An Overview of Brownfields Redevelopment in the United States Through Regulatory, Public Health, and Sustainability Lenses.

This second article in a series of three on land reuse highlights brownfields redevelopment in the U.S., focusing on regulatory frameworks, public health, policy, and sustainable development. The main regulatory agency in the U.S. involved in brownfields is the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). Many other state and federal agencies have brownfield or brownfield-supporting programs. Apart from the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, few agencies have programs fully dedicated to public health protection related to brownfields. Sustainable development, defined in this article as development that minimizes use of nonrenewable resources, is recognized as a component of redevelopment and is generally promoted by U.S. EPA and through other sustainable development initiatives. A broader focus on sustainable development and public health improvement could reduce the inequity and health disparities typically seen in areas with distressed environments. Such a focus could be implemented globally to improve population health and the environment over the long term.

Brownfields in Romania and the United States: A Visual Tour.

This third article in a series of three on land reuse describes brownfield sites in Romania and the U.S. In 2018 and 2019, four of the authors toured brownfield areas in Romania (including Bucharest, southern Transylvania, and Oradea) and the U.S. (Southeast Missouri [called the Missouri Bootheel], Northern Arizona and Navajo Nation, and Northwest Indiana). We were interested in similarities and differences among brownfields in various urban and rural settings in both countries. This article describes these sites through a visual perspective as well as site characteristics and commonalities. Ultimately, potentially contaminated or land reuse sites such as brownfields are common in many parts of the world. We hope to advance the understanding of brownfields and site transformation options through our collaboration.

Sustainable Brownfields Redevelopment in the European Union: An Overview of Policy and Funding Frameworks.

This first article in a series of three on land reuse highlights sustainable brownfields redevelopment in Europe. Sustainability is a key European concept. Europe's densely populated urban areas are facing specific challenges that include urban sprawl and environmental pollution. Redeveloping brownfields, or reusing the abandoned built landscape, can positively impact the economic, social, and environmental health security of cities. Many European Union (EU) cities benefit from policy and financial assistance in renovating their urban areas. This article reviews the EU's policy and funding frameworks that support sustainable brownfields redevelopment. Brownfield site problems are common to many countries in Europe and around the world, and this article aims to share knowledge and resources that support the transformation of these abandoned or underused areas into public or private uses.

Educating the Future Environmental Health Workforce During COVID-19: Developing a Virtual Curriculum for Navajo Student Interns Using the Environmental Health and Land Reuse Certificate Program.

Beginning in 2016, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) and the National Environmental Health Association (NEHA) launched a partnership to create a free online course with the goal of building capacity within communities to help remediate and redevelop brownfields sites. Brownfields are land reuse sites often contaminated by harmful chemicals or redeveloped without proper environmental oversight. Due to their potentially hazardous status, brownfields sites can lead to harmful exposures in humans while accentuating and often exacerbating socioeconomic disparities within their communities. As a result of this partnership, NEHA and ATSDR launched the Environmental Health and Land Reuse (EHLR) Certificate Program in 2020. The Journal is pleased to feature this column to highlight an example of how the EHLR Certificate Program was used to build understanding and increase knowledge on this important topic within environmental health students. The findings and conclusions in this column are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views or official position of NEHA, ATSDR, or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Furthermore, verbal permission was given by the students to use their work in this column.

Evolution of Federalism in Environmental Health: Federal, State, and Local Government Control.

Environmental health sits at the intersection of public health and environmental protection. Governments often confront environmental health concerns through environmental laws. Authority to take actions like passing these laws is determined by federalism, which divides the authority to make laws and policies on various issues between those levels of government. However, tensions often arise when these levels of government attempt to share regulatory authority over environmental issues. Issues of federalism are especially prevalent in environmental health issues, where incidents not only cross state and local borders and affect different levels of government but may also involve both environmental and health agencies. This article describes the history of environmental federalism in the United States through the lens of public health, including how the regulatory structure transitioned from primarily state control to a more centralized federal system of governance. It also describes modern federalism in environmental health, the levels of government involved in environmental health decisions, and the legal authorities that allow these governments to regulate environmental health in the United States. Finally, this article describes the implications of federalism in environmental health.

