workers’ exposure to metals lessened, but did not disappear The toxicity of metals had not changed, but exposure levels had decreased, lessening the adverse health effects in workers In the mid-twentieth century, the manufacture of synthetic chemicals became a significant economic force and commercial reality, in part, due to the resource demands of World War II The chemical industry had arrived, generating products such as therapeutic drugs, pesticides, herbicides, plastics, synthetic rubber, and consumer goods In a sense, the Chemical Age had arrived The production and use of these products brought exposure to new, synthesized substances for which toxicology information was lacking Moreover, the exposures were experienced by persons in the general environment, not solely confined to workplace environments Exposure occurred at lower levels through contamination of environmental media such as outdoor ambient air and community drinking water supplies The toxicological implications had changed from those of dealing with the consequence of short-term, high to medium levels of chemical substances, to the condition of long-term exposure to low concentrations of substances found in essential environmental media, i.e., air, water, and food One source observes that approximately 10 million chemical compounds have been synthesized in laboratories since the beginning of the twentieth century, but only about 1% is produced commercially and can possibly come into contact with living organisms [1] Although many substances found in commerce lack adequate toxicity data, there already exist ample data to characterize a large number of substances as being deleterious to human health The major endpoints known to be affected by toxic substances are shown in Table  11.1, illustrated by specific substances Standard references in toxicology contain more comprehensive listings of substances hazardous to human health (e.g., the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health [NIOSH]’s Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances [2], which contains detailed toxicological and industrial hygiene information on a large number of chemicals), and the Toxicological Profiles issued by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry [3] 11.2  U.S POLICIES ON HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES In recognition of the need to control environmental releases of hazardous substances and to inform potential at-risk populations, Congress has enacted five major statutes: the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSAct), the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRAct), the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCAct), the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPAct), and the Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act The last-named act is a major revision of the TSCAct and is therefore considered a separate act for the purposes of this chapter Each of these statutes is discussed in the following sections 11.2.1 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, 1947 Chemicals designed to kill what humans deem as pests have been part of humankind’s experience For example, both arsenic and hydrogen cyanide were used for pest control, but were 287 288 Environmental Policy and Public Health FIGURE 11.1  Workplace notification of a hazardous chemical (From OSHA (U.S Occupational Safety and Health Administration), Chemical hazards and toxic substances, Directorate of Standards and Guidance, Washington, DC, 2016.) eventually abandoned as pesticides due to their high toxicity and hazard to humans The period of post-World War II saw the development and expanded use of synthetic pesticides, such as dichloro diphenyl trichloroethane (DDT) [4] Because pesticides are specifically designed to kill living creatures, concern gradually evolved about potential adverse effects on human and ecosystem health This section will give a history of pesticide policymaking in the U.S and elsewhere History 11.2.1.1  Although federal pesticide legislation was first enacted in 1910, its aim was to reduce economic exploitation of farmers TABLE 11.1 Toxicity Endpoints and Alphabetized Associated Toxic Substances Endpoint Cancer Cardiovascular diseases Developmental disorders Endocrine disruption Immune dysfunction Liver disease Nervous system disorders Reproductive disorders Respiratory diseases Skin diseases Example Substances Arsenic, asbestos, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, PAHs Carbon monoxide, lead, ozone Cadmium, endocrine disruptors, lead, mercury BPA, atrazine, phthalates, perchlorate Formaldehyde Ethyl alcohol, carbon tetrachloride Lead, manganese, methyl mercury, organophosphates (OPs), PCBs, formaldehyde Cadmium, endocrine disruptors, DDT, PCBs, phthalates Nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide Dioxins, nickel, pentachlorophenol Source: ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry), ATSDR ToxProfiles, U.S Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Division of Toxicology, Atlanta, GA, 2004 by manufacturers and distributors of adulterated or ineffective pesticides Congress did not address the potential risks to human health posed by pesticide products until it enacted the 1947 version of the FIFRAct The U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA) became responsible for administering the pesticide statutes during this period However, responsibility was shifted to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) when that agency was created in 1970 Broader congressional concerns about long- and short-term toxic effects of pesticide exposure on pesticide applicators, wildlife, nontarget insects and birds, and on food consumers subsequently led to a complete revision of the FIFRAct in 1972 (Table 11.2) The 1972 law, as amended, is the basis of current federal policy Substantial changes were made to the FIFRAct in 1988 in order to accelerate the process of reregistering The FIFRAct governs pestipesticides, and again in cide products and their use 1996 The 1996 amend- in the U.S [5] ments facilitated registration of pesticides for special (so-called minor) uses, reauthorization of collection of fees to support reregistration, and a requirement to coordinate regulations between the FIFRAct and the FDCAct As detailed by Schierow [5], the FIFRAct, as amended, requires EPA to regulate the sale and use of pesticides in the U.S through registration and labeling of the estimated 21,000 pesticide products currently in use [5] The act directs the EPA to restrict the use of pesticides as necessary in order to prevent unreasonable adverse effects on humans and the environment, taking into account the costs and benefits of various pesticide uses The FIFRAct prohibits sale of any pesticide in the U.S unless it is registered and labeled indicating approved uses and restrictions It is a violation of the law to use a pesticide in a manner that is inconsistent with the label instructions The EPA registers each pesticide for each approved use, e.g., TABLE 11.2 FIFRAct Amendments Year Act 1947 1964 1972 1975 1978 1980 1988 1990 1991 1996 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) Amendments Federal Environmental Pesticide Control Act FIFRA Extension Federal Pesticide Act Amendments Amendments Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act Amendments Food Quality Protection Act Source: Schierow, L., Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act, Summaries of environmental laws administered by the EPA, Congressional Research Service, 1999, http://www.NLE/ CRSreports/BriefingBooks/Laws/l.cfm Hazardous Chemical Substances to control boll weevils on cotton In addition, the FIFRAct requires the EPA to reregister older pesticides based on new data that meet current regulatory and scientific standards Establishments that manufacture or sell pesticide products must be registered by the EPA Facility managers are required to keep certain records and to allow inspections by the EPA or state regulatory representatives The FIFRAct Definition of “Pesticide”: Pesticides are broadly defined in the FIFRAct §2(u) as chemicals and other products used to kill, repel, or control pests Familiar examples include pesticides used to kill insects and weeds that can reduce the yield and harm the quality of agricultural commodities, ornamental plantings, forests, wooden structures, and pastures But the broad definition of pesticide contained in the FIFRAct also applies to products with less familiar “pesticidal uses.” For example, substances used to control mold, mildew, algae, and other nuisance growths on equipment, in surface water, or on stored grains are considered to be pesticides for the purposes of the FIFRAct The term also applies to disinfectants and sterilants, insect repellents and fumigants, rat poison, mothballs, and many other substances Registration of Pesticide Products: When pesticide manufacturers apply to the EPA to register a pesticide’s active ingredient, pesticide product, or a new use of a registered pesticide under the FIFRAct §3, the EPA requires them to submit scientific data on pesticide toxicity and behavior in the environment The EPA may require data from any combination of more than 100 different tests, depending on the toxicity and degree of exposure To register a pesticide’s use on food, the EPA also requires applicants to identify analytical methods that can be used to test food for pesticide residues and to determine the amount of pesticide residue that could remain on crops, as well as on (or in) food products, assuming that the pesticide is applied according to the manufacturer’s recommended rates and methods [5] Based on the data submitted, the EPA must determine whether and under what conditions the proposed pesticide’s use presents an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment If the pesticide is proposed for use on a food crop, the EPA also determines whether a safe level of pesticide residue, called a tolerance, can be established under the FDCAct A tolerance must be established before a pesticide registration may be granted for use on food If any registration is granted, the EPA specifies the approved uses and conditions of use, including safe methods of pesticide storage and disposal, which the registrant must explain on the product label The FIFRAct requires that federal regulations for pesticide labels preempt state, local, and tribal regulations Use of a pesticide product in a manner inconsistent with its label is prohibited [5] The EPA may classify and register a pesticide product for general or restricted use Products known as restricted-use pesticides are those judged to be more dangerous to the applicator or to the environment Such pesticides can be applied only by people who have been trained and certified Individual states, U.S territories, and Indian tribes are generally responsible for training and certifying pesticide applicators [5] 289 The FIFRAct §3 also allows conditional, temporary registrations if (1) the proposed pesticide ingredients and uses are substantially similar to currently registered products and will not create additional significant environmental risks, (2) an amendment is proposed for additional uses of a registered pesticide and sufficient data are submitted indicating that there is no significant additional risk, or (3) data requirements for a new active ingredient require more time to generate than normally allowed, and use of the pesticide during the period will not cause any unreasonable adverse effect on the environment and will be in the public interest Public Disclosure, Exclusive Use, and Trade Secrets: The FIFRAct §3 directs the EPA to make the data submitted by the applicant publicly available within 30 days after a registration is granted However, applicants may claim certain data are protected as trade secrets under §10 If the EPA agrees that the data are protected, the agency must withhold the data from the public, unless the data pertain to the health effects or environmental fate or effects of the pesticide’s ingredients Information may be protected if it qualifies as a trade secret and reveals (1) manufacturing processes; (2) details of methods for testing, detecting, or measuring amounts of inert ingredients; or (3) the identity or percentage quantity of inert ingredients [5] Companies sometimes seek to register a product based upon the registration of similar products, relying upon the data provided by the original registrant that is publicly released This is allowed However, §3 of the FIFRAct provides for a 10-year period of exclusive use by the registrant of data submitted in support of an original registration or a new use In addition, an applicant who submits any new data in support of a registration is entitled to compensation for the cost of data development by any subsequent applicant who supports an application with that data within 15 years of its submission If compensation is not jointly agreed upon by the registrant and applicant, binding arbitration can be invoked [5] Reregistration of Pesticides: Most pesticides currently registered in the U.S are older pesticides and were not subject to modern safety reviews Amendments to the FIFRAct in 1972 directed the EPA to reregister approximately 35,000 older products, thereby assessing their safety in light of current knowledge The task of reregistering older pesticides has been streamlined by reviewing groupings of products having the same active ingredients, on a generic instead of an individual product basis Many of the 35,000 products will not be reviewed and their registrations will be canceled because registrants not wish to support reregistration Nevertheless, the task for registrants and the EPA remains immense and costly In 1988, in order to accelerate the process of reregistration, Congress imposed a 10-year reregistration schedule To help pay for the additional costs of the accelerated process, Congress directed the EPA to require registrants to pay reregistration and annual registration maintenance fees on pesticide ingredients and products The 1996 amendments to the FIFRAct extended the EPA’s authority to collect maintenance 290 fees through FY 2001 Exemptions from fees or reductions are allowed for minor-use pesticides, public health pesticides, and small business registrants [5] 11.2.1.2  Key Provisions of the FIFRAct Relevant to Public Health In its current construction, the FIFRAct has the following major functions [5]: Pesticide Registration—All new pesticide products used in the U.S must first be registered with the EPA To register a new pesticide requires the submission to the EPA of the product’s complete chemical formula, a proposed label, and a full description of the tests made of the product and the results upon which the claims are based Manufacturers can ask for trade secret protection to protect information claimed to be vital to commercial propriety Control over Pesticide Usage—The EPA has authority to restrict use of pesticides The FIFRAct permits the classification of pesticides into general and restricted categories, with the latter category available only to certified applicators Certification standards are developed by the EPA to regulate how certified applicators apply restricted pesticides Removal of Pesticides from the Market—The FIFRAct mandates the EPA to take action against those pesticide products considered a risk to public health and the environment The EPA’s actions can include a cancellation order (which is used to initiate review of the substance, during which the product can continue to be manufactured and placed in commerce), or a suspension order (which is an immediate ban on the production and distribution of a pesticide product) There also are different administrative procedures attending a cancellation order or a suspension order that would determine how quickly the EPA’s action would take effect Imports and Exports—The FIFRAct §17 directs that imports of pesticide products will be subject to the same requirements of testing and registration as domestic products However, the FIFRAct excludes U.S All new pesticide products exports from coverage used in the U.S must first be under the Act, other than registered with EPA To regfor certain record keeping ister a new pesticide requires provisions the submission to EPA of the product’s complete chemical formula, a proposed label, and a full description of the tests made of the product and the results The FIFRAct has several implications for hazardous waste generation and management, primarily through linkage to other federal statutes The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRAct) of 1976 gives the EPA the authority to regulate the disposal of generated hazardous wastes, including the disposal of pesticides from manufacturers The federal Waste Pollution Control Act of Environmental Policy