256a - What are ACGIH BEIs®?

An innovative course for teaching communication and interpersonal relationships was delivered to 29 environmental and occupational health professionals. This course aimed to highlight interpersonal and emotional aspects in the professional-client interaction and incumbent communication aspects when consulting team members, colleagues, and nonprofessionals in the occupational arena. Various experiential and other teaching techniques were used. Assessment showed that participants reported the positive features of such a course although few changes in either psychosocial abilities or awareness were evident. Possible ramifications of the findings are discussed.

Background:Environmental health (EH) professionals, one of the largest segments of the public health workforce, are responsible for delivery of essential environmental public health services. The challenges facing these professionals and research needs to improve EH practice are not fully understood, but 26% of EH professionals working in health departments of the United States plan to retire in 5 y, while only 6% of public health students are currently pursuing EH concentrations.Objectives:A groundbreaking initiative was recently launched to understand EH practice in health departments of the United States. This commentary article aims to identify priority EH practice challenges and related research needs for health departments.Methods:A horizon scanning approach was conducted in which challenges facing EH professionals were provided by 1,736 respondents working at health departments who responded to a web-based survey fielded in November 2017. Thematic analyses of the responses and determining the frequency at which respondents reported specific issues and opportunities identified primary EH topic areas. These topic areas and related issues informed focus group discussions at an in-person workshop held in Anaheim, California. The purpose of the in-person workshop was to engage each of the topic areas and issues, through facilitated focus groups, leading to the formation of four to five related problem statements for each EH topic.Discussion:EH professionals are strategically positioned to diagnose, intervene, and prevent public health threats. Focus group engagement resulted in 29 priority problem statements partitioned among 6 EH topic areas: a) drinking water quality, b) wastewater management, c) healthy homes, d) food safety, e) vectors and public health pests, and f) emerging issues. This commentary article identifies priority challenges and related research needs to catalyze effective delivery of essential environmental public health services for common EH program areas in health departments. An unprecedented initiative to revitalize EH practice with timely and strategic recommendations for student and professional training, nontraditional partnerships, and basic and translational research activities is recommended. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP5161

Agricultural farmers in developing countries are at high risk of pesticide exposure and adverse effects because of unsafe practices and inappropriate legislation. Biological monitoring is considered a useful tool for pesticide exposure assessment; however, its use is limited in developing countries due to a lack of techniques and resources such as laboratory analysis, trained staff and budgets. This study examines whether the World Health Organization predicted exposure assessment model (WHO-PEAM) is a suitable alternative tool for assessing insecticide exposure among agricultural farmers. WHO-PEAM was used to predict daily doses (PDD) of chlorpyrifos for a group of Vietnamese rice farmers using a set of exposure parameters obtained from a questionnaire survey of participant famers during a field study. These results were compared to absorbed daily doses (ADD) of chlorpyrifos for the farmers measured using a biological monitoring program, in which 24-h urine samples were collected and analysed for the chlorpyrifos metabolite, 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol (TCP) using LC/MS. Validation of the model results was tested using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test (WSR) and two-way mixed-model intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The mean of total ADD was 20μg/kg/day while that of total PDD was 22μg/kg/day. The WSR test revealed no statistically significant difference in the average values of ADDT and PDDT. ICC indicated substantial agreement for both single and average measures between ADDT and PDDT (ICC, 0.62 and 0.77, respectively). The results demonstrate that a refined WHO-PEAM model can be readily used as a field method, without biological monitoring, to evaluate chlorpyrifos exposure among agricultural farmers in Vietnam and similar developing countries.

Work-Relatedness.

The East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP) Biological Monitoring and Abatement Program (BMAP) consists of three tasks that reflect different but complementary approaches to evaluating the ecological integrity of waters near ETTP. These tasks include (1) bioaccumulation monitoring of fish and clams, (2) benthic macroinvertebrate species richness and density monitoring, and (3) fish community monitoring. The sampling and analysis requirements for the ETTP BMAP in calendar year 2024, covering in part both FY 2024 and FY 2025, are outlined in the respective FY sampling and analysis plans (UCOR 2023, 2024). Sampled water bodies and locations for the ETTP BMAP are shown in Figures 1 and 2. This ETTP BMAP report presents the CY 2024 results and provides context with results from previous years. The report also includes Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)–generated biological monitoring data collected for other US Department of Energy programs, including the UCOR Water Resources Restoration Program (WRRP) off-site fish bioaccumulation data (UCOR 2023) and select Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12) BMAP fish bioaccumulation data. Historical data collected for the ETTP BMAP and other programs in the nearby Poplar Creek and Clinch River are provided where appropriate. This progress report provides an update on the biological monitoring activities supporting the ETTP UCOR Environmental Compliance organization, which sponsors the ETTP BMAP. In addition to this internal reporting, ETTP BMAP results are provided in the annual remediation effectiveness reports and the annual site environmental reports, both of which are publicly available. BMAP data are also available to the public via the Oak Ridge Environmental Information System (https://ucor.com/oak-ridge-environmental-information-system-oreis/).

