Assessing the economic and societal benefits of SRP-funded research

Environmental Health Perspectives

Volumn 126, Issue 6, 2018, Pages

  Suk, William A ^a   Heacock, Michelle L ^a   Trottier, Brittany A ^a   Amolegbe, Sara M ^b   Avakian, Maureen D ^b   Henry, Heather F ^a   Carlin, Danielle J ^a   Reed, Larry G ^b  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES   (United States)

^b MDB Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYL;

CLEANING; COMMERCIAL PHENOMENA; DANGEROUS GOODS; ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION; ELECTROCHEMICAL ANALYSIS; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; INDUSTRY; INTERVIEW; MINING; NATIONAL HEALTH ORGANIZATION; NOTE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SUPERFUND BASIC RESEARCH AND TRAINING PROGRAM; UNIVERSITY; ECONOMICS; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; HAZARDOUS WASTE SITE; PREVENTION AND CONTROL; PROCEDURES; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; UNITED STATES;

ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING; ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION AND REMEDIATION; HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES; HAZARDOUS WASTE SITES; NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES (U.S.); SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; UNITED STATES;

EID: 85049147623     PISSN: 00916765     EISSN: 15529924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1289/EHP3534     Document Type: Note

References (72)

1. Bruns MA, Hanson JR, Mefford J, Scow KM. 2001. Isolate PM1 populations are dominant and novel methyl tert-butyl ether-degrading bacteria in compost biofilter enrichments. Environ Microbiol 3(3):220–225, PMID: 11321538, https://doi.org/10. 1046/j.1462-2920.2001.00184.x.
2. Brusseau M, Carroll K, Truex M, Becker D. 2013. Characterization and remediation of chlorinated volatile organic contaminants in the vadose zone. Vadose Zone. J 12(4): PMID: 25383058, https://doi.org/10.2136/vzj2012.0137.
3. Brusseau ML, Hatton J, DiGuiseppi W. 2011. Assessing the impact of source-zone remediation efforts at the contaminant-plume scale through analysis of contaminant mass discharge. J Contam Hydrol 126(3–4):130–139, PMID: 22115080, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2011.08.003.
4. Brusseau ML, Mainhagu J, Morrison C, Carroll KC. 2015. The vapor-phase multi-stage CMD test for characterizing contaminant mass discharge associated with VOC sources in the vadose zone: application to three sites in different life-cycle stages of SVE operations. J Contam Hydrol 179:55–64, PMID: 26047819, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2015.05.006.
5. Brusseau ML, Rohay V, Truex MJ. 2010. Analysis of soil vapor extraction data to evaluate mass-transfer constraints and estimate source-zone mass flux. Ground Water Monit Remediat 30(3):57–64, PMID: 23516336, https://doi.org/10. 1111/j.1745-6592.2010.01286.x.
6. Carlin DJ, Henry H, Heacock M, Trottier B, Drew CH, Suk WA. 2018. The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Superfund Research Program: a model for multidisciplinary training of the next generation of environmental health scientists. Rev Environ Health 33(1):53–62, PMID: 29055939, https://doi.org/10.1515/reveh-2017-0024.
7. Carroll KC, Oostrom M, Truex MJ, Rohay VJ, Brusseau ML. 2012. Assessing performance and closure for soil vapor extraction: integrating vapor discharge and impact to groundwater quality. J Contam Hydrol 128(1–4):71–82, PMID: 22192346, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2011.10.003.
8. Edison International. 1997. “Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the Quarterly Period Ended March 31, 1997.” Washington, DC:Securities and Exchange Commission. http://services. corporate-ir.net/SEC/Document.Service?id=P3VybD1hSFIwY0RvdkwyRndhUzU wWlc1cmQybDZZWEprTG1OdmJTOWtiM2R1Ykc5aFpDNXdhSEEvWVdOMGF XOXVQVkJFUmlacGNHRm5aVDB6TXpFd09ETW1jM1ZpYzJsa1BUVTMmdHlwZ T0yJmZuPTMzMTA4My5wZGY= [accessed 9 April 2018].
