Indoor Air Contamination from Hazardous Waste Sites: Improving the Evidence Base for Decision-Making

A Community-Engaged Oral History Study as a Tool for Understanding Environmental Justice Aspects of Human Exposures to Hazardous Waste Thermal Treatment Emissions in Colfax, LA

This study investigates environmental justice (EJ) themes related to siting a hazardous waste thermal treatment facility near a low-income community of color. We investigated effects of living near a hazardous waste thermal treatment facility through three EJ aspects: recognitional, procedural, and distributive justice. The study involved the collection of oral history interviews from residents of Colfax, a town in Grant Parish, Louisiana, that hosts an open burn/open detonation hazardous waste thermal treatment facility. The facility processes materials such as munitions, theme park waste, and contaminated soils from Superfund sites, and it increased its volume drastically in 2014. Residents reported adverse health conditions and exposure to air pollutants. We analyzed how the three themes of EJ emerged from the interviews using the NVivo coding software. We recorded narratives that described substantial changes around people's identity, health, and social experiences after the facility's increase in operations. Residents described a peaceful and clean community before the facility's construction in 1980. Some residents stated that the community had not been consulted when the facility was established or when its operations were increased. Colfax residents' narratives jointly relay a proud history of community connections and homeownership that was undermined by environmental health hazards created by the facility and by their exclusion from local and state government decisions about the facility's placement.

Does Hazardous-Waste Testing Follow Technical Guidance, Thus Help Protect Environmental Justice and Health?

Does representative hazardous-waste-site testing tend to follow or to violate government technical guidance? This is an important question, because following such guidance promotes reliable risk analysis, adequate remediation, and environmental-justice and -health protection. Yet only government documents typically address this question, usually only when it is too late, when citizens have already exhibited health harm, allegedly from living or working near current/former hazardous-waste sites. Because no systematic, representative, scientific analyses have answered the preceding question, this article begins to investigate it by posing a narrower part of the question: Does representative US testing of volatile-organic-compound (VOC) waste sites tend to follow or to violate government technical requirements? The article (i) outlines US/state-government technical guidance for VOC testing; (ii) develops criteria for discovering representative US cases of VOC testing; (iii) uses the dominant US Environmental Protection Agency method to assess whether these representative cases follow such guidance; (iv) employs the results of (iii) to begin to answer the preceding question; then (v) discusses the degree to which, if any, these results suggest threats to environmental health or justice. Our initial, but representative, results show that almost all US VOC-waste-site testing (that we investigated) violates government technical requirements and systematically underestimates risks, and this may help justify less expensive, potentially health-threatening cleanups, mostly in environmental justice communities. We outline needed future research and suggest two strategies to promote following government technical guidance for hazardous-waste testing.

Health Misinformation about Toxic-Site Harm: The Case for Independent-Party Testing to Confirm Safety

Health misinformation can cause harm if regulators or private remediators falsely claim that a hazardous facility is safe. This misinformation especially threatens the health of children, minorities, and poor people, disproportionate numbers of whom live near toxic facilities. Yet, perhaps because of financial incentives, private remediators may use safety misinformation to justify reduced cleanup. Such incentives exist in nations like the United States, where most toxic-site testing/remediation is semi-privatized or voluntary, conducted by private parties, commercial redevelopers, who can increase profits by underestimating health harm, thus decreasing required testing/remediation. Our objective is to begin to determine whether or not interested parties misrepresent health harm (at hazardous facilities that they test/remediate/redevelop) when they use traditional and social media to claim that these sites are safe. Our hypothesis is that, contrary to the safety claims of the world’s largest commercial developer, Coldwell Banker Real Estate/Trammell Crow (CBRE/TCC), the authors’ screening assessment, especially its lab-certified, toxic-site, indoor-air tests, show violations of all three prominent government, cancer-safety benchmarks. If so, these facilities require additional testing/remediation, likely put site renters at risk, and may reveal problems with privatized hazardous cleanup. To our knowledge, we provide the first independent tests of privatized, toxic-site assessments before cancer reports occur. Our screening assessment of this hypothesis tests indoor air in rental units on a prominent former weapons-testing site (the US Naval Ordnance Testing Station, Pasadena, California (NOTSPA) that is subject to carcinogenic vapor intrusion by volatile organic compounds, VOCs), then compares test results to the redeveloper’s site-safety claims, made to government officials and citizens through traditional and social media. Although NOTSPA toxic soil-gas concentrations are up to nearly a million times above allowed levels, and indoor air was never tested until now, both the regulator and the remediator (CBRE/TCC) have repeatedly claimed on social media that “the site is safe at this time.” We used mainly Method TO-17 and two-week sampling with passive, sorbent tubes to assess indoor-air VOCs. Our results show that VOC levels at every location sampled—all in occupied site-rental units—violate all three government-mandated safety benchmarks: environmental screening levels (ESLs), No Significant Risk Levels (NSRLs), and inhalation risks based on the Inhalation Unit Risk (IUR); some violations are two orders of magnitude above multiple safety benchmarks. These results support our hypothesis and suggest a need for independent assessment of privatized cleanups and media-enhanced safety claims about them. If our results can be replicated at other sites, then preventing health misinformation and toxic-facility safety threats may require new strategies, one of which we outline.

