Ch 12 CECs 010312

Report as inappropriate Your report has been received

Shared by: ajizai

Tags

Stats

views:: 0
posted:: 9/17/2012
language:: English
pages:: 32

Public Domain

Document Sample

1 CHAPTER 12 CONSTITUENTS OF EMERGING CONCERN
2
3
4 Constituentstaminants of Emerging Concern (CECs) can be broadly defined as any chemicals not Formatted: Justified
5 commonly monitored but have the potential to cause adverse ecological or human health
6 impacts. Due to rapid advances in analytical technology, the ability to detect infinitesimally
7 small chemical concentrations has caused an “emergence” of chemicals previously undetectable
8 such as caffeine, antibiotics, detergents, perfumes, disinfectants, insecticides, pain killers,
9 steroids, other personal care products, drugs, and natural and synthetic hormones. Chemicals
10 known as endocrine disruptors are thought to be adversely affecting the reproductive systems of
11 fish that inhabit waters that also serve as drinking water sources. This chapter provides a brief
12 overview of the issues associated with these emerging contaminantsconstituents in regards to
13 occurrence, fate and transport, health effects, removal by wastewater and drinking water
14 treatment processes, and regulations.
15
16 Classes of Emerging ContaminantsConstituents

17 Pharmaceuticals or pharmaceutically active chemicals (PhACs) and personal care products
18 (PCPs) are often grouped together and called pharmaceuticals and personal care products
19 (PPCPs). PPCPs include a diverse group of thousands of chemicals that are ingested by humans
20 and animals or applied to the bodies of humans and animals. This wide-ranging class includes
21 prescription and non-prescription drugs (for both humans and animals), soaps, fragrances, insect
22 repellant and sunscreen, among others. These chemicals enter sewer systems when they are
23 excreted or washed off the body. Unused medications are also disposed of by flushing them
24 down the toilet or pouring them down the drain. Incomplete removal in wastewater treatment
25 plants results in numerous PPCPs being discharged to surface waters at very low (µg/L to ng/L)
26 concentrations. They can also enter surface waters from land application of organic materials and
27 by runoff contaminated by animal excrement.
28
29 In addition to PPCPs, other classes of emerging contaminantsconstituents include
30 polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), pyrethroids, and PFCs. Recently, several other types
31 of high volume use chemicals have gained the attention of researchers and regulators which
32 include current-use flame retardants, antimicrobials, nanomaterials, cyclosiloxanes, and
33 quaternary ammonium compounds (QACs).
34
35 PFCs are chemicals used in non-stick cookware, stain-resistant fabrics, and food packaging. The
36 use of PFCs has been restricted over the past decade because of concerns with their potential
37 toxicity to humans and wildlife, but they are frequently detected in the environment worldwide.
38 Triclosan and triclocarban are antimicrobials found in many consumer products such as soaps,
39 toothpaste, and other personal care products. Concerns over these compounds include their
40 potential for endocrine disruption in wildlife, antibiotic resistance, and potential toxicity to algal
41 and microbial communities. Nanomaterials such as nanosilver, titanium dioxide, and carbon
42 nanotubes are used in commercial applications and are currently being studied to investigate
43 their environmental fate and potential toxicity. Cyclosiloxanes are persistent contaminants used
44 in a wide variety of personal care products, silicones, and in commercial applications as carriers,
45 lubricants, and solvents. Information on cyclosiloxanes such as Decamethylcyclopentasiloxane

Draft Report 12-1 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

46 (D5) is limited due to the difficulty in measuring in environmental matrices. QACs are cationic
47 surfactants widely used in industrial applications and consumer products such as fabric softeners
48 and detergents.
49
50 Endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are chemicals that interfere with the normal functioning
51 of hormones in the bodies of humans and animals. It is debatable which compounds should be
52 considered as EDCs, as compounds not currently considered EDCs may be determined to have
53 endocrine disruptive effects after further screening. Modes of action of EDCs include mimicking
54 natural hormones, interfering with hormone function, and degrading hormones. Some PPCPs
55 such as phthalates, used in hair spray, fingernail polish, and cosmetics, and hormones contained
56 in oral contraceptives are EDCs but not all EDCs are PPCPs. For example, industrial waste
57 products such as dioxins (TCDD) and furans, industrial chemicals such as perchlorate, PCBs and
58 organometals (e.g. tributyltin, an anti-fouling agent in boat paint), organochlorine pesticides and
59 their degradation products, and flame retardants such as PDBEs are all endocrine disruptors. In
60 addition, potential EDCs are contained in natural products such as soybeans and alfalfa. EDCs
61 enter surface waters from a variety of sources including industrial and municipal wastewater
62 discharges and runoff from urban and agricultural areas. .
63
64 Pyrethroids are primarily used as an insectide. The usage of pyrethroids dramatically increased in
65 the early 2000s after the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and
66 manufacturers withdrew diazinon and chloropyrifos products for residential use because of
67 health risks to users and their families (Aquatic Science Center, 2011). Pyrethroids have
68 endocrine disrupting properties and notably, bifenthrin stands out among the group for its
69 elevated concentration and frequency of detection in urban runoff, which originates from
70 pesticide use around homes and commercial establishments.
71
72 Nitrosamines are a class of organic CECs that are of particular concern to drinking water
73 agencies due to its carcinogenic nature. Nitrosamines can be formed as a byproduct of the
74 disinfection of some natural waters with chloramines. It is anticipated that certain nitrosamines
75 such as N-nitrosodimehtlyamine (NDMA), or a broader class of nitrosamines, may likely be the
76 next disinfection byproduct(s) regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
77 (USEPA).
78
79 Occurrence in the Environment