INTEGRATING PUBLIC HEALTH IN LAND REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT: Part 2: Assessing Local Health Agency Capacity to Integrate Environmental Health and Land Reuse Work.

Many local health departments (LHDs) across the country coordinate with their service areas on environmental health or land reuse. The Brownfields & Reuse Opportunity Working Group (BROWN) is a multipartner land reuse stakeholder network that includes member representatives from state and local health agencies, federal agencies, environmental consultants, environmental health professionals, and academia. In 2015, BROWN provided input on five Environmental Health Resources Self Learning Modules (Epidemiology, Risk Assessment, Risk Communications, Land Reuse Sites, and Toxicology) that the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) was developing. ATSDR created the educational modules as resources and self-study guides to increase LHD capacity to respond to environmental issues. Following input from BROWN members on the modules, the National Environmental Health Association independently developed a short survey to identify baseline capacity of environmental professionals, primarily LHD professionals, to address environmental health and land reuse issues. The survey results of 93 LHD personnel indicated variation in the level of education among LHD employees and how often specific environmental health and land reuse services were requested. A subset of three LHD respondents also provided input into the learning modules.

INTEGRATING PUBLIC HEALTH IN LAND REUSE AND REDEVELOPMENT: Part 3: Public Health Indicators Associated With Land Reuse and Redevelopment: Results of a 40-Community Analysis.

The National Environmental Health Association is publishing a three-part series that highlights collaboration and partnerships with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) and redevelopment stakeholders to promote environmental health and land reuse as environmental and public health practices. This series will serve as a guide for identifying new and existing resources that can be adopted at the local environmental health level to safely reuse environmentally impacted land to improve community health outcomes. The conclusions in this series are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and ATSDR.

Land Reuse Site Screening Tool Cohorts: Creating Land Reuse Site Inventories.

As part of our continued effort to highlight innovative approaches to improve the health and environment of communities, the Journal is pleased to publish a bimonthly column from the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). ATSDR serves the public by using the best science, taking responsive public health actions, and providing trusted health information to prevent harmful exposures and diseases related to toxic substances. The purpose of this column is to inform readers of ATSDR's activities and initiatives to better understand the relationship between exposure to hazardous substances in the environment, its impact on human health, and how to protect public health. The conclusions of this column are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position of ATSDR or CDC.

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry Brownfields/ land-reuse site tool.

As part of our continuing effort to highlight innovative approaches to improving the health and environment of communities, the Journal is pleased to bring back the bimonthly column from the U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). The ATSDR, based in Atlanta, Georgia, is a federal public health agency of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and shares a common office of the Director with the National Center for Environmental Health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). ATSDR serves the public by using the best science, taking responsive public health actions, and providing trusted health information to prevent harmful exposures and diseases related to toxic substances. The purpose of this column is to inform readers of ATSDR's activities and initiatives to better understand the relationship between exposure to hazardous substances in the environment and their impact on human health and how to protect public health. We believe that the column will provide a valuable resource to our readership by helping to make known the considerable resources and expertise that ATSDR has available to assist communities, states, and others to assure good environmental health practice for all is served. The conclusions of this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of ATSDR, CDC, or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Gary D. Perlman is an environmental health scientist for ATSDR. He is a commissioned officer with the U.S. Public Health Service and has been deployed in support of numerous environmental disasters including hurricanes Katrina, Rita, Isabelle, and Irene, as well as the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Laurel Berman is the national brownfields coordinator with ATSDR. She coordinates the ATSDR Brownfields/Land-Reuse Health Initiative. Kathryn Leann Lemley Bing is an environmental health scientist and an ATSDR regional representative in Atlanta. She has specialized expertise working in brownfield/land-reuse communities.