and Public Health 1972, under §301, requires all industrial enterprises, including pesticide manufacturers and formulators, to apply to the EPA for discharge permits if they release effluent into any body of water The same statute, §307 permits pesticides to be controlled as toxic substances, thereby leading to the development of special discharge standards The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLAct), as amended, directs Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), in consultation with the EPA and the NTP, to initiate a program of research to fill gaps in scientific knowledge for prioritized CERCLAct hazardous substances The program of research is, by statute, to be coordinated with the EPA’s authorities under the FIFRAct and the TSCAct, in both instances possibly leading to the EPA rulemaking requiring manufacturers of a particular hazardous substance to fill the research gaps identified by ATSDR The FIFRAct was amended somewhat by the FQPAct of 1996, which is discussed in a subsequent section of this chapter Associations between Pesticides 11.2.1.3  and Human Health Pesticides are chemical substances evolved by nature or synthetically produced to be biologically active As such, pesticides are intentionally harmful to living organisms, often with biological specificity Given the mortal purpose of pesticides, their public health implications might seem obvious However, the implications are a complicated proposition For example, it can be argued that pesticides have benefited the public’s health by reducing mosquito infestation, thereby reducing the ­number of persons at risk of contracting malaria or West Nile disease However, some pesticides used to control mosquitoes are environmentally persistent and can cause serious harm to ecological systems An example is the use of DDT in the tropics for malaria control, even though it causes ecological degradation DDT and other chemicals are called Persistent Organic Pollutants and their use and management is the subject of an international treaty, which is discussed in Chapter The FIFRAct provides some human and ecological health protection by requiring the EPA to register pesticides, control their uses, and remove those found harmful from the U.S market In this regard, the FIFRAct serves as a gatekeeper over which pesticides get into the general environment But this gatekeeping does not provide complete prohibition of pesticides and similar chemicals from migrating into the U.S environment This is because many pesticides are approved for use in the U.S because of their desirable properties of pest eradication, which can increase crop yields and improve food quality Are the pesticides in the environment potentially harmful to human and ecological health? And if harmful, does this necessitate further effort to reduce pesticide levels and public health action? The presence of pesticides, herbicides, and rodenticides in the U.S environment raises questions about the potential impact on human and ecological health The U.S Geological Survey (USGS) [6] observes that about one billion pounds of conventional pesticides are used each year in the U.S In 2006 the USGS reported the findings from a 10-year program of surveillance of pesticide levels in U.S rivers, fish, and private Hazardous Chemical Substances wells The report is based on data from 51 major river systems from Florida to the Pacific Northwest, Hawaii, and Alaska, and a regional study conducted in the High Plains aquifer system The USGS study, which covers the years 1992–2001, found that pesticides seldom occurred alone but almost always as complex mixtures Most stream samples and about half the well samples contained two or more pesticides, and frequently more [6] Findings showed pesticides were present throughout the year in most streams in urban and agricultural areas of the U.S When the USGS measurements were compared with EPA drinking water standards and guidelines, the pesticides were seldom found at concentrations likely to affect humans Concentrations of individual pesticides were almost always lower than the standards and guidelines, representing fewer than 10% of the sampled stream sites and about 1% of domestic and public supply wells Concerning fish tissues, organochlorine pesticides and their degradants were found in greater than 90% of fish in streams that drained agricultural, urban, and mixed land-use settings Pesticides were less common in groundwater More than 80% of urban streams and more than 50% of agricultural streams had concentrations in water of at least one pesticide that exceeded a water quality benchmark for aquatic life, which suggests the need for further control of pesticide releases into the environment Regarding the general toxicity of pesticides, the Northwest Coalition for Alternatives Pesticides examined the scientific literature for evidence of pesticides’ carcinogenicity and reproductive toxicity [7] The investigators used EPA data on carcinogenicity of chemicals They found that of the 250 pesticides evaluated by the EPA, 12 of the 26 with the greatest The FIFRAct provides the annual use in the U.S had main federal framework for been classified as carcinomanaging the hazard of pes- gens in one of the EPA’s carticides For EPA-approved cinogenesis categories.* pesticides, more than one Chronic exposure at lower billion pounds are used levels has been associated annually in various agriculwith adverse neurological tural and other commercial and behavioral conditions in applications in the U.S young children [8] Other research on the chronic exposure of adults to pesticides has produced features of Parkinson’s disease; ongoing research uses animal models to conduct basic science on the etiology of the disease [9,9a] A study conducted by Columbia University investigators in 2004 found that insecticide exposures were widespread among minority women in New York City during pregnancy [10] The study consisted of 314 mother-newborn * Atrazine, metolachlor, 2, 4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, metam sodium, methyl bromide, glyphosate, dichloropropene, chlorpyrifos, cyanazine, pendimethalin, trifluralin, acetochlor, alachlor, dicamba, S-Ethyl dipropylthiocarbamate, chlorothalonil, copper hydroxide, propanil, terbfos, mancozeb, fluometuron, monosodium methanearsonate, bentazone, diazinon, parathion, sodium chlorate The 12 pesticides italicized have been classified by EPA as carcinogenic in one of EPA’s carcinogenesis categories (Chapter 11) 291 pairs and insecticide measurements in maternal ambient air during pregnancy as well as in umbilical cord plasma at delivery For each log unit increase in cord plasma chlorpyrifos levels, birth weight decreased by 42.6 g and birth length decreased by 0.24 cm Combined measures of cord plasma chlorpyrifos and diazinon (adjusted for relative potency) were also inversely associated with birth weight and length Birth weight averaged 186.3 g less among newborns possessing the highest compared with lowest 26% of exposure levels Further, the associations between birth weight and length and cord plasma chlorpyrifos and diazinon were highly statistically significant among newborns born before the years 2000–2001 when the EPA phased out residential use of these insecticides Among newborns born after January 2001, exposure levels were substantially lower, and no association with fetal growth was apparent This investigation affirms the toxicological adage, “The dose makes the poison.” In another study with dose-dependent results, investigators from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) (Chapter 3) examined cancer rates in a large cohort of pesticide applicators [11] The study involved a total of 54,383 pesticide applicators in Iowa and North Carolina Exposure to the widely used pesticide chlorpyrifos was found to be associated with increased rate of lung cancer The incidence of lung cancer was statistically significantly associated with chlorpyrifos lifetime ­exposure-days, suggesting a dose-dependent effect This study and the one from Columbia University imply that environmental health policies about pesticide use and application should be further strengthened to mitigate or decrease exposure to pesticides In summary, the implications of pesticides and similar chemicals in community environments are of continuing concern to environmental and public health authorities, given the purpose of the chemicals The FIFRAct provides the main federal framework for managing the hazard of pesticides For EPA-approved pesticides, more than one billion pounds are annually used in various agricultural and other commercial applications in the U.S Given the commercial value of pesticides, there will be continued releases of them into environmental media This reality emphasizes the importance of policies that are committed to monitoring of pesticide levels in water, food, and human tissues, and for conducting research on potential human and ecological impacts Associations between Pesticides 11.2.1.4  and Ecosystem Health How pesticides affect ecosystems? As presented by one source, pesticides can travel great distances through the environment [12] When sprayed on crops or in gardens, pesticides can be blown by the wind to other areas They can also flow with rain water into nearby streams or can seep through the soil into groundwater Some pesticides can remain in the environment for many years and pass from one organism to another In general, insecticides generally are the most toxic pesticides to the environment, followed by fungicides and herbicides 292 The most hazardous pesticides include those that can be distinguished on the basis of water solubility or fat solubility Water soluble pesticides are easily transported from the target area into groundwater and streams since the pesticides become dissolved in the water Fat soluble pesticides are readily absorbed in the tissues of insects, fish, and other animals, often resulting in extended persistence in food chains Organochlorine pesticides such as DDT are fat-soluble pesticides When there is a small amount of pesticide in the environment, it will enter the bodies of the animals that are low in the food chain (e.g., grasshoppers) Even though there is only a small amount of the toxicant in each grasshopper, shrews or other predators will receive a larger amount of the toxicant in its body because the predator will eat many grasshoppers When the secondary consumer is eaten (e.g., shrews), a higher level predator (e.g., an owl) will consume all of its toxicants, plus those of all the other prey it eats This means that the higher the trophic level, the greater the concentration of toxicants This process is bioamplification Therefore, the top carnivore that has the higher trophic level (e.g., owl) will be the most badly affected as it will have obtained the most concentrated amount of toxicants This will lead to a decline of the population of the top predator (e.g., owl), causing an increase of the population of shrews as there are not as many of their predators, and leading to a decrease in the population of grasshoppers [12] This biomagnification process is a major challenge to the proper application of pesticides for crop and gardening use The effects of pesticides on specific members of an ecosystem become consequential to public and ecosystem health when the effects are broad in impact An important example is the effects of pesticides on pollinators A 2-year study conducted by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services was the first investigation of the global status of pollinators [13] The study reported a growing number of pollinator species worldwide are being driven toward extinction by diverse pressures, many of them anthropogenic, threatening millions of livelihoods and A study reports a growing number of pollinator species hundreds of billions of dollars of food supplies worldwide are being driven toward extinction by diverse Pollinated crops include those that provide fruit, vegpressures, many of them etables, seeds, nuts, and oils anthropogenic, threatening Many of these are important millions of livelihoods and dietary sources of vitamins hundreds of billions of doland minerals, without which lars of food supplies the risks of malnutrition might be expected to increase Between US$235 billion and US$577 billion worth of annual global food production relies on direct contributions by pollinators In addition to food crops, pollinators contribute to crops that provide biofuels (e.g., canola and palm oils), fibers (e.g., cotton), medicines, forage for livestock, and construction materials Moreover, nearly 90% of all wild flowering plants depend at least to some extent on animal pollination Environmental Policy and Public Health The assessment found that an estimated 16% of vertebrate pollinators are threatened with global extinction—increasing to 30% for island species—with a trend toward more extinction Although most insect pollinators have not been assessed at a global level, regional and national assessments indicate high levels of threat, particularly for bees and butterflies— with often more than 40% of invertebrate species threatened locally Declines in regional wild pollinators have been confirmed for North Western Europe and in North America The assessment found that pesticides, including neonicotinoid insecticides, threaten pollinators worldwide, although the long-term effects are still unknown [13] Several studies of the effects of neonicotinoid pesticides on the mortality of bees have been reported Neonicotinoids are compounds that are structurally similar to nicotine, the addictive ingredient in tobacco (Chapter 7) In a large-scale field study, researchers combined large-scale pesticide usage and yield observations from oilseed rape with those detailing honey bee colony losses over an 11-year period The findings revealed a correlation between honey bee colony losses and national-scale imidacloprid (a neonicotinoid) usage patterns across England and Wales [14] In a separate study, researchers from Bern, Switzerland, together with partners from Thailand and Germany, found that male honey bees were affected by two neonicotinoid insecticides The insecticides were associated with reducing male honey bees’ life span and number of living sperm [15] In another study, a research team from Bern, Switzerland, and Wolfville, Canada, found that honey bee queens, which are crucial to colony functioning, are severely affected by two neonicotinoid insecticides [16] These and other investigations led the EU in 2013 to ban most neonicotinoids for use on flowering crops and spring sown crops, but approved sulfoxaflor, a neonicotinoid, in July 2015 on the basis that it would not have any unacceptable effects on the environment In stark contrast, the EPA, which had attempted to approve sulfoxaflor for use in the U.S., was blocked by a federal appeals court The court overturned the EPA’s approval for sulfoxaflor, finding that the EPA had relied on “flawed and limited” data, and its approval was unjustified given the “precariousness of bee populations” [17] Turning from insects to plants, the overuse of an herbicide, glyphosate, has produced weeds that are resistant to the herbicide Glyphosate comprised 57% of all the herbicides used in the U.S on corn and soybeans in 2013, according to the USDA The agency has now identified 14 species of glyphosate-resistant weeds in the U.S., and 32 have been documented worldwide, according to a government-industryuniversity coalition that tracks the issue globally [18] Of note, glyphosate, the active ingredient in the herbicide Roundup has become the most heavily used agricultural chemical in the history of the world A study estimated that globally, about 9.4 million tons of the chemical have been sprayed onto fields Environmental and health authorities are investigating the efficacy of using this herbicide, given that in March 2015 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) unanimously determined that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic to humans” [19] These concerns have fueled ongoing research on the putative toxicity of glyphosate For example, in one 293 Hazardous Chemical Substances study, long-term exposure to low concentrations of glyphosate produced problems in the liver and kidneys Investigators examined the function of genes in these organs and related changes to liver and kidney damage [20] The chemical industry disputed IARC’s classification and in 2016 undertook actions to reverse the classification, but without success 11.2.2 Federal Hazardous Substances Act, 1960 One of the early federal statutes on hazardous substances is the FHSAct of 1960 (Public Law 86-613; 74 Stat 372, as amended) This act requires precautionary labeling on the container of hazardous household products to help consumers safely store and use those products and to