80 EDCs and PPCPs were first recognized as potential contaminants when they were linked to
81 adverse impacts on aquatic organisms. Aquatic organisms, particularly freshwater and
82 anadromous fish, live in streams and lakes used as sources of drinking water so effects on fish
83 can be a first sign of the presence of these compounds in drinking water sources.
84
85 Effects on Aquatic Organisms

86
87 Aquatic organisms are sensitive to low levels of exposure and are particularly vulnerable when
88 exposure occurs during developmentally sensitive times such as before birth and during juvenile
89 stages of growth. There are a number of studies that have shown developmental and reproductive
90 effects on fish exposed to wastewater effluent, shellfish exposed to organotins, and alligators and

Draft Report 12-2 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

91 frogs exposed to pesticides. Exposure to estrogenic hormones can result in more females than
92 males in a given fish population, the presence of both male and female reproductive organs
93 within an individual organism, and reduced reproductive success. USGS has reported finding
94 intersex or feminized male fish in many locations throughout the country. A nationwide USGS
95 study that analyzed the concentrations of two hormones (17β-estradiol and 11-ketotestosterone)
96 in the blood plasma of carp from 25 sites showed that fish from New Don Pedro Reservoir on the
97 Tuolumne River had the highest concentrations (Goodbred et al, 1997). Fish collected from the
98 San Joaquin River at two locations had lower concentrations of the two hormones.
99
100 A study of Chinook salmon collected from 13 locations in the Sacramento and San Joaquin
101 watersheds indicated that up to 38 percent of the male fish exhibited complete sex reversal. The
102 highest percent was found in the Mokelumne River, which is generally considered to be a high
103 quality source of drinking water. The feminization of male salmon is potentially attributed to
104 steroid hormones in wastewater effluent, agricultural wastes, and fish hatchery discharges;
105 detergent metabolites used as carriers in pesticide formulations; and pyrethroid pesticides and
106 their metabolites (Sedlak, 2006).
107
108 Under the Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, the Central Valley Regional Water
109 Quality Control Board applied an estrogenic endocrine disrupting chemical (EEDC) screening
110 procedure with juvenile rainbow trout to surface freshwaters collected in the Central Valley and
111 northeastern California (Vlaming, 2006). The indicator used for this assessment was a juvenile
112 rainbow trout liver vitellogenin (Vtg) gene expression assay. Vtg is the liver-synthesized egg
113 yolk protein precursor and is usually silent or not expressed in male fish. The appearance of Vtg
114 in the plasma of adult male or juvenile fish is widely accepted as evidence of exposure to
115 estrogenic chemicals. Results showed that out of 113 samples, only six samples induced
116 marginal, but statistically significant estrogenic activity in the screening procedure. EEDC
117 concentrations in these six samples were low (at or near procedure threshold).
118
119 Since 2003, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Environmental Contaminants Division have
120 periodically deployed water sampling devices to assess potential contaminant effects on special
121 status species in the Delta. In 2005, sampling frequency was increased to monthly, and extracts
122 collected from the sampling devices were injected into juvenile striped bass. Analytical results
123 showed numerous pesticides present at low levels in water. The laboratory tests demonstrated
124 that low level mixtures of contaminants in Delta water can set off responses that signal endocrine
125 disruption in fish (Aquatic Science Center, 2011). The results indicate a need for more
126 comprehensive assessment of endocrine disrupting chemicals in the Delta. Another study
127 conducted by Johnson et al 2010 was to: 1) determine the presence of vitellogenin in the
128 Sacramento splittail, a native fish of the Sacramento/San Joaquin River estuary and 2) to
129 determine the presence of trace levels of organic contaminants by using passive sampling
130 devices. Results showed that two male splittails out of 12 had extremely elevated vitellogenin.
131 Legacy organochlorines (DDT, DDE, dieldrin) were found at all sites during all seasons;
132 dieldrin, chlordane, and DDE were detected at 58.4 µg/L, 23.8 µg/L, and 61.2 µg/L, respectively.
133 Organophosphate pesticides chlorpyrifos and dioxathion were detected; chlorpyrifos was
134 detected at 154 µg/L in the False River site, a bend off the Sacramento River. Pyrethroids were
135 also detected; bifenthrin, cypermethrin and fenpropathrin were detected at much lower levels
136 than the organochlorines and organophosphates. Triazine herbicides such as atrazine, atroton,

