Hazardous waste site frequency: use of the capture-recapture method

Abstract

This investigation used a two-source capture-recapture method (CRM) for determining ascertainment and undercounts of non-national priority listed hazardous waste sites in the states of Arizona, Maine and Pennsylvania. These findings suggest that ascertainment of hazardous waste sites vary greatly, with some more accurate (i.e., Maine) than others (i.e., Pennsylvania). These data suggest that nontraditional manufacturing states (e.g., Maine) have a higher ascertainment rate than traditional manufacturing states (e.g., Pennsylvania). These results indicate that resources for locating hazardous waste sites should be more heavily allotted to industrialized areas. We suggest that the CRM is a convenient, low cost and effective method for determining (1) the accuracy of previous estimates, and (2) the number of sites in a locale with 95% confidence intervals along with an estimate of the undercount. Findings suggest that estimates of hazardous waste sites should use the CRM to determine and improve accuracy.

Keywords

environmental hazards environmental investigations public health superfund

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aaron, D. J. , Chang, Y.-F. and Markovic, N. et al. 2003: Estimating the lesbian population: a capture-recapture approach. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 57, 207-209.

Doyle, M. E. and Young, J. C. 1993: Human health risk assessments. In Maughan, J. T. , editor, Ecological assessment of hazardous waste sites. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 113-143.

Federal CERCLIS list. 2003: Superfund Information Systems: CERCLIS Hazardous Waste Sites. Washington, DC: US Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/cursites [Accessed May 15, 2003].

Lange, J. H. , LaPorte, R. E. and Chang, Y.-F. 2003a: Exposure to lead and an old way of counting. Environmental Health Prospectives 111, A510-A511.

Lange, J. H. , LaPorte, R. E. and Talbott, E. O. et al. 2003b: Capture-recapture method: the gold standard for incidence and prevalence (Letter). New Zealand Medical Journal 20, 116-116.

Lange, J. H. , Chang, Y. F. and LaPorte, R. E. et al. 2004. Finding hazardous waste sites: evaluation using the capture-recapture method. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 72, 1182-1186.

LaPorte, R. E. , McCarty, D. J. and Tull, E. S. et al. 1992: County birds, bees and NCDs. Lancet 339, 494-495.

LaPorte, R. E. , Dearwater, S. R. and Chang, Y.-F. et al. 1995: Efficiency and accuracy of diseases monitoring systems: application of capture-recapture methods to injury monitoring. American Journal of Epidemiology 142, 1069-1077.

Le Cren, E. A. 1965: A note on the history of mark-recapture population estimates. Journal of Animal Ecology 34, 453-454.

10.

Litt, J. S. and Burke, T. A. 2002: Uncovering the historic environmental hazards of urban brownfields. Journal of Urban Health 79, 464-481.

11.

McCarty, D. J. , Tull, E. S. and Moy, C. S. et al. 1993: Ascertainment corrected rates: applications of the capture-recapture methods. International Journal of Epidemiology 22, 559-565.

12.

Tifft, E. C. 1988: Introduction to remediation of hazardous waste sites. In Bellandi, R. , editor, Hazardous waste site remediation: the engineer’s perspective. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 3-19.