9. Fallahpour N, Yuan S, Rajic L, Alshawabkeh AN. 2016. Hydrodechlorination of TCE in a circulated electrolytic column at high flow rate. Chemosphere 144:59–64, PMID: 26344148, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2015.08. 037.
10. Farr JV, Faber IJ, Ganguly A, Martin WA, Larson SL. 2016. Simulation-based costing for early phase life cycle cost analysis: example application to an environmental remediation project. Eng Economist 61(3):207–222, https://doi.org/10. 1080/0013791X.2015.1062582.
11. Ghosh U, Luthy RG, Cornelissen G, Werner D, Menzie CA. 2011. In-situ sorbent amendments: a new direction in contaminated sediment management. Environ Sci Technol 45(4):1163–1168, PMID: 21247210, https://doi.org/10.1021/es102694h.
12. GhoshU,MenzieCA.2010.Low-Impact Delivery System for In-Situ Treatment of Contaminated Sediment. U.S. Patent 7,824,129, November 2, 2010. http://patft. uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u= %2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7824129.PN.&OS= PN/7824129&RS=PN/7824129 [accessed 23 October 2017].
13. Gordon M, Choe N, Duffy J, Ekuan G, Heilman P, Muiznieks I, et al. 1997. Phytoremediation of soil and water contaminants. In: Phytoremediation of Trichloroethylene with Hybrid Poplars. Kruger EL, Anderson TA, Coats JR, eds. Washington, DC:American Chemical Society, 177–185.
14. Guinea J, Sela E, Gómez-Núñez A, Mangwende T, Ambali A, Ngum N, et al. 2015. Impact oriented monitoring: a new methodology for monitoring and evaluation of international public health research projects. Res Eval 24(2):131–145, https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvu034.
15. Hanson JR, Ackerman CE, Scow KM. 1999. Biodegradation of methyl tert-butyl ether by a bacterial pure culture. Appl Environ Microbiol 65(11):4788–4792, PMID: 10543787.
16. Hardisty PE, Cassie S, Ellis J, Wallace S. 2006. Assessing the costs and benefits of MGP site remediation. Land Contam Reclamat 14(2):352–356, https://doi.org/10. 2462/09670513.725.
17. Henry H, Suk W. 2017. Sustainable exposure prevention through innovative detection and remediation technologies from the NIEHS Superfund Research Program. Rev Environ Health 32(1–2):35–44, PMID: 28212109, https://doi.org/10. 1515/reveh-2016-0037.
18. Hicks KA, Schmidt R, Nickelsen MG, Boyle SL, Baker JM, Tornatore PM, et al. 2014. Successful treatment of an MTBE-impacted aquifer using a bioreactor self-colonized by native aquifer bacteria. Biodegradation 25(1):41–53, PMID: 23613160, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10532-013-9639-0.
19. Hristova K, Gebreyesus B, Mackay D, Scow KM. 2003. Naturally occurring bacteria similar to the methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE)-degrading strain PM1 are present in MTBE-contaminated groundwater. Appl Environ Microbiol 69(5):2616–2623, PMID: 12732529, https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.69.5.2616-2623.2003.
20. Hristova KR, Lutenegger CM, Scow KM. 2001. Detection and quantification of methyl tert-butyl ether-degrading strain PM1 by real-time TaqMan PCR. Appl Environ Microbiol 67(11):5154–5160, PMID: 11679339, https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.67.11.5154-5160.2001.
21. Hristova KR, Schmidt R, Chakicherla AY, Legler TC, Wu J, Chain PS, et al. 2007. Comparative transcriptome analysis of Methylibium petroleiphilum PM1 exposed to the fuel oxygenates methyl tert-butyl ether and ethanol. Appl Environ Microbiol 73(22):7347–7357, PMID: 17890343, https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.01604-07.
22. Iron Kast. 2017. Iron Carbonate Based Concrete – FerrockTM. http://ironkast.com/technology [accessed 9 April 2018].
23. Kane SR, Chakicherla AY, Chain PSG, Schmidt R, Shin MW, Legler TC, et al. 2007. Whole-genome analysis of the methyl tert-butyl ether-degrading beta-proteobac-terium Methylibium petroleiphilum PM1. J Bacteriol 189(5):1931–1945, PMID: 17158667, https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.01259-06.
24. Kingston JT, Dahlen PR, Johnson PC, Foote E, Williams S. 2010. “Critical Evaluation of State-of-the-Art In Situ Thermal Treatment Technologies for DNAPL Source Zone Treatment.” ER-0314. Alexandria, VA:Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP). https://www.serdp-estcp.org/content/download/4576/67301/file/ER-0314-FR.pdf [accessed 16 May 2018].