give them information about immediate first aid steps to take if an accident happens The act also allows the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) to ban certain products that are so dangerous or that the nature of the hazard is such that the labeling the act requires is not adequate to protect consumers [21] The FHSAct only covers products that, during reasonably foreseeable purchase, storage, or use, may be brought into or around a place where people live Products used or stored in a garage, shed, carport, or other building that is part of the household are also covered The act requires hazardous household products (“hazardous substances”) to bear labeling that alerts consumers to the potential hazards that those products present and that tells them what they need to to protect themselves and their children from those hazards Whether a product must be labeled depends on its contents and the likelihood that consumers will be exposed to any hazards it presents To require labeling, a product must first be toxic, corrosive, flammable or combustible, an irritant, or a strong sensitizer, or it must generate pressure through decomposition, heat, or other means Further, the product must have the potential to cause substantial personal injury or substantial illness during or as a result of any customary or reasonably foreseeable handling or use, including reasonably foreseeable ingestion by children Each of the hazards above has a specific definition in the FHSAct Where it is appropriate, regulations issued under the act specify the tests to perform to evaluate a product for a specific hazard The definitions are as follows [21]: Aproduct is toxic if it can produce personal injury or illness to humans when it is inhaled, swallowed, or absorbed through the skin and contain certain tests on animals to determine whether a product can cause immediate injury In addition, a product is toxic if it can cause long term chronic effects like cancer, birth defects, or neurotoxicity A product is corrosive if it destroys living tissue such as skin or eyes by chemical action Aproduct is an irritant if it is not corrosive and causes a substantial injury to the area of the body that it comes in contact with Irritation can occur after immediate, prolonged, or repeated contact A strong sensitizer is a product that the Commission declares by regulation has a significant potential to cause hypersensitivity […] The flammability of a product depends on the results of testing […] Products that generate pressure, through decomposition, heat, or other means include aerosols, fireworks that contain explosive powder, and certain pool chemicals that, when their containers are heated by sunlight, for example, start to react and generate pressure in the containers The label on the immediate package of a hazardous product, and any outer wrapping or container that might cover up the label on the package must have the following information in English [21]: The name and business address of the manufacturer, packer, distributor, or seller; The common or usual or chemical name of each hazardous ingredient; The signal word “Danger” for products that are corrosive, extremely flammable, or highly toxic; The signal word “Caution” or “Warning” for all other hazardous products; An affirmative statement of the principal hazard or hazards that the product presents, […]; Precautionary statements telling users what they must or what actions they must avoid to protect themselves; Where it is appropriate, instructions for first aid treatment to perform in the event that the product injures someone; The word “Poison” for a product that is highly toxic, in addition to the signal word “Danger”; If a product requires special care in handling or storage, instructions for consumers to follow to protect themselves; and 10 The statement “Keep out of the reach of children.” […] There are no formal guidelines for evaluating the exposure to a product and the risk of injury However, among the things to consider are the following: (1) How the contents and form of the product might cause an injury; (2) the product’s intended handling, use, and storage; and (3) any accidents that might foreseeably happen during handling, use, or storage that could hurt the purchaser, user, or others, including young children who might get into the package of the product Details about the FHSAct are available from the CPSC 11.2.3 Toxic Substances Control Act, 1976 Health and ecological concerns about hazardous substances in the general environment gradually expanded past just the matter of pesticides, in part due to concerns expressed by various environmental organizations Congress responded with the TSCAct, an action with initial public health promise, but subsequently found to be ineffective 11.2.3.1  History Federal legislation to control toxic substances was originally proposed in 1971 by the President’s Council on Environmental 294 Quality during the Nixon administration Its report, Toxic Substances, defined a need for comprehensive legislation to identify and control chemicals whose manufacture, processing, distribution, use, and/or disposal was potentially dangerous and not adequately regulated under other environmental statutes The enactment of the TSCAct of 1976 was influenced by episodes of environmental contamination such as the contamination of the Hudson River and other waterways by polychlorinated biphenyl (PCBs), the threat of stratospheric ozone depletion from chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) emissions, and contamination of agricultural produce by polybrominated biphenyls in the state of Michigan The episodes, together with more exact estimates of the costs of imposing toxic substances controls, opened the way for final passage of the legislation President Ford signed the TSCAct into law on October 11, 1976 [22] The TSCAct directs the EPA to execute the following key actions [22]: The TSCAct authorized EPA to screen existing and new chemicals used in manufacturing and commerce to identify potentially dangerous products or uses that should be subject to federal control [22] • Require manufacturers and processors to conduct tests for existing chemicals, • Prevent future risks through premarket screening and regulatory tracking of new chemical products, • Control unreasonable risks already known or as they are discovered for existing chemicals, • Gather and disseminate information about chemical production, use, and possible adverse effects to human health and the environment At the time of the TSCAct’s enactment, the law allowed continued production of the 62,000 chemicals already in commercial use, which were called existing chemicals Another 18,000 chemicals have been introduced into commerce since 1976, known as new chemicals In sum, approximately 80,000 chemicals potentially fall under the regulatory provisions of the TSCAct However, the chemical industry asserts that only about 15,000 chemicals are actively made, which would reduce their testing burden [23] The TSCAct authorizes the EPA to screen existing and new chemicals used in manufacturing and commerce in order to identify potentially dangerous products or uses that should be subject to federal control As enacted, the TSCAct also included a provision requiring the EPA to take specific measures to control the risks from PCBs Subsequently, three titles have been added to address concerns about other specific toxic substances: asbestos in 1986, radon in 1988, and lead in 1992 The amendments to the TSCAct are listed in Table 11.3 The EPA may require manufacturers and processors of chemicals to conduct and report the results of tests to determine the effects of potentially dangerous chemicals on living organisms Based on test results and other information, the EPA may regulate the manufacture, importation, processing, Environmental Policy and Public Health TABLE 11.3 Toxic Substances Control Act and Major Amendments Year Act 1976 1986 1988 1989 1990 1992 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act Radon Program Demonstration Act Asbestos School Hazard Abatement Reauthorization Act Radon Measurement Act Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act Source: Schierow, L., Toxic Substances Control Act, Summaries of environmental laws administered by the EPA National Library for the Environment, 1999, http://www.cnie.org/nl3/leg-8/k.html distribution, use, and/or disposal of any chemical that presents an unreasonable risk of injury to human health or the environment A variety of regulatory tools are available to the EPA under the TSCAct, ranging in severity from a total ban on production, import, and use to a requirement that a product must bear a warning label at the point of sale Key Provisions Relevant to Public Health 11.2.3.2  The TSCAact is a statute intended to protect the ENFORCEMENT public’s health from expo- EXAMPLE sure to toxic substances As described in the following (Washington, DC—August sections (adapted from [22]), 22, 2012): The EPA settled the TSCAct provides the EPA with INEOS Chlor Americas, with sweeping authorities to Inc., Wilmington, DE, to regulate chemical substances resolve violations of the Testing of Chemicals TSCAct INEOS allegedly TSCAct §4 directs the EPA imported various chainto require the development of length chlorinated paraffins test data on existing chemi- into the U.S without providcals when certain conditions ing the required notice prevail: (1) the manufacture, to the EPA Under this processing, distribution, use, settlement INEOS ended or disposal of the chemical the importation of short“may present an unreason- chained chlorinated parafable risk,” or (2) the chemi- fins into the U.S INEOS also cal is produced in very large agreed to provide to the EPA volume and there is a poten- the notices required by the tial for a substantial quantity TSCAct’s §5 for any medium to be released into the envi- or long-chain chlorinated ronment or for substantial or paraffin it proposes to significant human exposure import in the future [26] Under either condition, the EPA must issue a rule requiring tests if (1) existing data are insufficient to resolve the question of safety and (2) testing is necessary to develop the data Premanufacture Notification TSCAct §5 requires manufacturers, importers, and processors to notify the EPA at least 90 days prior to producing or otherwise introducing a new chemical product into the U.S At the time of submission, any Hazardous Chemical Substances information or test data that is known to, reasonably ascertainable by, or in possession of the notifier, and that might be useful to EPA in evaluating the chemical’s potential adverse effects on human health or the environment, must be submitted to the EPA The TSCAct also requires the EPA to be notified when there are plans to produce, process, or use an existing chemical in a way that significantly differs from previously permitted uses so that the EPA may determine whether the new use poses a greater risk of human or environmental exposure or effects than the former use Each year the EPA receives between 1500 and 3000 premanufacture notices (PMNs); most of these chemicals never go into commercial distribution [24] The EPA has 45 days after notification (or up to 90 days if it extends the period for good cause) to evaluate the potential risk posed by the chemical If the EPA determines that there is a reasonable basis to conclude that the substance presents or will present an unreasonable risk, the Administrator must promulgate requirements to adequately protect against such risk Alternatively, the EPA may determine that the proposed activity related to a chemical does not present an unreasonable risk This decision may be based on the available data, or when no data exist to document the effects of exposure, on what is known about the effects of chemicals in commerce with similar chemical structures and used in similar ways The TSCAct notification required of chemical manufacturers does not require them to report how their compounds are used or monitor where their products end up in the environment Neither companies have to conduct health and safety testing of their products either before or after they are entered into commerce According to one source, 80% of all applications to produce a new chemical are approved by the EPA with no health and safety data submitted Eighty percent are approved in three weeks [25] As policy, the lack of health and safety data is inconsistent with prudent public health practice because it goes counter to the prevention core of public health practice Regulatory Controls The alternative means available to the EPA for controlling chemical hazards that present unreasonable risks are specified in §6 of TSCA The EPA has the authority to: prohibit or limit the amount of production or distribution of a substance in commerce; prohibit or limit the production or distribution of a substance for a particular use; limit the volume or concentration of the chemical produced; prohibit or regulate the manner or method of commercial use; require warning labels and/or instructions on containers or products; require notification of the risk of injury to distributors and, to the extent possible, consumers; require recordkeeping by producers; specify disposal methods; and require replacement or repurchase of products already distributed Information Gathering TSCAct §8 requires the EPA to develop and maintain an inventory of all chemicals, or categories of chemicals, manufactured or processed in the U.S The first version of this inventory identified approximately 55,000 chemicals in commerce in 1979 All chemicals not on the inventory are, by definition, new and subject to the notification provisions of §5 These chemicals must be added to the inventory if they enter commerce Chemicals need not be 295 listed if they are only produced in very small quantities for purposes of experimentation or research To aid the EPA in its duties under TSCA, it was granted considerable authority to collect information from manufacturers The EPA may require maintenance of records and reporting of: chemical identities, names, and molecular structures; categories of use; amounts manufactured and processed for each category of use; descriptions of byproducts resulting from manufacture, processing, use, and disposal; environmental and health effects; number of individuals exposed; number of employees exposed and the duration of exposure; and manner or method of chemical disposal In addition, manufacturers, processors, and distributors of chemicals must maintain records of significant adverse reactions to health or the environment alleged to have been caused by the substance or mixture Industry also must submit lists and copies of health and safety studies Studies showing adverse effects previously unknown must be submitted to the EPA as soon as they are completed or discovered Imminent Hazards §7 provides the EPA with authority to take emergency action through the district courts to control a chemical substance or mixture that presents an imminent and unreasonable risk of serious widespread injury to health or the environment Relation to Other Laws TSCAct §9 allows the EPA to refer cases of chemical risk to other federal agencies (e.g., OSHA, FDA) with the authority to prevent or reduce the risk For statutes under EPA’s jurisdiction, the TSCAct gives the Administrator discretion to decide if a risk can best be handled under the authority of TSCA Enforcement and Judicial Review TSCAct §11 authorizes the EPA to inspect any facility subject to the TSCAct requirements and to issue subpoenas requiring attendance and testimony of witnesses, production of reports and documents, answers to questions and other necessary information §16 authorizes civil penalties, not to exceed $25,000 per violation per day, and affords the defendant an opportunity to request a hearing before an order is issued and to petition for judicial review of an order after it is issued Criminal penalties also are authorized for willful violations §17 provides jurisdiction to U.S district courts in civil actions to enforce the TSCAct §15 by restraining or compelling actions that violate or comply with it, respectively Chemicals may be seized and condemned if their manufacture, processing, or distribution violated the Act §20 authorizes civil suits by any person against any person in violation of the Act It also authorizes suits against the EPA to compel performance of nondiscretionary actions under TSCA §21 provides the public with the right to petition for the issuance, amendment or repeal of a rule requiring toxicity testing of a chemical, regulation of the chemical, or reporting Confidential Business Information TSCAct §14 provides broad protection of proprietary confidential information about chemicals in commerce Disclosure by the EPA employees of such information generally