Two-zone model application to breathing zone and area welding fume concentration data.

This study assessed a professional pipefitter/welder performing shielded metal arc welding on carbon steel under field conditions. The resulting breathing zone (near field) and area (far field) welding fume concentration data were applied to the two-zone model for the purpose of determining field-derived personal exposure emission (generation) rates during actual welding work. The study is unique in that one welder was evaluated under high production conditions for 2 days at two different welding locations: a boiler room and a breezeway. Samples were collected and analyzed for total particulate following NIOSH Method 0500 and for select metals following NIOSH Method 7300. Breezeway average personal breathing zone sample total particulate concentrations ranged from 2.89 mg/m(3) to 4.38 mg/m(3), Fe concentrations ranged from 0.53 to 0.63 mg/m(3), and Mn concentrations ranged from 0.10 to 0.12 mg/m(3). The boiler room average personal breathing zone sample total particulate concentrations ranged from 4.73 mg/m(3) to 5.90 mg/m(3), Fe concentrations ranged from 0.48 to 0.85 mg/m(3), and Mn concentrations ranged from 0.06 to 0.16 mg/m(3). Average arc times ranged from 20 to 25% of the total sampling time. Both tracer gas and anemometer techniques were used to estimate ventilation of the boiler room. The steady-state form of the two-zone model was applied to long-term and short-term sample total particulate, Fe, and Mn concentrations obtained during welding in the boiler room and breezeway. The average generation rate in the boiler room was 39.2 mg/min for TP, 6.4 mg/min for Fe, and 1.3 mg/min for Mn. The average generation rate in the breezeway was 40.0 mg/min for TP, 6.6 mg/min for Fe, and 1.2 mg/min for Mn. The field-based generation rates were considerably lower than laboratory-derived published emission rates of between 280 and 650 mg/min for TP. This study emphasizes the need for field-derived welding fume generation rates and showed the personal breathing zone and area sample concentrations can be described by the two-zone model in a way that may help the industrial hygienist estimate exposures. [Supplementary materials are available for this article. Go to the publisher's online edition of the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene for the following free supplemental resource: Tables detailing the personal breathing zone and average area sample results for breezeway welding and boiler room welding, two-zone modeling results, and boiler room welding personal breathing zone and area sample results with mixing fans on.].

Multimedia emissions inventory of polychlorinated biphenyls for the U.S. Great Lakes states.

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were banned in the United States in 1979, and since then a significant decline in their release to the environment has been observed. This decline has now reached a plateau. Several new regulatory programs have been put in place to further reduce PCB emissions/releases. However, our ability to measure the effectiveness of these regulatory/voluntary programs and to support regional fate/transport and source/receptor modeling efforts depend on reliable emission information. In this study, we attempt to improve the emission inventory for PCBs by compiling and analyzing the multimedia total PCB emission/release data reported for the U.S Great Lakes states for each year from 1990 to 2000. Although Toxic Release Inventory (TRI), National Emissions Inventory (NEI), Great Lakes Regional Air Toxic Emissions Inventory (GLRATEI), and Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network (IADN) data formed the basis of estimating air emissions, we used the TRI, National Response Center (NRC), and PCB transformer inventory data to estimate PCB releases to land. We used the Permit Compliance System and NRC data to obtain estimates of PCB discharges to water systems in the Great Lakes states. The Remedial Action Plans for each area of concern were the primary source for estimating PCB loads of dredged sediments. On the basis of the NEI, IADN, and GLRATEI data, the total air emissions within the decade were approximately 126 t. The regionwide discharges to water systems and releases to land in the form of landfills and accidental spills in 1990-2000 were estimated as approximately 170 and 3225 t, respectively. We estimated that approximately 1.3 million t of PCB-contaminated sediment were removed or targeted for removal in five lakes of the U.S. portion of the Great Lakes basin. We stress that these estimates were based on reported amounts and the unreported PCB releases/emissions could result in significantly higher estimates.