In May 1985, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit was issued for the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant. As a condition of the permit, a Biological Monitoring and Abatement Program ( BMAP) was developed to demonstrate that the effluent limitations established for the Y-12 Plant protect the classified uses of the receiving stream (East Fork Poplar Creek; EFPC), in particular, the growth and propagation of aquatic life (Lear et al. 1989). A second objective of the BMAP is to document the ecological effects resulting from the implementation of a water pollution control program designed to eliminate direct discharges of wastewaters to EFPC and to minimize the inadvertent release of pollutants to the environment. Because of the complex nature of the discharges to EFPC and the temporal and spatial variability in the composition of the discharges, a comprehensive, integrated approach to biological monitoring was developed. A new permit was issued to the Y-12 Plant on April 28, 1995 and became effective on July 1, 1995. Biological monitoring continues to be required under the new permit. The BMAP consists of four major tasks that reflect different but complementary approaches to evaluating the effects of the Y-12 Plant discharges on the aquatic integrity of EFPC. These tasks are (1) toxicity monitoring, (2) biological indicator studies, (3) bioaccumulation studies, and (4) ecological surveys of the periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrate, and fish communities.

In May 1985, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit was issued for the Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant. As a condition of the permit a Biological Monitoring and Abatement Program (BMAP) was developed to demonstrate that the effluent limitations established for the Y- 12 Plant protect the classified uses of the receiving stream (East Fork Poplar Creek; EFPC), in particular, the growth and propagation of aquatic life (Lear et al. 1989). A second objective of the BMAP is to document the ecological effects resulting from the implementation of a water pollution control program designed to eliminate direct discharges of wastewaters to EFPC and to minimize the inadvertent release of pollutants to the environment. Because of the complex nature of the discharges to EFPC and the temporal and spatial variability in the composition of the discharges, a comprehensive, integrated approach to biological monitoring was developed. A new permit was issued to the Y-12 Plant on April 28, 1995 and became effective on July 1, 1995. Biological monitoring continues to be required under the new permit. The BMAP consists of four major tasks that reflect different but complementary approaches to evaluating the effects of the Y-12 Plant discharges on the aquatic integrity of EFPC. These tasks are (1) toxicity monitoring, (2) biological indicator studies, (3) bioaccumulation studies, and (4) ecological surveys of the periphyton, benthic macroinvertebrate, and fish communities.

Injury prevention: A strategic priority for environmental health?