is not permitted except to other federal employees or when necessary to protect health or the environment Data from health and safety studies of chemicals are not protected unless their disclosure would reveal a chemical process or chemical proportion in a 296 mixture Wrongful disclosure of confidential data by federal employees is prohibited and may result in criminal penalties Chemical Categories TSCAct §26 allows the EPA to impose regulatory controls on categories of chemicals, rather than on a case-by-case basis Examples of chemical categories regulated by the EPA under §26 include PCBs and CFCs Other Provisions TSCAct §10 directs the EPA to conduct and coordinate among federal agencies research, development, and monitoring that is necessary to the purposes of the Act §22 waives compliance when in the interest of national defense §23 provides protection of employees who assist in carrying out the provisions of the act (i.e., whistle- blowers) §27 authorizes research and development of test methods for chemicals by the Public Health Service in cooperation with the EPA §28 Grants to states authorization to establish and operate programs to prevent or eliminate unreasonable risks to health or the environment It is apparent that the TSCAct gives the EPA broad authority to (1) induce testing of existing chemicals, currently in widespread commercial production or use; (2) prevent future chemical risks through premarket screening and regulatory tracking of new chemicals; (3) control unreasonable risk of chemicals; and (4) gather and disseminate information about chemical production, use, and possible adverse effects to human health and the environment [22] 11.2.3.3  Amendments to the TSCAct Starting in 1986, several important amendments to the TSCAct provide important public health authorizations to the EPA and other federal agencies in order to undertake programs on asbestos, radon, and lead Two amendments are specific to reducing the hazard of asbestos in schools The Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act of 1986 amends the TSCAct to direct the EPA Administrator to promulgate regulations for asbestos hazard abatement in schools and set standards for ambient interior concentrations of asbestos after completion of response actions in schools Other key provisions include the following: inform and protect the public during the phases of asbestos abatement, authorize each state governor to establish administrative procedures for reviewing school asbestos management plans, direct the EPA Administrator to make grants to local educational agencies, and make local educational agencies liable for civil penalties The Asbestos School Hazard Abatement Reauthorization Act of 1989 amended the 1986 act by deleting certain reporting requirements of states, directed state governors to maintain records on asbestos in schools, and made accreditation requirements of schools’ asbestos removal workers applicable to persons working with asbestos in public or commercial buildings [22] The TSCAct has been amended twice for the purpose of reducing the risk of radon gas in the ambient air of residential buildings The Radon Program Demonstration Act of 1988 established the national goal of making the air within buildings as free of radon as the outside ambient air The act contains several significant provisions The EPA is directed to make available to the public information about radon’s hazards, develop model construction standards for buildings, assist state radon programs, provide technical assistance to states, make Environmental Policy and Public Health grants to states on an annual basis for radon assessment and mitigation, and establish regional radon training centers in at least three institutions of higher learning The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 authorized the EPA to conduct research on radon and radon progeny measurement methods and mandated an EPA study on the feasibility of establishing a mandatory radon proficiency testing program [22] Of particular importance to public health, given the toxicity of lead in the environment, Title X of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 amended several federal statutes, including TSCA, for the purpose of reducing the health hazard of lead in community and workplace environments The act directs the Department of Housing and Urban Development to assess lead-based paint hazards in federally assisted housing, and requires housing agencies to take action on evaluating and reducing lead-based hazards The act amends the TSCAct by requiring that contractors and laboratories be federally certified The EPA is directed to conduct a comprehensive program to promote safe, effective, and affordable monitoring, detection, and abatement of lead-based paint and other lead exposure hazards Also, the Secretary of Labor was directed to issue an interim final regulation for workers’ exposure to lead in the construction industry Public Health Implications of the TSCAct 11.2.3.4  Unfortunately, the potential consequential benefits to the public’s health of the TSCAct did not materialize Of the major environmental health laws, the TSCAct stands out as the major disappointment in public health performance While there have been some positive impacts, particularly due to the act’s amendments, the larger promise of the TSCAct has not been realized At its core, the TSCAct provides the EPA with the authority to assess and control chemicals in commerce (i.e., existing chemicals) and new chemicals proposed for manufacture The intent is to protect the public from “unreasonable risk” to human health and the environment Given these laudable purposes, why has not the TSCAct lived up to its potential as an environmental health force? One reason why the TSCAct has failed is due of the large number of chemicals (80,000) that fall under regulatory coverage In theory, the EPA could require producers of these chemicals to conduct toxicity testing under the TSCAct’s authorities However, under TSCA, the EPA must find that a chemical presents an “unreasonable risk” before the agency can mandate toxicity testing Moreover, the EPA One reason why the must determine that any TSCAct failed is due of the risks are not outweighed by large number of chemicals a chemical’s economic and (80,000) that fall under societal benefits for each regulatory coverage way in which the substance might be used [22] These risks and benefits determinations pose a significant challenge to the EPA, owing to deficiencies in toxicological data for many substances and uncertainties in substances’ benefits The shortcomings of the TSCAct have been described by former EPA Assistant Administrator Lynn Goldman [24] She 492 Cost–benefit analysis Cost-effectiveness analysis Demographics Dermal Developing countries Diagnostic test Disease incidence Disease surveillance Disease Dose–response study Dose Ecology Ecosystem Effluent Emissions Environment Environmental contamination Environmental equity Environmental health Environmental justice Environmental medium Epidemiologic surveillance Epidemiology Ergonomics Exposure assessment Exposure investigation Exposure pathway Exposure route Exposure–response relationship Exposure Federalism Fibrosis Fossil fuel Fungicide Gene Genotoxicity Geographic information system (GIS) Appendix An economic technique applied to public decision-making that attempts to quantify in dollar terms the advantages (benefits) and disadvantages (cost) associated with a particular policy An analysis that measures the net cost of providing a service as well as the outcomes obtained The statistical study of human populations Referring to the skin Dermal absorption means absorption through the skin Those countries that are in the process of becoming industrialized but have constrained resources A laboratory test used to determine whether a person has a particular health problem The rate of new occurrences of a disease A data collecting system that monitors the occurrence of specific diseases (e.g., cancer) Illness; sickness; an interruption, cessation, or disorder of body functions, systems, or organs [2] A toxicological study of the quantitative relationship between the amount of a toxicant administered or taken and the incidence or extent of the adverse effect [6] The total amount of radiation or toxicant, drug, or other chemical administered or taken by the organism (adapted from [6]) The branch of biology that deals with the relations of organisms to one another and to their physical surroundings [7] A community of living organisms in conjunction with the nonliving components of their environment (things like air, water and mineral soil), interacting as a system Waste material discharged into the environment Pollutants released into the air or waterways from industrial processes, households, or transportation vehicles The circumstances, objects, and conditions by which one is surrounded [8] The presence of hazardous substances in the environment The proportionate and equitable distribution of environmental benefits and risks among diverse economic and cultural communities [9] Comprises of those aspects of human health, including quality of life, that are determined by physical, chemical, biological, social and psychosocial factors in the environment It also refers to the theory and practice of assessing, correcting, controlling, and preventing those factors in the environment that can Concern about the disproportionate occurrence of pollution and potential pollution-related health effects affecting low-income, cultural, and ethnic populations and lesser cleanup efforts in their communities [10] Material in the outdoor natural physical environment that surrounds or contacts organisms (e.g., surface water, groundwater, soil, air) and through which substances can move and reach organisms (adapted from [1]) The ongoing, systematic collection, analysis, and interpretation of health data essential to the planning, implementation, and evaluation of public health practice, closely integrated with the timely dissemination of these data to persons who need to know The study of the occurrence of disease in human populations An applied science concerned with the characteristics of people that need to be considered in designing and arranging things that they use in order that people and things will interact most effectively and safely [8] Determination of the sources, environmental transport and modification, and fate of pollutants and contaminants, including the conditions under which people or other target species could be exposed, and the doses that could result in adverse effects [10] The collection and analysis of site-specific information to determine whether human populations have been exposed to hazardous substances The site-specific information may include environmental sampling, exposuredose reconstruction, biologic or biomedical testing, and evaluation of medical information The path by which pollutants travel from sources via air, soil, water, or food to reach living organisms (adapted from [10]) The way a substance enters an organism after contact (e.g., inhalation, ingestion, dermal absorption) The relationship between exposure level and the incidence of adverse effects The amount of a stressor (e.g., a hazardous substance) that living organisms contact over a defined period of time A kind of government in which power is divided between a central government and independent regional (e.g., states) governments Formation of fibrous tissue as a reparative or reactive process [2] A fuel that is formed in the earth from animal or plant remains A substance that kills molds The functional unit of heredity that occupies a specific place or locus on a chromosome [2] An effect on the genetic material (DNA) of living cells that, upon replication of the cells, is expressed as a mutagenic or a carcinogenic event [6] A computer hardware and software system designed to collect, manipulate, analyze, and display spatially referenced data for solving complex resource, environmental, and social problems Appendix Global warming Governance Government Greenhouse gases Hazard assessment Hazard identification Hazard surveillance Hazard Hazard Health assessment Health education Health investigation Health surveillance Health Herbicide Hydroponics (n) Hypersensitivity In utero In vitro In vivo Incidence Ingestion Inhalation Insecticide Interaction Kyoto Protocol Leukemia Media Metabolism Metabolite Microgram (µg) Milligram (mg) Mixture Morbidity rate Morbidity Mortality 493 The progressive gradual rise of the earth’s surface temperature, thought to be caused by the greenhouse effect and responsible for changes in global climate patterns Administration, establishment, brass, organization—the persons (or committees or departments, etc.) who make up a governing body and who administer something The act or process of governing; specific: authorative direction or control [8] Gases that can absorb heat in the atmosphere An evaluation of the effects of a stressor or determining a margin of safety for an organism by comparing the concentration which causes toxic effects with an estimate of exposure to the organism [11a] Hazard identification of a given substances is an informed judgment based on verifiable toxicity data from animal models or human studies [11a] A data collecting system that monitors the distribution of specific hazards (e.g., carcinogens) (1) Potential for radiation, a chemical or other pollutant to cause human illness or injury (2) In the pesticide program, the inherent toxicity of a compound [11a] A factor or exposure that may adversely affect health [11] An evaluation of available data on existing or potential risks to human health posed by a Superfund site The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) is required to perform such an assessment at every site on the National Priorities List [11a] A program of activities to promote health and provide information and training about reducing exposure, illness, or disease that result from hazardous substances in the environment An investigation of a defined population, using epidemiologic methods, that would help determine exposures or possible public health impact by defining health problems, which require further investigation through epidemiologic studies, environmental monitoring or sampling, and surveillance The periodic medical screening of a defined population for a specific disease or for biologic markers of disease for which the population is, or is thought to be, at significantly increased risk Health is a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity [12] A chemical that kills weeds and other plants A method of growing plants using mineral nutrient solutions, in water, without soil A greater than normal bodily response to a foreign agent Within the womb; not yet born In an artificial environment, as in a test tube or culture medium In the living body The rate of development of disease in a population that can be expressed as either incidence density or cumulative incidence Prevalence refers to existing cases of a health condition in a population, and incidence refers to new cases [13] Taking food or drink into the body Chemicals can get in or on food, drink, utensils, cigarettes, or hands from which they can be ingested Breathing Exposure can occur from inhaling contaminants because they can be deposited in the lungs, taken into the blood, or both An agent that kills insects An outcome that occurs when exposure to two or more chemicals results in a qualitatively or quantitatively altered biologic response than that predicted from the actions of the components administered separately An international agreement struck by 159 nations attending the Third Conference of Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, held in December 1997 in Kyoto, Japan, to reduce worldwide emissions of greenhouse gases Cancer of the blood-forming tissues Soil, water, air, plants, animals, or any other parts of the environment that can contain contaminants The sum of chemical changes occurring in tissue For example, food is metabolized (chemically changed) to supply the body with energy Chemicals can be metabolized and made either more or less harmful by the body Any product of metabolism One one-millionth of a gram One one-thousandth of a gram Any set of two or more chemical substances, regardless of their sources, that may jointly contribute to toxicity in the target population The number of illnesses or cases of disease in a population Illness or disease The condition of being mortal; death 494 National Priorities List (NPL) Particulate matter Peer review Percentile Picogram (pg) Plume Policy Politics Potentially responsible parties Precautionary principle Prevalence Primary prevention Public comment Public health assessment Public health Pulmonary Quantitative structure activity relationships (QSAR) Random