25. Landrigan PJ, Fuller R, Acosta NJR, Adeyi O, Arnold R, Basu NN, et al. 2018. The Lancet Commission on pollution and health. Lancet 391(10119):462–512, PMID: 29056410, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32345-0.
26. Landrigan PJ, Wright RO, Cordero JF, Eaton DL, Goldstein BD, Hennig B, et al. 2015. The NIEHS Superfund Research Program: 25 years of translational research for public health. Environ Health Perspect 123(10):909–918, PMID: 25978799, https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1409247.
27. Ledford H. 2013. Universities struggle to make patents pay. Nature 501(7468):471– 472, PMID: 24067689, https://doi.org/10.1038/501471a.
28. Lockheed Martin. 2016. Fact Sheet: Middle River Complex and Martin State Airport Environmental Studies and Cleanup. https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/eo/documents/remediation/middle-river/fact-sheet-march-2016.pdf [accessed 16 May 2018].
29. Luthy RG, Ghosh U. 2006. In Situ Stabilization of Persistent Hydrophobic Organic Contaminants in Sediments Using Coal-and Wood-Derived Carbon Sorbents. U.S. Patent 7,101,115, September 5, 2006. http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/ nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO %2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=7101115.PN.&OS=PN/7101115&RS=PN/ 7101115 [accessed 23 October 2017].
30. Mainhagu J, Morrison C, Brusseau ML. 2015. Using vapor phase tomography to measure the spatial distribution of vapor concentrations and flux for vadose-zone VOC sources. J Contam Hydrol 177–178:54–63, PMID: 25835545, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jconhyd.2015.03.002.
31. Milat AJ, Bauman A, Redman S. 2015. Narrative review of models and success factors for scaling up public health interventions. Implement Sci 10:113, PMID: 26264351, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-015-0301-6.
32. Mishamandani S. 2014. Translating research into products to improve public health. Environmental Factor. Research Triangle Park, NC; June 2014. https://factor.niehs. nih.gov/2014/6/science-translating/file695558_alt.pdf [accessed 29 June 2017].
33. National Toxicology Program. 2016. Trichloroethylene. https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/materials/tce:508.pdf[accessed 3 Jan 2018].
34. Naval Undersea Warfare Center Division. 1998. “EPA Super fund Record of Decision: Naval Undersea Warfare Engineering Station (4 Waste Areas).” EPA/ROD/R10-98/183. Keyport, WA:Naval Facilities Engineering Command. https://semspub.epa.gov/work/HQ/188631.pdf [accessed 9 April 2018].
35. Neithalath N, Stone D, Das S. 2016. Binder Compositions and Method of Synthesis. U.S. Patent Application Publication 20160264466 A1, September 15, 2016. http://appft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF& d=PG01&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1= %2220160264466%22.PGNR.&OS=DN/20160264466&RS=DN/20160264466 [accessed 5 April 2018].
36. Newman L, Strand S, Choe N, Duffy J, Ekuan G, Ruszaj M, et al. 1997. Uptake and biotransformation of trichloroethylene by hybrid poplars. Environ Sci Technol 31(4):1062–1067, https://doi.org/10.1021/es960564w.
37. Newman L, Wang X, Muiznieks I, Ekuan G, Ruszaj M, Cortellucci R, et al. 1999. Remediation of trichloroethylene in an artificial aquifer with trees: a controlled field study. Environ Sci Technol 33(21):3935–3935, https://doi.org/10. 1021/es9920213.
38. NIEHS. 2002. Progress reports: University of Washington: Phytoremediation of toxic wastes. 2002 Progress Report. https://tools.niehs.nih.gov/srp/Programs/progress_ report.cfm?Project_ID=P42ES0046960005&nOrder=4 [accessed 9 April 2018].
39. NIEHS. 2007. Research Brief 153: Novel high-strength iron cement sequesters pollutants. https://tools.niehs.nih.gov/srp/researchbriefs/view.cfm?Brief_ID=153 [accessed 9 April 2018].
40. NIEHS. 2010. Patents: Superfund Research Program. https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/supported/centers/srp/products/patents/index.cfm [accessed 9 April 2018].