The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued for the Oak Ridge Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12 Complex) which became effective May 1, 2006, continued a requirement for a Biological Monitoring and Abatement Program (BMAP). The BMAP was originally developed in 1985 to demonstrate that the effluent limitations established for the Y-12 Complex protected the classified uses of the receiving stream (East Fork Poplar Creek: EFPC), in particular, the growth and propagation of aquatic life (Loar et al. 1989). The objectives of the current BMAP are similar, specifically to assess stream ecological conditions relative to regulatory limits and criteria, to assess ecological impacts as well as recovery in response to Y-12 operations, and to investigate the causes of continuing impacts. The BMAP consists of three tasks that reflect complementary approaches to evaluating the effects of the Y-12 Complex discharges on the biotic integrity of EFPC. These tasks include: (1) bioaccumulation monitoring, (2) benthic macroinvertebrate community monitoring, and (3) fish community monitoring. As required by the NPDES permit, the BMAP benthic macroinvertebrate community monitoring task includes studies to annually evaluate the receiving stream's biological integrity in comparison to TN Water Quality Criteria. BMAP monitoring is currently being conducted at five primary EFPC sites, although sites may be excluded or added depending upon the specific objectives of the various tasks. Criteria used in selecting the sites include: (1) location of sampling sites used in other studies, (2) known or suspected sources of downstream impacts, (3) proximity to U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) boundaries, (4) appropriate habitat distribution, and (5) access. The primary sampling sites include upper EFPC at kilometers (EFKs) 24.4 and 23.4 [upstream and downstream of Lake Reality (LR) respectively]; EFK 18.7 (also EFK 18.2 and 19), located off the ORR and below an area of intensive commercial and light industrial development; EFK 13.8, located upstream from the Oak Ridge Wastewater Treatment Facility (ORWTF); and EFK 6.3 located approximately 1.4 km below the ORR boundary (Fig. 1.1). Actual sampling locations on EFPC may differ slightly by task according to specific requirements of the task. Brushy Fork (BF) at kilometer (BFK) 7.6 and Hinds Creek at kilometer (HCK) 20.6 are the most commonly used reference sites for the Y-12 BMAP. Additional sites off the ORR are also occasionally used for reference, including Beaver Creek, Bull Run, Cox Creek, and Paint Rock Creek (Fig. 1.2). Summaries of the sampling designs for the three primary tasks of the Y-12 Complex BMAP for EFPC are presented in Tables 1.1-1.3. This report covers the 2008 period, although data collected outside this time period are included as appropriate. To address the biological monitoring requirements for Bear Creek and McCoy Branch, CERLCA-funded programs, data are summarized in Appendix A and Appendix B respectively. Data for these two watersheds are provided herein to address Section IX of the NPDES Permit for Y-12, where 'Results of these CERCLA programs can be used to meet the biological monitoring requirements of this permit...'. A summary of the toxicity testing results for Y-12 outfalls into upper EFPC is provided in Appendix C (these results have been previously reported) to provide a more thorough perspective of conditions in the stream. Data summarized in this report are available from the Oak Ridge Environmental Information system (OREIS) in an Arc-GIS usable format (http://www-oreis.bechteljacobs.org/oreis/help/oreishome.html). Per requirements specified in the NPDES permit, data collected following TDEC monitoring protocols (TDEC 2006) is also submitted directly to TDEC in Excel format.

The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued for the Oak Ridge Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12 Complex) which became effective May 1, 2006, continued a requirement for a Biological Monitoring and Abatement Program (BMAP). The BMAP was originally developed in 1985 to demonstrate that the effluent limitations established for the Y-12 Complex protected the classified uses of the receiving stream (East Fork Poplar Creek: EFPC), in particular, the growth and propagation of aquatic life (Loar et al. 1989). The objectives of the current BMAP are similar, specifically to assess stream ecological conditions relative to regulatory limits and criteria, to assess ecological impacts as well as recovery in response to Y-12 operations, and to investigate the causes of continuing impacts. The BMAP consists of three tasks that reflect complementary approaches to evaluating the effects of the Y-12 Complex discharges on the biotic integrity of EFPC. These tasks include: (1) bioaccumulation monitoring, (2) benthic macroinvertebrate community monitoring, and (3) fish community monitoring. As required by the NPDES permit, the BMAP benthic macroinvertebrate community monitoring task includes studies to annually evaluate the receiving stream's biological integrity in comparison to TN Water Quality Criteria. BMAP monitoring is currently being conducted at five primary EFPC sites, although sites may be excluded or added depending upon the specific objectives of the various tasks. Criteria used in selecting the sites include: (1) location of sampling sites used in other studies, (2) known or suspected sources of downstream impacts, (3) proximity to U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) boundaries, (4) appropriate habitat distribution, and (5) access. The primary sampling sites include upper EFPC at kilometers (EFKs) 24.4 and 23.4 [upstream and downstream of Lake Reality (LR) respectively]; EFK 18.7 (also EFK 18.2 and 19), located off the ORR and below an area of intensive commercial and light industrial development; EFK 13.8, located upstream from the Oak Ridge Wastewater Treatment Facility (ORWTF); and EFK 6.3 located approximately 1.4 km below the ORR boundary (Fig. 1.1). Actual sampling locations on EFPC may differ slightly by task according to specific requirements of the task. Brushy Fork (BF) at kilometer (BFK) 7.6 and Hinds Creek at kilometer (HCK) 20.6 are the most commonly used reference sites for the Y-12 BMAP. Additional sites off the ORR are also occasionally used for reference, including Beaver Creek, Bull Run, Cox Creek, and Paint Rock Creek (Fig. 1.2). Summaries of the sampling designs for the three primary tasks of the Y-12 Complex BMAP for EFPC are presented in Tables 1.1-1.3. This report covers the 2007 study period, although data collected outside this time period are included as appropriate. To address the biological monitoring requirements for Bear Creek and McCoy Branch, CERCLA-funded data is summarized in Appendix A (for Bear Creek) and Appendix B (for McCoy Branch). Data for these two watersheds is provided herein to address Section IX of the NPDES Permit for Y-12, where 'Results of these CERCLA programs can be used to meet the biological monitoring requirements of this permit'. For potential comparison with instream biological measures, a summary of the toxicity testing results for Y-12 outfalls into upper EFPC is provided in Appendix C (these results have been previously reported).