samples Range Record of decision Reference dose (RfD) Reference concentration (RfC) Registry Residual risk Risk Assessment Risk assessment Risk communication Risk estimate Risk Route of exposure Rulemaking Rule Screening program Appendix EPA’s listing of Superfund sites that have undergone preliminary assessment and site inspection to determine which locations pose immediate threat to persons living or working near the release A kind of air pollution that includes soot, dust, dirt, and aerosols Evaluation of the accuracy or validity of technical data, observations, and interpretation by qualified experts in an organized group process [10] Any of the values in a series dividing the distribution of the individuals in the series into 100 groups of equal frequency One one trillionth of a gram An area of chemicals in a particular medium, such as air or groundwater, that moves away from its source in a long band or column For example, a plume can be a column of smoke from a chimney or chemicals moving with groundwater A definite course or method of action selected from among alternatives and in light of given conditions to guide and determine present and future directions [8] The total complex of relations between people living in society [8] Persons or organizations liable under CERCLA for the costs of remediating NPL sites Decisions about the best ways to manage or reduce risks that reflect a preference for avoiding unnecessary health risks instead of unnecessary economic expenditures when information about potential risks is incomplete [10] The proportion of ill persons in a population at a point in time, expressed as a simple percentage Prevalence refers to existing cases of a health condition in a population, and incidence refers to new cases [13] The prevention of an adverse health effect in an individual or population through marked reduction or elimination of the hazards known to cause the health effects Invited comment from the general public on agency findings or proposed activities An evaluation by ATSDR of data and information on the release of hazardous substances into the environment to assess any current or future impact on public health, develop health advisories or other recommendations, and identify studies or actions needed to evaluate and mitigate or prevent human health effects; also, the document resulting from that evaluation “Public health is the process of mobilizing local, state, national, and international resources to solve the major health problems affecting communities” [14] Pertaining to the lungs The relationship between the properties (physical and/or chemical) of substances and their ability to cause particular effects, enter into particular reactions, etc The goal of QSAR studies in toxicology is to develop procedures whereby the toxicity of a compound can be predicated from its chemical structure by analogy with the known toxic properties of other toxicants of similar structure (adapted from [6]) Samples selected from a statistical population so that each sample has an equal probability of being selected [1] The arithmetic difference between the largest and smallest values in a data set An EPA document that discusses the various cleanup techniques that were considered for a site and an explanation of why a particular course of action was selected [15] The amount of a chemical that one can ingest every day for a lifetime that is not anticipated to cause harmful noncancer health effects The concentration of a chemical that one can breathe every day for a lifetime that is not anticipated to cause harmful noncancer health effects A system for collecting and maintaining, in a structured record, information on specific persons from a defined population The health risk remaining after risk-reduction actions are implemented, such as risks associated with sources of air pollution that remain after maximum achievable control technology has been applied [10] Qualitative and quantitative evaluation of the risk posed to human health and/or the environment by the actual or potential presence and/or use of specific pollutants [11a] The characterization of the potential adverse health effects of human exposures to environmental hazards” [16] An interactive process of exchange of information and opinion among individuals, groups, and institutions [17] A description of the probability that organisms exposed to a specific dose of a chemical or other pollutant will develop an adverse response, e.g., cancer The probability that an event will occur [11] The means by which a person may contact a chemical substance For example, drinking (ingestion) and bathing (skin contact) are two different routes of exposure to contaminants that may be found in water The agency process for formulating, amending, or repealing a rule [18] The whole or a part of an agency statement of general or particular applicability and future effect designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy [18] A program of screening for a health problem, diagnostic evaluation of persons who have positive screening test results, and treatment for persons in whom the health problem is diagnosed 495 Appendix Screening Secondary prevention Soluble Solvent Stakeholder Statistical significance Stressor Superfund Surveillance Sustainable development Synergism Toxicant Toxicity Toxicokinetics Toxicology Toxics Release Inventory Toxin Tumor Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) Weather Weight-of-evidence A method for identifying asymptomatic individuals as likely, or unlikely, to have a particular health problem The prevention or slowing of the progression of a health problem attributable to specific hazards through use of education, protective equipment, relocation away from the hazards or other means to avoid contact with the hazard Dissolves well in liquid A substance that dissolves another substance An individual or group that has an interest in or will be affected by an action A calculated value that infers the probability whether an observed difference in quantities being measured could be due to variability in the data rather than an actual difference in the quantities themselves A chemical, material, organism, radiation, noise, temperature change or activity that stresses an organism’s health or well-being Another name for the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLAct) The term is also used to refer to the Hazard Substance Superfund, the trust fund established by CERCLA A data collection system that monitors the occurrence of disease (disease surveillance) or the distribution of hazard (hazard surveillance) “Development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” [19] A response to a mixture of toxic chemicals that is greater than that suggested by the component toxicities A substance not produced by a living organism that causes a harmful effect when administered to a living organism See toxin The property of chemicals that causes adverse effects on living organisms Toxicodynamics; the study of the quantitative relationship between absorption, distribution, and excretion of toxicants and their metabolites [6] The science that deals with poisons (toxicants) and their effects [6] A publicly available EPA database that contains information on toxic chemical releases and other waste management activities reported annually by certain covered industry groups as well as federal facilities This inventory was established under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986 (EPCRA) and expanded by the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 A toxicant produced by a living organism [6] An abnormal mass of tissue Substances containing carbon and different proportions of other elements such as hydrogen, oxygen, fluorine, chlorine, bromine, sulfur, or nitrogen These substances easily become vapors or gases Many VOCs are commonly used as solvents (paint thinners, lacquer thinner, degreasers, and dry cleaning fluids) The short-term changes we see in temperature, clouds, precipitation, humidity, and wind in a region or a city Weather can vary greatly from one day to the next or even within the same day In the morning, the weather may be cloudy and cool But by afternoon, it may be sunny and warm [20] A systematic method for applying biomedical judgment to empirical observations and mechanistic considerations to qualitatively assess the potential toxicity of a substance, singly or in a chemical mixture, for a given target organ or system REFERENCES RiskFocus® 1990 Analysis of the Impact of Exposure Assumptions on Risk Assessment of Chemicals in the Environment: Part I, 123 Springfield, VA: VERSAR, Inc Hensyl, W R., ed 1987 Stedman’s Pocket Medical Dictionary Baltimore, MD: Williams & Wilkins NRC (National Research Council) 1997 Environmental Epidemiology, vol Washington, DC: National Academy Press Merriam-Webster 2001 Merriam-Webster online http:// www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/mwwod.pl BOC (Bureau of Census) 1992 Census of population and housing, 1990: Summary tape file on CD-ROM technical documentation Department of Commerce, Washington, DC Hodgson, E and P E Levi 1987 A Textbook of Modern Toxicology, 274, 361 New York: Elsevier 7 Oxford Dictionary 2005 Oxford Dictionary Online http:// www.askoxford.com/?view=uk Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary 1985 Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster Publishers WDOE (Washington Department of Ecology) 1995 A study on environmental equity in Washington state Report 95-413 Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA 10 CRARM (Commission on Risk Assessment and Risk Management) 1997 Framework for environmental health risk management U.S Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC 11 Yassi, A., T Kjellström, T De Kok, and T L Guidotti 2001 Basic Environmental Health Oxford: Oxford University Press 11a EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) 2016 EPA terms of environment dictionary http://www.ecologydictionary.org/ EPA-Terms-of-Environment-Dictionary/ 496 12 WHO (World Health Organization) 2000 About WHO http://www.who.int 13 Dicker, R C 1996 Analyzing and interpreting data In Field Epidemiology, ed M B Gregg New York: Oxford University Press 14 Detels, R and L Breslow 1991 Current scope and concerns in public health In Oxford Textbook of Public Health, 2nd ed., vol 1, ed W W Holland, R Detels, and G Knox Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications; Oxford University Press 15 EPA (U.S Environmental Protection Agency) 1992 Superfund progress—aficionado’s version, report PB92-963267, 11 Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, DC 16 NRC (National Research Council) 1983 Risk assessment in the federal government: Managing the process National Academy Press, Washington, DC Appendix 17 NRC (National Research Council) 1989 Improving Risk Communication, 20, 21 Washington, DC: National Academy Press 18 LII (Legal Information Institute) 2005 Subchapter II— Administrative procedure http://www.law.cornell.edu/ uscode/htm/uscode05/usc_sup_01_5_10_1_30_5_40_11 html 19 Brundtland, G R 1987 Our Common Future: The World Commission on Environment and Development Oxford: Oxford University Press 20 NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) 2015 What are climate and climate change? http://www.nasa gov/audience/forstudents/5-8/features/nasa-knows/what-isclimate-change-58.html Index Page numbers followed by “f” indicate figures; those followed by “t” indicate tables A Acceptable daily intake (ADI), 465, 474 Acid rain, 201 elimination of, 153 Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, 1980 history, 334 public health implications of, 334 Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine (AQSIQ), 273 Administrative Procedures Act of 1946, 77 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), 290, 322, 438–439 Environmental Justice Conference, 1990, 438–439 Agenda 21, 43, 110–112, 452 Air pollutant, definition of, 189 Air pollution control policies, 204–216 China’s policies on air pollution control, 215–216 EU’s policies on air pollution control, 211–215 India’s policies on air pollution control, 216 U.S Primary Policy: CAAct, 1955, 204–211 costs and benefits of U.S air pollution control, 217–218 and ecosystem health, associations between, 201–202 emissions of air pollutants, sources of, 190–191 global economic impact of, 218 global prevalence of, 192–197 in China, 194–195, 195f in European Union, 194 global indoor air pollution prevalence, 196–197 in India, 195–196 in United States, 193–194, 193t hazard interventions, 218–219 and human health, associations between, 197–201 effects on children’s health, 199–201 effects on morbidity, 197–198 effects on mortality, 198–199 introduction to, 189–190, 190f monitoring technology and models air quality modeling, 203 air quality monitoring, 202 monitoring and modeling, comparison of, 203–204 policy questions, 219–220 summary, 219 toxicology and standards for criteria and other pollutants, 191–192, 192t Volkswagen (VW) Corporation & Diesel Emissions, 2014–2016, 216–217 Air Pollution Control Act of 1955, 205 Air pollution control district (APCD), 205 Air quality guidelines (AQGs), 193 Air quality index (AQI), 194 Air quality monitoring (AQM), 202 Air toxics, 200 American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), 4, 463 American Lung Association (ALA), 145 American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM), 474 Analysis of variance (ANOVA) model, 448 Anderton et al study 1994, 445–446 1997, 449 Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), 387, 388 Animal Feeding Operations (AFOs), 267 Anopheles mosquito, 355–356 Appropriations legislation, 53 Arsenic risk brouhaha, 467–468, 468t Artificial selection, see Selective breeding Asilomar Conference of 1975, 384 Assistant Secretary of Health (ASH), 60 Authorizing legislation, 53, 79 B Baden and Coursey Study, 1997, 449–450 The Bali Action Plan, Bali, Indonesia, 2007, 138–139 The Basel Convention, 1989, 109–110 Beaches Environmental Assessment and Coastal Health (BEACH) Act, 232–233 Been study, 1995, 447–448 Benzene (C6H6), 194 Benzo[a]pyrene (BaP), 194 Best available control technology (BACT), 207 Best available technology (BAT), 231 Best practicable control technology (BPT), 231 Biodegradation, 324 Biodiversity and endangered species ecosystem health and endangered species, associations between, 412–413 hazard interventions, 413–414, 414t history of, 399–401 human health and endangered species, associations between, 412 importance of biodiversity, 401–402 biological services performed by ecosystems, 401 economic values, 401–402 intrinsic values, 402 introduction to, 399 policy questions, 414–415 practices and issues, 408–410 EPA’s responsibilities under Endangered Species Act, 410 National Marine Fisheries Service, 410 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service, 408–410, 409t species at risk of endangerment, 410–411, 411t species groups deemed endangered or vulnerable, 399–400, 400t successful rescues of endangered species, 412, 412t summary, 414 U.S and global policies on, 402–408 Australia’s Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, 1999, 407 convention on biological diversity, 407–408 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, 1973, 403–404 Endangered Species Act, 1973, 402–403 EU directives on species and biodiversity, 404–407 Marine Mammal Protection Act, 1972, 402 Bioremediation, 111 Black Death, 3, Blackwater, 251 Brine, see Produced water British Thermal Unit (BTU), 369 Bubonic plague, 359 Building Resilience Against Climate Effects (BRACE) framework, 66 Built environment current practices and issues, 422–424 air quality, 423 brownfields, 423 housing and health issues, 423 sprawl, 422–423 sustainability, 424 transportation priorities, 423–424 determinants of health and well-being in human habitation, 418f and ecosystem health, associations between, 429 global perspective, 426–427 China’s built environment, 426–427 Europe’s built environment, 426 India’s built environment, 427 seminal issue of selected global built policies, 427 hazard interventions, 429 and human health, associations between, 428 introduction to, 417 policies, 424–426 complete streets, 424–425 health in all policies (HiAP), 424 leadership in energy and environmental design, 425 other built environment policies, 425–426 policy overview, 422 policy questions, 430 social environment, 421–422 summary, 429 terms and concepts, 417–418 land-use policy actors, 418 land-use policy tools, 417–418 497 498 Built environment (cont.) U.S planning practices, history of, 418–421 industrialization and birth of a movement, 419–420 New Federalism and reemergence of public health, 421 U.S Federal Government’s growth into planning, 420–421 Bullard’s 1990 book and thesis, 437–438 Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 75 C California Air