Consumer perception of household hazardous materials.

UNLABELLED: We evaluated consumer perception of household hazardous materials (HHM) to identify links between storage of HHMs and consumer perception. METHODS: 357 telephone surveys were conducted within one county to determine home storage location (high, low, unknown) of 10 substances common to pediatric poisoning. Questions addressed look-alikes, poison information resources, disposal/recycling practices, and the transfer of cleaning products to other containers. RESULTS: Prescription medications were stored in lower elevations than vitamins with iron and OTC ibuprofen or acetaminophen. Products common in poisoning were often stored at low elevations. Poison center (PCC) awareness was modest; 35% stated the PCC would be first choice; 43% chose 911. Nineteen percent indicated they transferred cleaning items to other containers, usually bleach (6.7%), but 29% transferred prescription medications. CONCLUSION: Results will be utilized to develop a community-specific educational campaign targeted toward lack of awareness of the poison center and reinforcement of proper storage and disposal practices.

Improving environmental risk management through historical impact assessments.

A historical contaminant impact assessment was conducted at 48 heavy manufacturing facilities located in 20 different states for a U.S.-based company. The facilities evaluated were industrial manufacturing sites that operated for as long as 100 yr and used several types of hazardous substances, including solvents and degreasers, oils and other petroleum products, paints and pigments, and heavy metals. The purpose of conducting the impact assessment was to provide direction and guidance on future environmental objectives and pollution prevention initiatives. The impact assessment involved examining historical investigative and remediation costs since 1985, types of contaminants, subsurface geology, hydrology, and regulatory requirements. The results reveled that 85% of the historical environmental costs were associated with hexavalent chromium and chlorinated solvents. Other contaminants, such as oils and other petroleum products and other heavy metals, were far more commonly detected but only accounted for the remaining 15% of costs. The results also indicated that the costs are also strongly associated with the type of geologic environment to which the chemicals were released. As a result of these findings, an aggressive pollution prevention program has been initiated to eliminate the use of those contaminants that are especially expensive to remediate and to develop stronger and more effective engineering controls at facilities located in sensitive ecological areas.

Assessing poisoning risks related to storage of household hazardous materials: using a focus group to improve a survey questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: In fall of 2004, the authors began an investigation to characterize the correlations between the storage of Household Hazardous Materials and the associated health risks, particularly to children. The study area selected was Genesee County, Michigan, near Flint, with data to be collected by a phone survey of residents and through the acquisition of county hospital records containing procedure codes indicating treatment for poison emergencies, and review of poison control center data. METHODS: A focus group was used to identify key topics and relationships within these data for improving the phone survey questionnaire and its analysis. RESULTS: The focus group was successful in identifying the key issues with respect to all the data collection objectives, resulting in a significantly shorter and more topically focused survey questionnaire. Execution time of the phone survey decreased from 30 to 12 minutes, and useful relationships between the data were revealed, e.g., the linkage between reading food labels and reading labels on containers containing potentially harmful substances. CONCLUSION: Focus groups and their preparatory planning can help reveal data interrelationships before larger surveys are undertaken. Even where time and budget constraints prevent the ability to conduct a series of focus groups, one successful focus group session can improve survey performance and reduce costs.

Heavy metals in an urban watershed in southeastern Michigan.

The occurrence of heavy metals in the soil was measured over a period of several years to determine background concentrations in a heavily urbanized watershed in southeastern Michigan. A spatially dispersed sample was collected to capture the inherent variability of the soils and historic land use. The analysis focused on 14 metals (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, and zinc) that are part of the USEPA's list of the 129 most common pollutants. Metal concentrations were measured at three depths: near-surface (<0.5 m), shallow subsurface (0.5-10 m), and depths greater than 10 m across six soil units in glacial terrain. Additional analyses assessed the metal concentrations in each depth profile across three general land use categories: residential, commercial, and industrial. Metal concentrations were the highest in the near-surface with Pb present at concentrations averaging 15.5 times that of background in industrial areas and approximately 16 times background in residential areas. Cadmium, Hg, and Zn were also present in surface soils at levels of several times that of background. The highest concentrations of each of these metals were present in the clay-rich soils located in the eastern, more urbanized and industrialized part of the watershed. Metals detected at elevated concentrations decreased in concentration with increasing depth and distance from the urbanized and industrialized center of the watershed. Statistically significant differences in the concentrations of heavy metals were also noted between the land use categories, with Cd, Cr, Cu, Pb, Ni, and Zn observed within industrial areas at mean concentrations several times greater than background levels.

Surface and subsurface geologic risk factors to ground water affecting brownfield redevelopment potential.

A model is created for assessing the redevelopment potential of brownfields. The model is derived from a space and time conceptual framework that identifies and measures the surface and subsurface risk factors present at brownfield sites. The model then combines these factors with a contamination extent multiplier at each site to create an index of redevelopment potential. Results from the application of the model within an urbanized watershed demonstrate clear differences between the redevelopment potential present within five different near-surface geologic units, with those units containing clay being less vulnerable to subsurface contamination. With and without the extent multiplier, the total risk present at the brownfield sites within all the geologic units is also strongly correlated to the actual costs of remediation. Thus, computing the total surface and subsurface risk within a watershed can help guide the remediation efforts at broad geographic scales, and prioritize the locations for redevelopment.

Environmental evaluation of subdivision site developments.

An environmental evaluation was performed at 16 subdivision sites within four communities in east-central Michigan. The primary objective was to evaluate the fit between environmental ordinances and the physical/environmental conditions to which they were applied. An environmental response index was developed with indicators to assess water, soil, slope, development density, roads, vegetation, and ecology. Water-related indicators achieved the highest scores, while soil-related indicators scored the poorest, with generally poor performance across all indicators. The poor performance indicates there are problems in the ability of environmental ordinances developed at broader jurisdictional scales (e.g., the state) to address the existing environmental conditions at smaller geographic scales (subdivisions within communities). Two key problems include the lack of scientific specificity in the broader state-level ordinances and the lack of local expertise and/or resources to monitor the environment.