As a condition of the modified National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued to the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant (ORGDP; now referred to as the Oak Ridge K-25 Site) on September 11, 1986, a Biological Monitoring and Abatement Program (BMAP) was developed for the receiving stream (Mitchell Branch or K-1700 stream). On October 1, 1992, a renewed NPDES permit was issued for the K-25 Site. A biological monitoring plan was submitted for Mitchell Branch, Poplar Creek, Poplar Creek Embayment of the Clinch River and any unnamed tributaries of these streams. The objectives of BMAP are to (1) demonstrate that the effluent limitations established for the Oak Ridge K-25 Site protect and maintain the use of Mitchell Branch for growth and propagation of fish and other aquatic life and (2) document the effects on stream biota resulting from operation of major new pollution abatement facilities, including the Central Neutralization Facility (CNF) and the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) incinerator. The BMAP consists of four tasks: (1) toxicity monitoring; (2) bioaccumulation monitoring; (3) assessment of fish health; and (4) instream monitoring of biological communities, including benthic macroinvertebrates and fish. This document, the third in a series, reports on the results of the Oak Ridge K-25 Site BMAP; it describes studies that were conducted over various periods of time between June 1990 and December 1993, although monitoring conducted outside this time period is included, as appropriate.

Effectiveness of interventions in reducing pesticide overexposure and poisonings

RESUMENO monitoramento biológico é uma ferramenta fundamental para o manejo ambiental. Ele permite avaliar o estado do ambiente ao longo do tempo, informando sobre a necessidade e sobre as conseqüências das medidas de manejo. Na Amazônia, o monitoramento é uma atividade particularmente difícil devido à variedade das ameaças ambientais, à vastidão da área, e à enorme riqueza de espécies. Para ser eficiente, um programa de monitoramento precisa ser claramente enraizado em uma ameaça ambiental que se pretende resolver – só assim haverá um critério claro para decidir quais variáveis serão medidas e como planejar essa medição. Numa área tão grande quanto a Amazônia, é particularmente importante que os programas de monitoramento definam a priori a sua escala de atuação. Um desenho amostral que serve para a escala local será deficiente na escala regional, e vice‐versa. A idéia de trabalhar simultaneamente em diferentes escalas espaciais é louvável mas altamente arriscada. Finalmente, quando o monitoramento requer identificação de espécies, a riqueza biológica da Amazônia e a escassez de pessoal qualificado limitam o avanço do trabalho. Para garantir a viabilidade futura das atividades de monitoramento é essencial investir com criatividade e determinação no treinamento de observadores. Este comentário sublinha alguns aspetos de progresso recente em monitoramento biológico da Amazônia e identifica três necessidades para o futuro: 1) Garantir a orientação do monitoramento para ameaças claramente identificadas; 2) Trabalhar em uma escala espacial prioritária, definida antes do lançamento do programa; e 3) Investir no treinamento de observadores.El monitoreo biológico es una herramienta fundamental para la gestión ambiental porque permite evaluar el estado del ambiente al largo del tiempo, informando sobre la necesidad e sobre las consecuencias de acciones de gestión. En Amazonia, el monitoreo es una actividad particularmente difícil gracias à la variedad de amenazas, a la extensión de la área, y a la enorme riqueza de especies. Para ser eficiente, un programa de monitoreo necesita ser claramente enraizado en una amenaza ambiental que se pretende resolver – solo así existirá un criterio claro para decidir lo que medir y como medirlo. En una área tan grande como Amazonia, se hace esencial que los programas de monitoreo establezcan a priori su escala de actuación. Un diseño de muestreo que funciona en la escala local será deficiente en la escala regional y vice‐versa. La idea de trabajar simultáneamente en distintas escalas espaciales es muy arriesgada – hay que priorizar. Finalmente, cuando el monitoreo exige identificación de especies, la riqueza de Amazonia y la escasez de personal calificado limitan el progreso del trabajo. Para garantizar la viabilidad del monitoreo, se hace esencial invertir con creatividad y determinación en el entrenamiento de observadores. Este comentario refiere algunos progresos recientes en el monitoreo biológico de Amazonia y identifica tres necesidades para el futuro: 1) Garantizar que cada programa esté claramente orientado para una amenaza ambiental; 2) Trabajar en una escala espacial prioritária; y 3) Invertir en el entrenamiento de observadores.