Resources Board (CARB), 198, 217 The Cancún, Mexico, Agreements, 2010, 139 Cap and Trade credits, see Pollution trading credits (PTCs) Carbon capture and storage (CCS), 151 Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, 140–141, 140f Carbon monoxide (CO), 191, 194 Carbon taxes, 152–153, 153t Carcinogen Identification Committee (CIC), 307 Carcinogens, 241 Carlin and Xia study, 1999, 450 Carpal Tunnel Syndrome, 34 Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, 2003, 386–387 Center for Biodiversity, 399–401 Center for Tobacco Products (CTP), 68–69 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 13, 65, 89, 234, 263, 351, 443 Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), 196, 216 Chemical waste management (CWM), 441 Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP), 324 Chikungunya virus (CHIKV), 357 China Food and Drug Administration (CFDA), 273 China’s built environment, 426–427 Chlorination, of public drinking water, 230 Chlorpyrifos, ecological risk of, 470 Cholera, 351–352 Chromated copper arsenate (CCA), 468 Cigarette smoking, 159 and cancer, 167 and cardiovascular disease, 166–167 and death, 166 and health risks, 166, 167 and respiratory disease, 167 secondhand tobacco smoke, 167–168 thirdhand tobacco smoke, 168 City Beautiful movement, 419, 422 Civil Rights Act of 1964, 61 Clean Air Act (CAAct), 4, 54, 85, 146, 190, 205, 206t, 442, 443, 461 Clean development mechanism (CDM), 137 Clean Power Plan, 2015, 149–150, 210 The Clean Water Act (CWAct), 1972, 229–237 cost and benefits of water pollution control, 237 ecosystem health and contaminated water, associations between, 235–236 The EPA Clean Water Rule, 2015, 236–237 The EPA Water Quality Trading Policy, 2003, 236 history of, 229–232 human health and contaminated water, associations between, 234–235 key provisions relevant to public health, 233–234 Index major amendments, 231t perspective of, 232–233 titles of, 230t Climate Action Plan, 2013, 148–149 Climate change, 360 adaptation, policies on, 155 on agriculture and species endangerment, portent of, 141–143 current signs of, 132–133 on ecosystem health, portent of, 144–146 global perspective, 130–133 global policies on China’s climate change policies, 151–152 EU climate change policies, 150–151 history of, 133–141 hazard interventions, 155 on human health, portent of, 143–144 impacts of human health, 143–144 industrial revolution, 129–130 introduction to, 129–130, 130f Obama administration’s policymaking on Clean Power Plan, 2015, 149–150 Climate Action Plan, 2013, 148–149 GHG Reporting Program, 2008, 148 U.S Supreme Court Decisions, 146–148 policy frameworks for mitigating cap and trade of GHGs, 153–155 carbon taxes and emissions trading systems, 152–153 policy issues, 146–155 policymaking, public’s role in, 155 policy questions, 156–157 summary, 155–156 Coal, combustion of, 130 Coal-to-gas (CTG) plants, 376 Commission for Social Justice (CSJ), 441 Committee to Coordinate Environmental Health and Related Programs (CCEHRP), 71 Committee to Coordinate Toxicology and Related Programs (CCTRP), 71 Community Development Act, 421 Community Modeling and Analysis System (CMAS), 203 Comparative risk assessment (CRA), 471–473, 472t Compound annual growth rate (CAGR), 244 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLAct), 1980, 13, 55, 85, 290, 318, 325–332, 437, 469, 475 ecosystem health and uncontrolled hazardous waste, associations between, 330 EPA’s Brownfields program, 332, 332t Hazardous Substance Trust Fund, 326 history of, 325–328 human health and uncontrolled hazardous waste, associations between, 330 key provisions relevant to public health, 328–330 vs Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRAct), 328t successes and criticisms of, 331–332, 331t Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System (CERCLIS), 441, 449 Concentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO), 267 Concise International Chemical Assessment Documents (CICADs), 311 Congressional Research Service (CRS), 55 Constitutional courts, 54 “The Constructive Dialogue” program, 426 Consumer Product Safety Act (CPSAct), 1972, 93–95 history of, 94 key provisions relevant to public health, 94 public health implications of, 94–95 Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), 94, 170, 293 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), 1973, 403–404 Criteria Air Pollutants (CAPs), 191, 193 Critical thinking, 22 Culture-Independent Diagnostic Tests (CIDT), 263 D Davidson and Anderton study, 2000, 450 DeKalb County Smoke-Free Air Ordinance, 179–180 Dengue virus (DENV), 357 Department of Agriculture, 72 Department of Commerce (DoC), 72–73 Department of Defense (DoD), 73 Department of Education (DOE), 464 Department of Energy (DOE), 73 Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), 62 Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), 53, 92, 171, 234, 306 agencies with environmental programs, 63–72 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), 64–65 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 65 National Center for Environmental Health (NCEH), 65–66 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 66 Office of Smoking and Health (OSH), 67 Food and Drug Administration (FDA), 67 Center for Tobacco Products (CTP), 68–69 National Center for Toxicological Research (NCTR), 67–68 Indian Health Service (IHS), 69 National Institutes of Health (NIH), 69–70 National Cancer Institute (NCI), 70 National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), 70–71 Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, 71–72 Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (DHEW), 58 Department of Homeland Security (DHS), 74, 100 Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), 74 Department of Interior (DOI), 75 Department of Justice (DOJ), 75–76 Department of Labor (DOL), 76 Department of State (DOS), 76 Department of Transportation (DOT), 76 Desalination, 252 Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant (DART), 307 499 Index Dichotomous environmental and public health statutes, 55–63, 56t department of health, education, and welfare and DHHS, 57–58 establishment of EPA, 60–63 governance climate, 62–63 legislative climate, 61–62 societal climate, 61 PHS surgeons general, role of, 58–60 U.S Public Health Service, emergence of, 56–57 Disability-adjusted life year (DALY), 113 Disease Prevention Model, 11, 11t Division of Vector-Borne Diseases (DVBD), 359 Dose–response assessment, 464, 471 E Ebola virus disease (EVD), 354–355 Ecoethics, 47 Ecological risk assessment, 469–470 Ecology, definition of, Ecosystem, definition of, Ecosystem health, implications for, 360–361 Electronic products waste, 342 Enabling legislation, see Authorizing legislation Endangered Species Act, 1973 (ESAct), 73, 402–403, 410 Endangered Species Protection Program (ESPP), 410 Energy Efficiency Directive (EED), 151, 426 Energy Policy Act, 2005, 375 Energy production and policies and climate change, 375–376 and ecosystem health, associations between, 378 global implications, 376–377 China’s energy policies, 376 Europe’s energy policies, 377 India’s energy policies, 376–377 hazard interventions, 378 and human health, associations between, 377–378 introduction to, 367 policy questions, 379–380 précis history of, 367–369 summary, 378–379 U S coal production and share of power generation, 369f U.S energy policies, 375 U.S energy production, 369–375 U.S field production of crude oil, 371f Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA), 73 Engineering Evaluation/Cost Assessment (EE/ CA), 327 Environmental Assessments (EAs), 388 Environmental equity, 435 Environmental ethics ecoethics, 47 ethics of individuals, 47–48, 48t ethics of organizations, 47 Environmental hazards, policies to control, 32–46 alternatives to command and control, 34–42, 35t litigation, 35 market power, 36–37 performance incentives, 37 precautionary approach, 37–42 command and control, 32–34 policy cornucopia, 45–46 public education, 42 sustainable development, 42–45 voluntary action by private sector entities, 45 Environmental health definition of, European roots, 9–10 evolution of, 7–11 historical environmental hazards, necessities for survival, 7–9 food security, 8–9 healthful air quality, potable water, sanitary waste management, 7–8 sustainable environment, recent trends, 10–11 resources of, 7t responsibilities of, 18 services, 18t Environmental Health Criteria (EHC) documents, 311 Environmental health policymaking authors’ reflection on, 481–484 closure, 484 critical thinking, 22 development and enactment of, 482–483 environmental ethics, 46–48 environmental hazards, policies to control, 32–46 environmental health, evolution of, 7–11 environmental health policy framework, 3–5 environmental health responsibilities, 18 establishment of agenda setting, 30 assessment and reformulation, 30 formulation and legitimation, 30 implementation, 30 policymaking is a combination of phases, 30 policy termination, 30 field of toxicology, 483 government, role of, 16–19 implications for, 353, 355, 359–360 influences on, 25–26, 26f introduction to, 3, 25 key definitions, 5–7 lessons learned, summary of, 481–484 mortality associated with environmental hazards, 482t nexus between human and ecological health, 11 PACM model, 31–32, 31f policy as a means to effect public health, 46, 46t policy questions, 23–24, 48–49 public health, fundamentals of, 11–13 public health practice, 13–15 public’s influence on, 26–30 domestic economic policies, 28–29 experts’ input, 28 form of governance, 29–30 free trade policies, 29 newsmedia, internet communications, and social media, 27–28 vested interest groups, 27 public’s policy expectations, 19–22 summary, 22–23, 48 Environmental health structure Administrative Procedures Act of 1946, 77 DHHS agencies with environmental programs, 63–72 dichotomous environmental and public health statutes, 55–63 policy questions, 80–81 summary, 80 U.S civics 101, 51–55 U.S federal government, 51–80 other health programs, 72–77 regulatory programs, 78–80, 78t Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), 370, 422 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), 91, 368, 388 Environmental inequity, 435 Environmental justice EPA definition of, 435 global perspective on, 452–453 history of, 437–451 Bullard’s 1990 book and thesis, 437–438 demographics investigations, 444–450 five key conferences/meetings, 438–440 seven seminal studies, 440–444 tabulation of studies, 450–451, 451t Warren County, North Carolina, Protest, 1982, 437 introduction to, 435 key events, 438t matter of definition, 435–437 NAACP Environmental and Climate Justice Program, 454 perspective on evolution of, 455–456 policy impacts of, 435–458 policy implications of, 456–457 policy questions, 457–458 poverty and, 453 President Clinton’s executive order on, 451–452 summary, 457 Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, 1964, 454 tribal issues of, 453–454 Environmental Performance Index (EPI), 122 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 51, 86, 318, 386, 388 study, 1992, 442–444 air pollution, 442–443, 442t blood lead levels (BLLs), 443, 443t children’s lead exposure, 443 major limitations, 442 other environmental hazards, 444 waste sites, 443 water contamination problems, 443–444 Environmental racism, 435 Environmental Research and Development Demonstration Authorization Act (ERDDAAct), 1976, 96–97 history of, 96–97 public health implications of, 97 Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI), 121 Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), 167 Environment, definition of, Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act, 1999, 407 Environment-related infectious diseases climate change, 360 ecosystem health, implications for, 360–361 environment and infectious diseases, 351–353 cholera, 351–352 clean water and sanitation, 353 typhus, 352–353 epidemiological triangle, 352f global perspective of, 351 500 Environment-related infectious diseases (cont.) hazard interventions, 361 hazardous disease agent, 352f introduction to, 351 policy questions, 361–362 summary, 361 tropical infectious diseases, 360 vector-borne diseases, emergence of, 354–360 mosquito-borne diseases, 355–358 rodent-borne diseases, 359 tick-borne diseases, 358–359 zoonotic diseases and human health Ebola virus disease (EVD), 354–355 H1N1 influenza virus, 353–354 quarantine and public health, 355 The EPA Clean Water Rule, 2015, 236–237 The EPA Water Quality Trading Policy, 2003, 236 Escherichia coli (E coli), 265, 266 European Chemical Agency (ECHA), 121, 309 European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), 119 European Environmental Agency (EEA), 36–37, 120–121 European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), 121 European Inventory of Existing Commercial Chemical Substances (EINECS), 308 European List of Notified Chemical Substances (ELINCS), 308 European Pollutant Registry (EPER), 121 European Union, 119–121 directives on species and biodiversity, 404–407 EU biodiversity strategy, 406–407 EU Birds Directive, 1979, 404 The Habitats Directive, 1992, 405 Natura 2000, 406 The North American Bird Conservation Initiative, 1999, 405–406 Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), 151, 153–154 GMO policies, 389–390 Maritime Pollution Policies, 335–336 European Union Directive on Tobacco, 2001, 182–183 labeling, 182–183 list of ingredients, 183 manufacture, presentation, and sale of tobacco products, 182 maximum yields of cigarettes, 182 tobacco for oral use, 183 Europe’s built environment, 426 Eutrophication, 201 Existing chemicals, definition of, 294 Exposure assessment, 464, 470, 471 F Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET), 280 Federal Aeronautics Administration (FAA), 76 Federal Communications Commission (FCC), 53 Federal Energy Administration (FEA), 73 Federal Facility Compliance Act of 1992, 322 Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSAct), 1960, 293 Federal Hazardous Substances Labeling Act of 1960, 170 Federal Housing Authority (FHA), 420 Index Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRAct), 1947, 20, 85, 287–293 amendments, 288t ecosystem health and pesticides, associations between, 291–293 history of, 288–290 definition of “pesticide,” 289 public disclosure, exclusive use, and trade secrets, 289 registration of pesticide products, 289 reregistration of pesticides, 289 restricted-use pesticides, 289 human health and pesticides and, associations between, 290–291 key provisions relevant to public health, 290 Federalism, 20, 51 Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIAct), 1906, 17, 264–267 ecosystem health and unsafe meat and, associations between, 266–267 history of, 264–265 human health and unsafe meat and, associations between, 266 key provisions of, 264–265 primary goals of, 264 public health implications of, 265–266 Federal Oil Conservation Board, 367–368 Federal Radio Commission in 1927, 79 Federal Register, 80, 148, 326, 408, 454 Federal Security Agency (FSA), 58 Federal systems, see Federalism Federal Water Pollution Control Act, 320 Finished Product Standards (FPS), 266 First National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit, 1991, 439–440, 439t FluView, 354 Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), 116, 263–264 Food and Drug Administration (FDA), 67, 86, 351, 387 Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network (FoodNet), 263 Food Code, 261–262 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCAct), 1906, 17, 172, 244, 260–264 amendments, 260–261, 261t chapters of, 261t ecosystem health and unsafe food, associations between, 263–264 history of, 260–261 human health and unsafe food, associations between, 263 key provisions relevant to public health, 261 public health implications of, 261–263 The Food Quality Protection Act (FQPAct), 1996, 32, 53, 86, 303–304 history of, 303 key provisions relevant to public health, 304 public health implications of, 304 titles of, 303t Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), 266 Food safety and security global policies EU food safety policies, 272–273 food safety policies in China, 273 food safety policies in India, 273–274 U.S Global Food Security Act, 2016, 274–275 global state of food security, 275–281 hazard interventions, 281–282 introduction to, 259, 260f policies, 259 policy questions, 282–283 state of food security in U.S., 275 summary, 282 U.S food safety and security policies Federal Meat Inspection Act, 1906, 264–267 Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, 1906, 260–264 Food Safety Modernization Act, 2011, 267–269 Nutrition Labeling and Education Act, 1990, 267 USDA food security policies, 269 U.S state and local food safety policies, 269–272 Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), 273–274 Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMAct), 2011, 267–269 Food security, 8–9 Food waste, 338–339 