Assessing the Environmental Protection Agency's guidelines for cumulative risk assessment: Are they suitable for state agencies and EPA regional offices?

In the field of health risk analysis, cumulative risk assessment (CRA) is a necessary, although undeniably more complex approach to understanding the mixture of stressors, whether chemical or psychosocial, that exist in our environment, in all the pathways through which the chemicals may evolve—air, soil, or water, as well as the accumulation of these exposures over time. Related, or attached to the developing awareness of scientists understanding this mix of combined health effects is the burgeoning of the environmental justice movement, in which educated community advocates and even affected community members have called attention to evidence of a higher pollution burden in minority and/or lower SES communities. The intention of this paper is to 1) examine the development and understanding of CRA, primarily by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 2) to assess several states agencies and some EPA regional offices' interpretation of CRA, again based primarily on EPA guidance, and 3) to analyze how CRA might be refined in its implementation—giving some cues as to how the EPA may more effectively interact with communities interested in CRA.^

A discourse-theoretic approach to negotiated rulemaking

In 1996 and in 1997, Congress ordered the Secretary of Health and Human Services to undertake a process of negotiated rulemaking, which is authorized under the Negotiated Rulemaking Act of 1990, on three separate rulemaking matters. Other Federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Health and Safety Administration, have also made use of this procedure. As part of the program to reinvent government, President Clinton has issued an executive order requiring federal agencies to engage in some negotiated rulemaking procedures. I present an analytic, interpretative and critical approach to looking at the statutory and regulatory provisions for negotiated rulemaking as related to issues of democratic governance surrounding the problem of delegation of legislative power. The paradigm of law delineated by Jürgen Habermas, which sets law the task of achieving social or value integration as well as integration of systems, provides the background theory for a critique of such processes. My research questions are two. First, why should a citizen obey a regulation which is the result of negotiation by directly interested parties? Second, what is the potential effect of negotiated rulemaking on other institutions for deliberative democracy? For the internal critique I argue that the procedures for negotiated rulemaking will not produce among the participants the agreement and cooperation which is the legislative intent. For the external critique I argue that negotiated rulemaking will not result in democratically-legitimated regulation. In addition, the practice of negotiated rulemaking will further weaken the functioning of the public sphere, as Habermas theorizes it, as the central institution of deliberative democracy. The primary implication is the need to mitigate further development of administrative agencies as isolated, self-regulating systems, which have been loosened from the controls of democratic governance, through the development of a robust public sphere in which affected persons may achieve mutual understanding. ^

Smoke free restaurant ordinance, compliance with the regulation to reduce exposure to environmental tobacco smoke while dining at local restaurants in San Antonio, Texas

This study is a secondary analysis of a survey developed by Dr. Jimmy Perkins and administered by San Antonio/Bexar County Metropolitan Health District. The survey was developed subsequent to the implementation of the city smoking ordinance effective January 1, 2004. The survey had a multi-purpose plan to establish the number of restaurants having smoke free status prior to and following the ordinance, determine compliance as it relates to a necessary smoking section and proper signage, and expose the rationale for restaurants to become smoke free. The data resulting from the survey was presented to the San Antonio/Bexar County Metropolitan Health District. The summary presented the types of establishments surveyed, smoking status of the establishment, reasons for the establishment becoming smoke free, compliance with smoking sections, compliance with signage requirements, awareness of ordinance, and chain status of the establishment. ^ The results of this study display the relationships among the variables previously mentioned. The following relationships have been examined and the outcomes have determined whether each is significant. After careful analysis, knowledge translates into compliance with signage regulations, which then translate into ordinance compliance. Size does matter as it relates to an establishment's number of employees and seating capacity. The smaller the establishment the more likely the establishment is to have become smoke free before the ordinance went into effect. Restaurants, rather than fast food establishments most commonly cited their reason for becoming smoke free was to comply with the ordinance and only ten percent of restaurants gave policy as the main reason for becoming smoke free. ^ This study is important for public health because the negative health effects of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) are still an overwhelming problem in the United States (3). ETS is a Known Human Group A Carcinogen (5). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has estimated that around 3,000 non-smoking Americans die every year from lung cancer caused by ETS (6). This information illustrates the importance of providing smoke free establishments, especially to non-smoking patrons. ^

A comprehensive review of the environmental impacts and human health risks associated with the occurrence of waste pharmaceuticals in water sources of the United States, and policy implications

The occurrence of waste pharmaceuticals has been identified and well documented in water sources throughout North America and Europe. Many studies have been conducted which identify the occurrence of various pharmaceutical compounds in these waters. This project is an extensive review of the documented evidence of this occurrence published in the scientific literature. This review was performed to determine if this occurrence has a significant impact on the environment and public health. This project and review found that pharmaceuticals such as sex hormone drugs, antibiotic drugs and antineoplastic/cytostatic agents as well as their metabolites have been found to occur in water sources throughout the United States at levels high enough to have noticeable impacts on human health and the environment. It was determined that the primary sources of this occurrence of pharmaceuticals were waste water effluent and solid wastes from sewage treatment plants, pharmaceutical manufacturing plants, healthcare and biomedical research facilities, as well as runoff from veterinary medicine applications (including aquaculture). ^ In addition, current public policies of US governmental agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) have been evaluated to see if they are doing a sufficient job at controlling this issue. Specific recommendations for developing these EPA, FDA, and DEA policies have been made to mitigate, prevent, or eliminate this issue.^ Other possible interventions such as implementing engineering controls were also evaluated in order to mitigate, prevent and eliminate this issue. These engineering controls include implementing improved current treatment technologies such as the advancement and improvement of waste water treatment processes utilized by conventional sewage treatment and pharmaceutical manufacturing plants. In addition, administrative controls such as the use of “green chemistry” in drug synthesis and design were also explored and evaluated as possible alternatives to mitigate, prevent, or eliminate this issue. Specific recommendations for incorporating these engineering and administrative controls into the applicable EPA, FDA, and DEA policies have also been made.^