Data-Quality Assessment Signals Toxic-Site Safety Threats and Environmental Injustices

Most hazardous-waste sites are located in urban areas populated by disproportionate numbers of children, minorities, and poor people who, as a result, face more severe pollution threats and environmental-health inequalities. Partly to address this harm, in 2017 the United Nations unanimously endorsed the New Urban Agenda, which includes redeveloping urban-infill-toxic-waste sites. However, no systematic, independent analyses assess the public-health adequacy of such hazardous-facility redevelopments. Our objective is to provide a preliminary data-quality assessment (PDQA) of urban-infill-toxic-site testing, conducted by private redevelopers, including whether it adequately addresses pollution threats. To this end, we used two qualitative, weight-of-evidence methods. Method 1 employs nine criteria to select assessments for PDQA and help control for confounders. To conduct PDQA, Method 2 uses three US Environmental Protection Agency standards—the temporal, geographical, and technological representativeness of sampling. Our Method 1 results reveal four current toxic-site assessments (by CBRE/Trammell Crow, the world’s largest commercial developer); at all of these sites the main risk drivers are solvents, volatile organic compounds, including trichloroethylene. Our Method 2 results indicate that all four assessments violate most PDQA standards and systematically underestimate health risk. These results reveal environmental injustice, disproportionate health threats to children/minorities/poor people at all four sites. Although preliminary, our conclusion is that alleviating harm and environmental-health inequalities posed by urban-infill-toxic-site pollution may require improving both the testing/cleanup/redevelopment requirements of the New Urban Agenda and the regulatory oversight of assessment and remediation performed by private redevelopers.

A Review of Volatile Organic Compound Contamination in Post-Industrial Urban Centers: Reproductive Health Implications Using a Detroit Lens

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are a group of aromatic or chlorinated organic chemicals commonly found in manufactured products that have high vapor pressure, and thus vaporize readily at room temperature. While airshed VOCs are well studied and have provided insights into public health issues, we suggest that belowground VOCs and the related vapor intrusion process could be equally or even more relevant to public health. The persistence, movement, remediation, and human health implications of subsurface VOCs in urban landscapes remain relatively understudied despite evidence of widespread contamination. This review explores the state of the science of subsurface movement and remediation of VOCs through groundwater and soils, the linkages between these poorly understood contaminant exposure pathways and health outcomes based on research in various animal models, and describes the role of these contaminants in human health, focusing on birth outcomes, notably low birth weight and preterm birth. Finally, this review provides recommendations for future research to address knowledge gaps that are essential for not only tackling health disparities and environmental injustice in post-industrial cities, but also protecting and preserving critical freshwater resources.

COVID-19 prevalence and fatality rates in association with air pollution emission concentrations and emission sources

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is primarily respiratory in nature, and as such, there is interest in examining whether air pollution might contribute to disease susceptibility or outcome. We merged data on COVID-19 cumulative prevalence and fatality rates as of May 31, 2020 with 2014-2019 pollution data from the US Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Justice Screen (EJSCREEN), with control for state testing rates, population density, and population covariate data from the County Health Rankings. Pollution data included three types of air emission concentrations (particulate matter<2.5 μm (PM2.5), ozone and diesel particulate matter (DPM)), and four pollution source variables (proximity to traffic, National Priority List sites, Risk Management Plan (RMP) sites, and hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities (TSDFs)). Results of mixed model linear multiple regression analyses indicated that, controlling for covariates, COVID-19 prevalence and fatality rates were significantly associated with greater DPM. Proximity to TSDFs was associated to greater fatality rates, and proximity to RMPs was associated with greater prevalence rates. Results are consistent with previous research indicating that air pollution increases susceptibility to respiratory viral pathogens. Results should be interpreted cautiously given the ecological design, the time lag between exposure and outcome, and the uncertainties in measuring COVID-19 prevalence. Areas with worse prior air quality, especially higher concentrations of diesel exhaust, may be at greater COVID-19 risk, although further studies are needed to confirm these relationships.

The Management of Health Hazards Related to Municipal Solid Waste on Fire in Europe: An Environmental Justice Issue?

Landfilling should be the last option in an integrated Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) management approach. In the European Union (EU), the policy framework to protect the environment and the public health against the impact of health hazards related to urban solid waste management has been consistently implemented in recent decades. A growing interest in the negative impact of fires in waste landfills on the environment and people's health was reported in some European countries. In Italy, an increasing occurrence of arsons in MSW and landfills has been reported in recent years. During the summer of 2012, a multi-site arson occurred in the Palermo Municipal solid waste landfill of Bellolampo (western Sicily), giving rise to an environmental emergency of public health concern. Local health authorities reacted by creating an inter-institutional multidisciplinary task force with the aim to implement measures to prevent and control the risk of exposure by delimiting a protection area to be taken under strict monitoring. Environmental and epidemiological investigations were put in place by air, soil, and farm product sampling. A syndromic surveillance of the exposed population was conducted as well. The air monitoring stations system in place detected an increase in the concentrations of dioxins and dioxin-like substances with the PM10 highest emission pick documented within the first 24 h and estimated at about 60 μg/m3. Levels of heavy metals above the limits permitted by law were detected in the top- and sub-soil samples collected within the two landfill sampling sites and also in other nearby sites. Non-conforming concentration values of dioxins and dioxin-like substances were detected in samples taken from farms, milk, and water. The health syndromic surveillance did not document any daily increase in the notification of emergency admissions related to acute respiratory diseases or any other health effect potentially related to the waste arson, but these findings were limited by the non-systematic collection of data. The experience reported in the present case report, as declined within the European Union policy framework and in the view of environmental justice, documented the need to structure a permanent collaboration between the different institutional actors involved in environmental and public health protection activities in order to develop specific protocols to manage events related to the occurrence of waste-related environmental emergencies or disasters.