Food web disruptions, 145 Formation water, see Produced water Fracking, 372 G GAO study 1983, 440–441 1995, 446–447 Garden City movement, 419 General Food Law Regulation, 272 Generally recognized as safe (GRAS), 387 Gene technology, see Modern biotechnology; Genetic engineering Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) development and commercialization of, 383 and ecosystem health, associations between, 395 genetically modified crops, 383, 384f, 385f global policies, 389–392 in Brazil, 391–392 in China, 390–391 in European Union, 389–390 global prevalence of, 385 hazard interventions, 395 history of, 384 and human health, associations between, 394–395 introduction to, 383–384 labeling of products containing GMO ingredients EU policies on, 393, 393f industry’s voluntary labeling of GMO products, 389f, 392–393 other nations’ policies on, 393–394 U.S policies on, 392 policy questions, 396–397 prevalence and practices in U.S., 384–385 public’s perceptions of, 394 summary, 395–396 U.S policies on, 385–389 Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, 2003, 386–387 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 388 U.S Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology, 1986, 385–386 501 Index U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA), 387–388 U.S Food and Drug Administration (FDA), 387 U.S GMO policy and authorities, 387–389 U.S National Environmental Policy Act (NEPAct), 388 U.S State Laws, 388–389 WHO’s definition of, 383 Genetic engineering, 383 Genetic modification (GM), 383 Geographic information system (GIS) technique, 447 Georgia Smokefree Air Act, 176–179 GHG Reporting Program, 2008, 148 Global Agreement on Trade and Tariffs (GATT), 118 Global environmental health programs and policies, 107–123 European Union, 119–121 European Chemical Agency (ECHA), 121 European Environmental Agency (EEA), 120–121 European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), 121 global rankings of environmental status, 121–122 introduction to, 107 policy questions, 122–123 summary, 122 United Nations, 107–108 Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), 116 International Labour Organization (ILO), 115–116 United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), 116–117 United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), 108–112 World Health Organization (WHO), 112–115 World Bank, 117–118 World Trade Organization, 118–119 Globally Harmonised System (GHS), of classification and labeling of chemicals, 308 Global state of food security, 275–281 resources for enhancing food security, 280–281 Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET), 280 natural resources conservation service, 280–281 required agricultural practices (Vermont), 281 UN World Food Programme (WFP), 280 threats to food security, 276–280 climate change, 278–279 food waste, 277–278, 277f genetically modified food, 280 human population growth and food security, 276–277 loss of pollinators, 279 soil security and arable land, 279–280 Government Accountability Office (GAO), 297 Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), 19 Gray water, 251 The Great Depression, 26 The Great Recession, 28–29 Green Commerce, 36 Green Communities, 36 Greenhouse gases (GHGs), 108, 192, 237 cap and trade of, 153–155 carbon dioxide (CO2), 131, 131f distribution of, 131, 132f emissions, 130–133 fluorinated gases (F-gases), 131 methane (CH4), 131 nitrous oxide (N2O), 131 Reporting Program (GHGRP), 148, 211, 267 sources of, 131–132 stabilizing, 137 Green Revolution, 383 Guillain–Barré syndrome (GBS), 358 H H1N1 influenza virus, 353–354 Hantavirus pulmonary syndrome, 359 Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act (HABHRCA), 227 Harmful algal blooms (HABs), 226 Hazard assessment, 461 definition of, 3, 461 evaluation, 461 identification, 461, 464, 470 occupational, assessment of, 462–463 to public health, 462 quotient, 461 Hazard Communication Standard (HCS), 92 Hazard index (HI), 201 Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs), 33, 206, 207 Hazardous chemical substances endpoints to be affected by toxic substances, 288t global perspective on toxic substances, 308–312 EU policies on hazardous substances, 308–309 WHO polices on hazardous substances, 309–311 World Health Assembly’s Resolution on Chemicals Management, 2016, 311–312 hazard interventions, 312–313 introduction to, 287 policy questions, 313–314 summary, 313 U.S agencies with hazardous substances policies, 305–306 National Toxicology Program, 306 U.S Chemical Safety Board, 305 U.S Department of Labor, 305 U.S policies on, 287–304 Federal Hazardous Substances Act, 1960, 293 Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, 1947, 287–293 The Food Quality Protection Act, 1996, 303–304 Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, 2016, 302–303 Toxic Substances Control Act, 1976, 293–302 U.S state policies on, 306–308 State of California, 306–307 State of Massachusetts, 307 State’s legislation on consumer’s right to know, 307–308 workplace notification of, 288f Hazardous waste, 319, 320f Hazardous waste sites (HWS), 318, 450 Hazard Ranking System (HRS), 326 Haze, 201 Health and Environment Linkages Initiative (HELI), 309 Health, definition of, Health Impact Assessment (HIA), 370, 422 Health in all policies (HiAP), 424 Heitgerd et al study, 1995, 448 Hird study, 1993, 444–445 Homo sapiens, 399 Housing Act of 1949, 420–421 Human health risk assessment, 464–469 arsenic risk brouhaha, 467–468 methods for quantifying risks, 465–467 cancer risks, characterization of, 466–467 noncancer risks, characterization of, 465–466 value of human’s life, 468–469 I INCHEM database, 311 Indian Health Service (IHS), 69 India’s built environment, 427 Industrial Hygiene Model, 11–12, 11t Information Quality Act, 2001, 97–99 history of, 97–99 public health implications of, 99 Intensive agriculture, 279 Interagency Liaison Regulatory Group (ILRG), 463–464 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 1988, 135, 250 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), 418, 423 International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), 115, 192, 197–198, 292, 309–310, 309t, 310t International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), 117 International Chemical Safety Cards (ICSCs), 311 International Development Association (IDA), 117 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO), 299 International Labour Organization (ILO), 115–116 International Maritime Organization (IMO), 335 International policies on maritime pollution, 335–336 International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS), 115, 310–311 International river basin district (IRBD), 247 International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), 400, 403, 405 Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC), 78 INTOX system, 311 K Kyoto Protocol (KP) of UNFCCC, 1987, 136–138 binding targets for developed countries, 137 502 Kyoto Protocol (KP) of UNFCCC, 1987 (cont.) industrialized country commitments, 136–137 monitoring compliance, 137 national programs, 136 new tools to reduce emissions, 137 overall framework, 136 reporting on emissions, 136 sharing technologies, 137 stabilizing GHGs, 137 L Land Disposal Program Flexibility Act of 1996, 322 Land Use, Land Use Change Forestry (LULUCF), 138 Land-use policy actors, 418 city planning commissions, 418 Council of Governments (COGs), 418 metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), 418 regional planning commissions, 418 Land-use policy tools, 417–418 building codes, 417 comprehensive plans, 417 subdivision regulations, 417–418 zoning codes, 417 Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, 2016, 302–303 history of, 302 key provisions relevant to public health, 302–303 Lead and Copper Rule, 241, 242 Lead emissions, 191 Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), 425 Legionella, 242–243, 243f Legislative courts, 54 Limit of quantification (LOQ), 467 London Convention and Protocol, 1972, 335 Lowest-observed adverse-effect level (LOAEL), 466, 474 Lowest observed effect concentration (LOEC), 466 M Maantay Study of Municipal Zoning Laws and Environmental Justice, 2002, 444 Malaria, 355–356 Margin of exposure (MOE), 465, 466 Margin of safety (MOS), 461, 465 Marine Hospital Service (MHS), 57 Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPAct), 1972, 73, 402 Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA), 334 Market-based instruments (MBIs), 36–37 The Marrakesh, Morocco, Accord, 2001, 138 Master Chemical Mechanism (MCM), 203 Material safety data sheets (MSDSs), 92 Maximum available control technology (MACT), 206 Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs), 239 Medical waste, 319 Medical Waste Tracking Act of 1988, 322 Metzger et al Study of Environmental Hazards and Hispanics’ Health, 1995, 444 Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), 245 Index Microbial contaminants, 241 Microorganisms, 388 Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), 76 Minimal risk levels (MRLs), 475 Ministry of Agriculture (MOA), 391 Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP), 215 Ministry of Environment and Forest (MoEF), 216 Minor Civil Divisions (MCDs), 446 Modern biotechnology, 383 Mohai and Bryant study, 1992, 441–442 Mohai and Saha study, 2015, 450 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, 1987, 134–135 Morello-Frosch et al study, 2002, 450 Mosquito-borne diseases, 355–358 chikungunya virus (CHIKV), 357 dengue virus (DENV), 357 malaria, 355–356 vector control and pesticides, 358 West Nile virus (WNV), 357 yellow fever, 356 Zika virus (ZIKV), 357–358 Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), 42 Municipal solid waste (MSW), 318–319, 318f, 319f N NAACP Environmental and Climate Justice (ECJ) Program, 454 National Academy of Sciences (NAS), 28, 468 National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), 77 National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), 53, 76–77 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), 191, 207, 209 National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO), 18 National Association of County Health Officials (NACHO), 18 National Board of Health (NBH), 355 National Cancer Institute (NCI), 70, 291, 306 National Center for Environmental Health (NCEH), 65–66 National Center for Toxicological Research (NCTR), 67–68 National Coalition of Hispanic Health and Human Services Organizations (COSSMHO), 443, 444 National Contingency Plan (NCP), 1968, 89 National Drinking Water Contaminant List (CCL), 241 National Energy Efficiency Action Plan, 426 National Environmental Justice Conference, 1994, 436, 440 National Environmental Policy Act (NEPAct), 1969, 51, 89–91 history of, 89–90 key provisions relevant to public health Congressional Declaration of National Environmental Policy, 90–91 Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), 91 public health implications of, 91 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), 443 National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 211 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 66, 92, 287, 463, 467, 468 National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), 70–71, 306 National Institutes of Health (NIH), 69–70, 306 National Law Journal study, 1992, 444 Nationally appropriate mitigation actions (NAMAs), 139 Nationally determined contributions (NDCs), 140 National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), 410 National Notifiable Diseases Surveillance System (NNDSS), 351 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 72–73, 145, 227 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), 230–231, 267 National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR), 238, 240 National Priorities List (NPL), 444–445 sites, 331, 331t National Quarantine Act (NQA) of 1878, 355 National Research Council (NRC), 461, 464 National-Scale Air Toxics Assessment (NATA), 200, 201 National Science Foundation (NSF), 53, 77 National Secondary Drinking Water Regulation (NSDWR), 238, 240 National Toxicology Program (NTP), 71, 306 Natura 2000, 406 Natural habitat degradation, 324 Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), 244 New Animal Drug Application (NADA), 387 New animal drugs (NADs), 387 New chemicals, definition of, 294 New Drug Application (NDA), 387 New Line Speed Inspection System (NELS), 266 New Poultry Inspection System (NPIS), 266 New Source Review (NSR), 208–209 New Turkey Inspection System (NTIS), 266 Nicotine, 159 Nitrogen dioxide (NO2), 194, 206 Noise Control Act, 1972, 95–96 history of, 95 public health implications of, 95–96 No observed adverse effect level (NOAEL), 466, 474 No observed effect concentration (NOEC), 466 North America Bird Conservation Initiative (NABCI), 405 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), 29 Nutrient pollution, sources of, 226 Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA), 1990, 267 O Oakes et al study, 1996, 448–449 Occupational injury risk assessment, 470–471 Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHAct), 1970, 4, 91–93 history of, 91–92 public health implications of, 92–93, 93f Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), 55 503 Index Ocean acidification, 132–133, 145 Ocean Dumping Act (ODAct), 1972, 333–334 history of, 333–334 public health implications of, 334 Ocean waste pollution, 332–336 Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, 1980, 334 EU Maritime Pollution Policies, 335–336 International Maritime Organization, 335 International policies on maritime pollution, 335–336 items found at ocean beaches, 333t London Convention and Protocol, 1972, 335 Ocean Dumping Act, 1972, 333–334 U.S Policies on Maritime Pollution, 333–334 Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), 306–307 Office of Hazardous Materials (HMS), 76 Office of Management and Budget (OMB), 53, 98, 99, 469 Office of Noise Abatement and Control (ONAC), 95 Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), 385–386 Office of Smoking and Health (OSH), 67 Ohio’s Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission, 418 Oil drilling, 372 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), 218 Orthomyxoviridae, 353 Oxides of nitrogen (NOX), 191–192 Ozone (O3), 192, 194 Ozone depletion, 134, 201 P PACM model, 31–32, 31f, 451 action, 31–32 change, 32 monitoring, 32 pressure, 31 Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO), 357 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act (PAHPA), 2006, 103 The Paris Agreement, 140 Particulate matter (PM), 192, 194 Permissible exposure limits (PELs), 305, 463 Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs), 109, 111, 290 Pesticides, 388 Pipe line and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), 375 Planetary health, definition of, 481 Plant-incorporated protectants (PIPs), 388 Plant Protection Act (PPA), 387 Plastics waste, 339–342 human health and ecological effects of, 341–342, 341t microbeads in waste, 341 in oceans, 340–341 as solid waste, 339–340 Policy, definition of, Political action committees (PACs), 27 Politics, definition of, 6–7 Pollution Prevention Act (PPAct), 318 Pollution trading credits (PTCs), 37 Potentially responsible parties (PRPs), 326, 327 Powassan (POW) virus, 359 Precautionary principle elements of, 40, 40t environmentalist’s version of, 40–41 European Union, position of, 41–42 history of, 38–39 international charters, 39–40 overview, 37–38 U.S federal government, position of, 41 Presidential/Congressional Commission on Risk Assessment and Risk Management (CRARM), 436–437 Presidential Policy Directive 21 (PPD-21), 74 Prevention and control of air pollution (PCAP), 215 Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD), 207, 208 Produced water, 251 Production tax credit (PTC), 370, 373f Proposition 65 (Prop 65), 306, 307 Public health agency, 14 definition of, 5–6 Disease Prevention Model, 11, 11t fundamentals of, 11–13 Industrial Hygiene Model, 11–12, 11t prevention of disease and disability, enemies of, 12t Public Health and Marine Hospital Service (PHMHS), 57 Public health practice, 13–15 behavioral science, 15 elements of, 13f epidemic investigation, 14 information/communication capacity, 14 laboratory science, 14–15 and medical practice, comparison of, 15–16 benefits and risks, 16 sociopolitical factors, 16 organizational capacity, 13 public health programs, 15 surveillance, 14 workforce competency, 13–14 Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act, 2002, 100–103 history of, 100 key provisions relevant to public health, 100–102 public health implications of, 102–103 titles of, 100–102, 100t additional provisions, 102 drinking water security and safety, 102 enhancing controls on dangerous biological agents and toxins, 101–102 national preparedness for bioterrorism and other public health emergencies, 100–101 protecting safety and security of food and drug, 102 Public Health