Vol. 113, No. 3 EnvironewsOpen AccessBeyond the Bench: Tox-in-a-Box Kris Freeman Kris Freeman Search for more papers by this author Published:1 March 2005https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.113-a162Cited by:1AboutSectionsPDF ToolsDownload CitationsTrack Citations ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InReddit The Tox Ambassador—a scientist visiting from a nearby university—squeezes several drops of blue dye into three different-sized beakers of water. The audience of sixth-grade students can easily see that although the same amount of dye is put in each beaker, the water in the smallest “baby” beaker turns much darker than that in the larger “big kid” and “adult” beakers. They are learning a key concept in toxicology: that your body size affects your dose, and that the dose makes the poison.Thousands of students have learned about environmental health science through presentations like these based on the Tox-in-a-Box™ resources kit, which includes activities for grades kindergarten through 12 (K–12), slides, demonstrations, instructions, tips for presenters, and a resource manual for teachers. The kit is designed for toxicologists and other environmental and public health professionals—Tox Ambassadors—to use in outreach efforts to students and teachers. It is produced and distributed by the Community Outreach and Education Program (COEP) of the NIEHS Center for Ecogenetics and Environmental Health at the University of Washington.Tox-in-a-Box was originally developed by COEP staff at the request of environmental health professionals who had been invited to give presentations in classrooms and weren’t sure how to explain toxicology to young audiences. Soon COEP staff also began training graduate students to serve as Tox Ambassadors. Since 2000, Tox Ambassadors have given presentations to almost 4,000 K–12 students in western Washington. Many of these presentations have been made through the NIEHS/University of Washington Integrated Environmental Health Middle School Project ( http://depts.washington.edu/ceeh/Outreach/k12.html).When Carlos Mata, a former visiting scholar and Tox Ambassador, returned to his native country of Costa Rica, he launched a program similar to Tox-in-a-Box called EcoAmigos. The EcoAmigos program disseminates basic environmental health information in regional schools. Tox-in-a-Box kits have also been sent to collaborators at the University of Alexandria in Egypt.Tox-in-a-Box fits well with many modules such as environment, biology, chemistry, social studies, risk, safety, reading, and debate. Learning themes include Living in a Chemical World, Routes of Exposure, Risks vs. Benefits, and Tox Tales: A Real Life Component. Overall, teachers give the kit high marks for both the relevance of the material to the students’ interests and concerns, and the ease of integrating the material into the curriculum they already teach.Tox-in-a-Box kits are available for purchase. A brochure is available online at http://depts.washington.edu/ceeh/Outreach/pdf/tib.pdf.Good things in small packages. The Tox-in-a-Box kit (top) has everything needed for a school presentation (left).FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited by Gilbert S and Frevert K (2009) Public Education Information Resources in Toxicology, 10.1016/B978-0-12-373593-5.00073-2, (681-689), . Vol. 113, No. 3 March 2005Metrics About Article Metrics Publication History Originally published1 March 2005Published in print1 March 2005 Financial disclosuresPDF download License information EHP is an open-access journal published with support from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health. All content is public domain unless otherwise noted. Note to readers with disabilities EHP strives to ensure that all journal content is accessible to all readers. However, some figures and Supplemental Material published in EHP articles may not conform to 508 standards due to the complexity of the information being presented. If you need assistance accessing journal content, please contact [email protected]. Our staff will work with you to assess and meet your accessibility needs within 3 working days.

Moving from awareness to action on preventing patient exposure to toxic environmental chemicals