41. NIEHS. 2015a. Program Mandates: Superfund Research Program. https://www.niehs. nih.gov/research/supported/centers/srp/about/program/index.cfm [accessed 9 April 2018].
42. NIEHS. 2015b. Strategies to attain SRP objectives and goals: 2015–2020. https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/supported/centers/srp/assets/docs/srp_strategies_ to_attain_objectives_and_goals_2015_508.pdf [accessed 9 April 2018].
43. NIEHS. 2018. Superfund Research Program. https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/supported/centers/srp/index.cfm [accessed 9 April 2018].
44. Picoyune. 2017. Picoyune Chemical Sensing Platforms. http://picoyune.com/[accessed 9 April 2018].
45. Pivetz BE. 2001. “Ground Water Issue: Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soil and Ground Water at Hazardous Waste Sites.” EPA/540/S-01/500. Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Research and Development. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/epa_540_s01_ 500.pdf [accessed 9 April 2018].
46. Salter A, Martin B. 2001. The economic benefits of publicly funded basic research: a critical review. Res Policy 30(3):509–532, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00091-3.
47. Schmidt R, Battaglia V, Scow K, Kane S, Hristova KR. 2008. Involvement of a novel enzyme, MdpA, in methyl tert-butyl ether degradation in Methylibium petroleiphilum PM1. Appl Environ Microbiol 74(21):6631–6638, PMID: 18791002, https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.01192-08.
48. Sediment Solutions. 2017. Delivering activated carbon for in-situ sediment remediation. http://sedimite.com/[accessed 9 April 2018].
49. Stark AM. 2009. LLNL technology cleans up Visalia Superfund 100 years ahead of schedule. https://www.llnl.gov/news/llnl-technology-cleans-visalia-superfund-100%C2%A0years-ahead-schedule [accessed 9 April 2018].
50. Stewart LD, Udell KS. 1988. Mechanism of residual oil displacement by steam injection. SPE Res Eng 3(04):1233–1242, https://doi.org/10.2118/16333-PA.
51. TerraTherm, Inc. 2018. Steam enhanced extraction. http://www.terratherm.com/thermal/ser/index.htm [accessed 9 April 2018].
52. Tetra Tech Inc. 2013. Feasibility study for the remediation of sediments adjacent to Lockheed Martin Middle River Complex Middle River, Maryland. http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed/data/corporate/documents/ remediation/middle-river/SedimentFeasibilityStudy071513.docx.pdf [accessed 9 April 2018].
53. The Economist. 2015. Time to fix patents. The Economist. London, UK; August 8, 2015. https://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21660522-ideas-fuel-economy-todays-patent-systems-are-rotten-way-rewarding-them-time-fix [accessed 9 April 2018].
54. Truex M, Carroll K, Rohay V, Mackley R, Parker K. 2012. “Treatability Test Report: Characterization of Vadose Zone Carbon Tetrachloride Source Strength Using Tomographic Methods at the 216-Z-9 Site” PNNL-21326. Richland, WA:Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. https://www.pnnl.gov/main/publications/external/technical_reports/PNNL-21326.pdf [accessed 9 April 2018].
55. U.S. Air Force Civil Engineer Center. 2017. Environmental Action Update: Air Force Environmental Activities at Williams. http://www.afcec.af.mil/Portals/17/documents/BRAC/Wiliams/AFD-170119-001.pdf?ver=2017-01-19-121924-317 [accessed 10 April 2018].
56. U.S. DoD (U.S. Department of Defense). 2006a. “Environmental Security Technology Certification Program: Plant Enhanced Bioremediation of Contaminated Soil and Groundwater.” ER-199519. Alexandria, VA:Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP)/Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP). www.serdp-estcp.org/ Program-Areas/Environmental-Restoration/Contaminated-Groundwater/ER-199519 [accessed 9 April 2018].
57. U.S. DoD. 2006b. “Unified Facilities Criteria (UFC): Design: In Situ Thermal Remediation.” UFC 3-280-05. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Defense. https://frtr.gov/costperformance/pdf/remediation/USACE-In_Situ_Thermal_Design. pdf[accessed 9 April 2018].