Service Act (PHSAct), 1912, 10, 57, 87–89, 317, 387 history of, 88 key provisions relative to public health, 88–89 Public Housing Act of 1937, 420 Public’s policy expectations, 19–22 accountability, 19 communication of risk, 19 cost-benefit analysis, 19–20 environmental justice, 20 federalism, 20 polluter pays for consequences of pollution, 20–21 prevention is preferred to remediation, 21 product safety, 21 public’s right to know, 21 risk assessment, 21–22 social support, 22 Pure Food and Drugs Act of 1906, 260 Q Quality of life, 6, 78, 79 Quiet Communities Act of 1997, 95 R Ready-to-cook (RTC) poultry, 266 Recommended exposure limit (REL), 305, 467 Record of decision (ROD), 327, 446 Recycling, of waste The Circular Economy, 344 innovative technology for waste reduction, 343 issues, 343 Reference concentration (RfC), 465, 466 Reference dose (RFD), 241, 465 ReGen villages, 425 Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), 154 Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals (REACH) framework, 42, 120, 308–309 Regulatory agencies, 78 Regulatory authority, 78 Regulatory dose (RgD), 465 Regulatory relief, 78 Remedial investigation and feasibility study (RI/ FS), 327 Renewable Energy Directive (RED), 151 Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Program, 211 Renewable portfolio standards (RPS), 375 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRAct), 85, 445 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, 386 Risk characterization of, 464, 470, 471 definition of, 3, 461 estimation of, 461 Risk assessment chlorpyrifos, ecological risk of, 470 ecological, 469–470 four elements of, 462f, 464 human health, 464–469 arsenic risk brouhaha, 467–468 cancer risks, characterization of, 466–467 methods for quantifying risks, 465–467 noncancer risks, characterization of, 465–466 value of human’s life, 468–469 introduction to, 461 key definitions and abbreviations, 461–462 occupational injury, 470–471 other applications of, 471–475 comparative risk assessment, 471–473, 472t data-derived safety factors, 474–475 risk-based corrective action, 473–474 other critics of, 476–477 policy impacts of, 461–477 policy questions, 477–478 public health concerns about, 475–476 summary, 477 504 Risk assessment (cont.) in U.S., evolution of, 462–463 U.S federal government’s involvement, 463–464 Risk Assessment Work Group (RAWG), 464 Risk-based corrective action (RBCA), 473–474 Risk Management Limit for Carcinogens (RML-CA), 467 Rodent-borne diseases, 359 Rulemaking process, 77 S The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWAct), 1974, 85, 237–246, 443, 461 bottled drinking water, 244–245 ecosystem health and nonpotable water, associations between, 243–244 EPA drinking water requirements for states and PWS, 242 Flint, Michigan, Water Crisis, 2014–2016, 245–246 history of, 237–238 human health and nonpotable water, associations between, 242–243 key provisions relevant to public health, 239–242 and major amendments, 238–239, 238t Safety factor (SF), 465 Saltwater, see Produced water Sanitary waste management, 7–8 Second National People of Color Environmental Leadership Summit, 2002, 440 Selective breeding, 384 Sites of Community Importance (SCIs), 406 Social determinants of health (SDOH), 453 Soil Conservation Service (SCS), 281 Solid Waste Disposal Act (SWDAct), 317, 320, 324–325 permit revocation, 324 permits, 324 site inspection, 325 site modification, 325 Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), 406 Special Protection Areas (SPAs), 406 State implementation plan (SIP), 204, 207 State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs), 216 Streamlined Inspection System (SIS), 266 Sulfur dioxide (SO2), 192, 194, 206 Superfund Act, 461 Superfund law, see Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLAct) Surface Water Treatment Rule, 241 Sustainable development, 43 “Swine flu,” see H1N1 influenza virus T Threshold effect, 145 Threshold limit values (TLVs), 463 Tick-borne diseases, 358–359 Tobacco products, 159–186 authority of Food And Drug Administration (FDA), 172–175 chewing, oral, or spit tobacco, 163 cigarettes, 161, 165–166 cigars, 161–162, 168 DeKalb County Smoke-Free Air Ordinance, 179–180 Index and ecosystem health, associations between use of, 169–170 electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), 163–164, 164f, 169 Georgia Smokefree Air Act, 176–179 global control of tobacco and related products, 180–184 hazard interventions, 184–185 hookah water pipe, 162f and human health, associations between use of, 165–169 introduction to, 159 pipes, 162–163, 168–169 policy questions, 185–186 précis history of tobacco use, 159–160, 160t prevalence of, 161–164 private sector tobacco policies, 180 requirement of smokeless tobacco product warning labels, 172, 174f restriction of tobacco marketing and sales to youth, 172 smokeless tobacco, 163, 169 snuff or dipping tobacco, 163 snus, 163 state and local tobacco policies, 175–180 summary, 185 tobacco plants, 160f tobacco sticks, 163 tobacco use in China, 183–184 and users, global prevalence of, 164–165 U.S federal policies on tobacco use and control, 170–175 U.S states with tobacco smoking policies, 176f Tolerance, definition of, 289 Total maximum daily load (TMDL), 231–232, 236 Toxicology, 287 Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), 32, 45, 55–56, 86, 109, 330, 450 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCAct), 1976, 20, 293–302 amendments to, 296 ecosystem health and hazardous substances, associations between, 301–302 history of, 293–294 human health and hazardous substances, associations between, 297–301 endocrine disruptors, health effects of, 299–300 hazardous substances and children’s health, 298, 299t obesogens, health effects of, 300–301 key provisions relevant to public health, 294–296 and major amendments, 294t public health implications of, 296–297 Toxics Use Reduction Act (TURA), 307 Treat, store, and disposal facilities (TSDFs), 440, 445–446, 447, 449 Treaty of Versailles (1919), 107–108 Tropical infectious diseases, 360 Typhus, 352–353 U Uncertainty factor (UF), 465 UN Climate Change Conference, Doha, Qatar, 2012, 139 UN Climate Change Conference, Paris, France, 2015, 140–141 UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), 1992, 109, 110–111 UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), 141 Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), 52, 108 United Church of Christ Report, 1987, 441 United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), 200 United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), 116–117 United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), 44, 108–112, 133, 228, 235 The Basel Convention, 1989, 109–110 convention on POPs, 2000, 111 program goals, 108–109 UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), 1992, 110–111 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD), 2002, 111–112 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), 1992, 39, 135–136, 360 Unit risk estimate (URE), 466–467 University of Michigan’s Natural Resources Conference, 1990, 438 Unregulated Contamination Monitoring Rule (UCMR), 239 UN World Food Programme (WFP), 280 Upper confidence limit (UCL), 466 Urban greening, 425 Urban local bodies (ULBs), 427 U.S Agency for International Development (USAID), 76, 280 U.S Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), 232, 237 U.S Chemical Safety Board (CSB), 305 U.S Climate Change Policymaking, overview of, 146 U.S Code, 53 U.S Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology, 1986, 385–386 U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA), 288, 353, 387–388 U.S Department of Labor (DOL), 305 U.S Department of Transportation (DOT), 175 U.S energy policies, 375 Energy Policy Act, 2005, 375 Pipe line and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), 375 state renewable portfolio standards (RPS), 375 U.S energy production, 369–375 influences on production and policy, 370 introduction to, 369–370 policy instruments, 370 sources of fossil fuels, 371–372 nuclear energy, 374–375 renewable energy sources, 372–374 U.S federal environmental health programs Department of Agriculture (USDA), 72 Department of Commerce (DoC), 72–73 Department of Defense (DoD), 73 Department of Energy (DOE), 73 Department of Homeland Security (DHS), 74 Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), 74 Department of Interior (DOI) Bureau of Land Management (BLM), 75 505 Index U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (EWS), 75 U.S Geological Survey (USGS), 75 Department of Justice (DOJ), 75–76 Department of Labor (DOL), 76 Department of State (DOS), 76 Department of Transportation (DOT), 76 National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), 53, 76–77 National Science Foundation (NSF), 53, 77 U.S federal environmental statutes confluence of vested interests, 86–87 Consumer Product Safety Act, 1972, 93–95 enforcement and penalties, 87 Environmental Research and Development Demonstration Authorization Act, 1976, 96–97 fear of catastrophic events, 85–86 impetus for, 86t Information Quality Act, 2001, 97–99 introduction to, 85 National Contingency Plan, 1968, 89 National Environmental Policy Act, 1969, 89–91 Noise Control Act, 1972, 95–96 Occupational Safety and Health Act, 1970, 91–93 opportunistic conditions, 86 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act, 2006, 103 policy questions, 103–104 Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act, 2002, 100–103 Public Health Service Act, 1912, 87–89 public health tradition, 85 regulations and standards, 87 summary, 103 U.S federal government Administrative Procedures Act of 1946, 77 constitutional basis of, 52–55 executive branch, 53–54, 53t judicial branch, 54–55, 54f legislative branch, 52–53 core structure of, 52f DHHS agencies with environmental programs, 63–72 dichotomous environmental and public health statutes, 55–63 environmental health structure, 51–80 other environmental health programs, 72–77 policy questions, 80–81 regulatory programs, 78–80, 78t summary, 80 U.S civics 101, 51–55 U.S federal policies on tobacco use and control, 170–175 1976 Amendment to the FHSAct of 1960, 171 Appropriations Act: Public Law 100–202 (1987), 171 Comprehensive Smokeless Tobacco Health Education Act of 1986, 171 Comprehensive Smoking Education Act of 1984, 171 Consumer Product Safety Act of 1972, 170 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009, 171 Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act of 1965, 170 Federal Hazardous Substances Labeling Act of 1960, 170 Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 (amended in 1938), 170 Little Cigar Act of 1973, 170 Pro-Children Act of 1994, 171 Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act of 1969, 170 Public Law 101–164 (1989), 171 Synar Amendment to the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration Reorganization Act of 1992, 171 Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976, 171 U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (US FWS), 75, 408–410, 409t U.S Food and Drug Administration (FDA), 67, 86, 351, 387 U.S Geological Survey (USGS), 75, 226, 290 U.S Global Food Security Act, 2016, 274–275 U.S GMO Policy and Authorities, 387–389 U.S Government Accountability Office (GAO), 155 U.S Green Building Council’s (USBC), 425 U.S judicial system, 54–55, 54f administrative law, 54–55 common law, 54 constitutional law, 54 statutory law, 54 U.S National Environmental Policy Act (NEPAct), 388 U.S Oil Pollution Act (OPAct), 1990, 336–337 history of, 336 Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund, 336 public health and ecosystem implications of, 336–337 U.S Policies on Maritime Pollution, 333–334 U.S Pollution Prevention Act (PPAct), 1990, 337–338 history of, 337–338 public health implications of, 338 requirements of, 337–338 U.S Primary Policy: CAAct, 1955 EPA’s air quality index, 210, 210t history of, 204–206 key provisions relevant to public health, 207–210 regulations on GHGs, 210–211 U.S Public Health Service (PHS), 51 emergence of, 56–57 surgeons general, role of, 58–60 U.S public water systems (PWS), 235 U.S Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRAct), 1976, 318–325 amendments to, 321–322, 321t ecosystem health and solid waste, associations between, 324 history of, 318–321 human health and solid waste, associations between, 323 illustrative State Solid Waste Act, 324–325 key provisions relevant to public health, 322–323 policy issues, 325 subtitles of, 322–323, 322t U.S State Laws, 388–389 U.S Supreme Court Decisions, 146–148 V “Value-laden” terminology, 465 Vector-borne diseases, emergence of, 354–360 epidemiological triangle of, 355f mosquito-borne diseases, 355–358 rodent-borne diseases, 359 tick-borne diseases, 358–359 Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), 203 W War on Cancer, 70 Warren County, North Carolina, Protest, 1982, 436f, 437 Waste, definition of, 317 Waste generation and management Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, 1980, 325–332 global perspective of, 338–342 electronic products waste, 342 food waste, 338–339 plastics waste, 339–342 hazard interventions, 344 introduction to, 317 ocean waste pollution, 332–336 plastic waste pollution, 318f policy overview, 317–318 policy questions, 345–346 summary, 344–345 U.S Oil Pollution Act, 1990, 336–337 U.S Pollution Prevention Act, 1990, 337–338 U.S Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 1976, 318–325 waste reduction, 342–344 Waste reduction The Circular Economy, 344 four Rs, 320t innovative technology for, 343 recycling issues, 343 Waterborne-disease outbreaks (WBDOs), 234, 242, 243f The Water Framework Directive, 247 Water quality and security chemical contaminants, 225–226 global state of, 227–229, 229t global water pollution policies China’s water pollution policies, 248 EU water pollution policies, 246–247 India’s water pollution policies, 248–249 global water security policies climate change’s impact on water security, 250 state of California’s drought policies, 250–251 water security and desalination, 252 water security and gray water, 251–252 water security and produced water, 251 hazard interventions, 253 improved water efficiency and other successes, 252–253, 253f introduction to, 225, 226f policy questions, 254–255 summary, 253–254 U.S water policies, 229–246 The Clean Water Act (CWAct), 1972, 229–237 The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWAct), 1974, 237–246 water contamination and security, 225–227 West Nile virus (WNV), 357 Workable program for community improvement (WPCI), 421 World Bank, 117–118 506 World Health Assembly’s Resolution on Chemicals Management, 2016, 311–312 World Health Organization (WHO), 95, 107, 112–113, 287, 351, 467 environmental health programs, 115 Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), 2005, 160, 180–181 global health risk factors, 114t alcohol consumption, 114 high blood pressure and cholesterol, 114 indoor smoke from solid fuels, 114 iron deficiency, 114–115 obesity, overweight, and high body mass, 115 tobacco consumption, 114 Index underweight/undernutrition, 113–114 unsafe sex, 114 unsafe water and sanitation, 114 International Health Regulations (WIHR), 351 key facts on Global Tobacco Control, 181–182 advertisement bans lower consumption, 182 picture warnings work, 181–182 secondhand smoke, 181 taxes discourage tobacco use, 182 polices on hazardous substances, 309–311 World Meteorological Organization (WMO), 133 World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD), 2002, 44, 109, 111–112 World Trade Organization, 107, 118–119 World Wildlife Fund (WWF), 410–411 Y Yellow fever, 356 Z Zero net emission (ZNE) requirements, 425 Zika virus (ZIKV), 357–358 Zimmerman study, 1993, 446 Zoonotic diseases and human health Ebola virus disease (EVD), 354–355 H1N1 influenza virus, 353–354 quarantine and public health, 355 ... that in your opinion are protective of public health Environmental Policy and Public Health 15 As the senior public health officer in your local health department, a community group of concerned... set workplace standards under the provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (Chapter 4) Specifically, 29 CFR 1910 Subpart Z, 1915 Subpart Z, and 1 926 Subparts D and Z of the OSHAct... About IPCS, 20 02, http://www.who.int/pcs/html 310 Environmental Policy and Public Health in humans An IARC finding that a particular agent is a human carcinogen has genuine public health importance
- Xem thêm -

Xem thêm: Ebook Environmental policy and public health (2/E): Part 2, Ebook Environmental policy and public health (2/E): Part 2, 9 Case Study: VW Corporation & Diesel Emissions, 2014–2016, 4 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, 1980, 8 Public’s Perceptions of GMOs, 4 President Clinton’s Executive Order on Environmental Justice

Tài liệu mới đăng

Mục lục

Xem thêm

Gợi ý tài liệu liên quan cho bạn