58. U.S. DoD. 2016a. “A Low-Impact Delivery System for In Situ Treatment of Sediments Contaminated with Methyl Mercury and Other Hydrophobic Chemicals.” ER-200835. Alexandria, VA:Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP). https://www.serdp-estcp.org/content/download/39402/379263/file/ER-200835-CP.pdf [accessed 9 April 2018].
59. U.S. DoD. 2016b. “Evaluating the Efficacy of a Low-Impact Delivery System for In Situ Treatment of Sediments Contaminated with Methylmercury and Other Hydrophobic Chemicals.” ER-200835. Alexandria, VA:Environmental Security Technology Certification Program (ESTCP). https://www.serdp-estcp.org/Program-Areas/Environmental-Restoration/Contaminated-Sediments/ER-200835 [accessed 9 April 2018].
60. U.S. DOE (U.S. Department of Energy). 2012. EM's ․500,000 investment in contaminant remediation leads to Hanford site strategy providing ․6.35 million in cost savings. https://energy.gov/em/articles/ems-500000-investment-contaminant-remediation-leads-hanford-site [accessed 9 April 2018].
61. U.S. DOE. 2016. “Response Action Report for the 200-PW-1 Operable Unit Soil Vapor Extraction Remediation.” DOE/RL-2014-48 REV 0. Richland, Washington: U.S. Department of Energy. https://pdw.hanford.gov/arpir/index.cfm/viewDoc? accession=0074963H [accessed 9 April 2018].
62. U.S. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2005. “Deployment of Phytotechnology in the 317-319 Area at Argonne National Laboratory-East, Innovative Technology Evaluation Report.” EPA/540/R-05/011. Washington, DC:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. https://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public_ record_report.cfm?dirEntryId=96194 [accessed 9 April 2018].
63. U.S. EPA. 2010. “Five Year Review Report: Second Five Year Review Report for Southern California Edison Company, Visalia Pole Yard Superfund Site, Visalia Tulare County, California: Five Year Review.” San Francisco, CA:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. https://semspub.epa.gov/work/HQ/180372. pdf [accessed 9 April 2018].
64. U.S. EPA. 2014a. Record of Decision: Lower Duwamish Waterway Superfund Site. Part 3 Responsiveness Summary. https://semspub.epa.gov/work/10/715977.pdf[accessed 9 April 2018].
65. U.S. EPA. 2014b. Statement of Basis for EPA’s Proposed Remedial Action for the Housatonic River “Rest of River.” https://semspub.epa.gov/work/01/558621.pdf[accessed 9 April 2018].
66. U.S. EPA. 2017. Methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE): overview. https://clu-in.org/contaminantfocus/default.focus/sec/Methyl_Tertiary_Butyl_Ether_(MTBE)/cat/Overview/[accessed 4 April 2018].
67. Udell KS. 1996. Heat and mass transfer in clean-up of underground toxic wastes. Annu Rev Heat Transfer 7:333–405, https://doi.org/10.1615/AnnualRevHeatTransfer. v7.80.
68. Udell KS. 1998a. Removal of volatile organic contaminants from soils and groundwater. Cent Eur J Public Health 6:148–151. https://cejph.szu.cz/artkey/cjp-199802-0018_Removal-of-volatile-organic-contaminants-from-soil-and-groundwater. php [accessed 15 May 2018].
69. Udell KS. 1998b. Application of in situ thermal remediation technologies for DNAPL removal. In: Groundwater Quality: Remediation and Protection (Proceedings of the GQ ’98 Conference). Herbert M, Kovar K, eds. September 1988, Tübingen, Germany. Oxfordshire, UK:International Association of Hydrological Sciences, 367–374.
70. University of Arizona SRP Center. 2016. UA SRP negotiates contract renewal with three global mining partners. https://superfund.arizona.edu/highlights/ua-srp-negotiates-contract-renewal-three-global-mining-partners[accessed 9 April 2018].
71. Volchko Y, Norrman J, Rosén L, Karlfeldt Fedje K. 2017. Cost-benefit analysis of copper recovery in remediation projects: a case study from Sweden. Sci Total Environ 605-606:300–314, PMID: 28668741, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.06.128.
72. Wan X, Lei M, Chen T. 2016. Cost-benefit calculation of phytoremediation technology for heavy-metal-contaminated soil. Sci Total Environ 563-564:796–802, PMID: 26765508, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.12.080.