Draft Report 12-3 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

137 prometon and simetryn were also observed. PCBs were detected at levels ranging from 32.3
138 µg/L to 73.4 µg/L.
139
140 Another study conducted by a university research team from UC Riverside and UC Berkeley
141 found further evidence regarding low level mixtures of contaminants in Delta water and signs of
142 endocrine disruption in fish (Lavado, 2009). This study evaluated the occurrence and sources of
143 compounds capable of feminizing fish in agriculturally impacted waterways in the Central
144 Valley. Out of 16 locations, estrogenic activity was repeatedly observed at six locations, with the
145 Sacramento River Delta location showing the highest estradiol equivalents. However, the
146 concentrations of compounds most frequently associated with feminization of fish (steroid
147 hormones, alkylphenol polyethoxylates, and alkylphenols) were well below the threshold values
148 for feminization of sensitive species, such as rainbow trout. The inconsistency between the water
149 sample and bioassay results was attributed to the possibility that other compounds could be
150 responsible for feminization of Delta fish species. Specifically, this study concluded that in
151 waters impacted by agricultural activities, estrogenic activity may result from the presence of
152 pesticide mixtures and/or their degradates as well as phytoestrogens, adjuvants, and other
153 compounds with multiple endocrine targets and modes of action. Subsequent work has shown
154 that there was a relationship between feminizing activity in fish and a mixture of alkylphenols
155 and alkyphenols ethoxylates (widely used as surfactants) and the pyrethoid bifenthrin.
156
157 Another recent study investigated the contribution of cattle-grazing rangelands to steroids in
158 surface waters (Kolodziej and Sedlak, 2007). Between April 2005 and March 2006, 30 sites were
159 sampled in Stanislaus, Marin, and Sonoma counties in central California. All of the steroid
160 analytes were detected in one or more of the 88 water samples. Estrone was detected more
161 frequently than the other steroids, with detectable concentrations in 78 percent of the samples at
162 concentrations as high as 38 ng/L. The estrogen 17α-estradiol was present in 31 percent of the
163 samples at concentrations up to 25 ng/L, while 17β-estradiol was present in 18 percent of the
164 samples at concentrations up to 1.7 ng/L. In approximately 10 to 20 percent of the samples,
165 steroid concentrations exceeded predicted no-effect concentrations (PNECs) for the feminization
166 of fish, indicating that allowing cattle direct access to surface waters may impact the health of
167 aquatic organisms in receiving waters.
168
169 In summary, studies conducted to date in the Bay-Delta system have pointed to adverse effects to
170 aquatic organisms from the presence of PPCPs, however more study is needed.
171
172 Occurrence in Surface Waters

173 PPCPs and EDCs have been detected in very small amounts in surface waters in the United
174 States and Europe. One of the first comprehensive studies conducted in the United States was
175 conducted by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) from 1999 to 2000. USGS sampled
176 139 streams in 30 states and found low levels of pharmaceuticals, antibiotics, and other organic
177 wastes (Barnes et al, 2002). Samples were collected from sites downstream of urban and
178 agricultural activities and analyzed for 95 chemicals. In 80 percent of the samples analyzed, one
179 or more chemicals were detected, typically at ng/L concentrations. Steroids, non-prescription
180 drugs (acetaminophen and ibuprofen), and insect repellants were the chemical groups most
181 frequently detected.
182

Draft Report 12-4 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

183 Two subsequent USGS studies were conducted and results were published in 2008. The first
184 study evaluated 100 target chemicals (pharmaceuticals and organic wastewater compounds) in
185 25 groundwater and 49 surface waters sources (Focazio et al, 2008). Sites were chosen in areas
186 that were known or suspected to have at least some human and or animal wastewater sources in
187 upstream or upgradient areas. Sixty-three of the 100 targeted chemicals were detected in at least
188 one sample (Focazio et al, 2008). The five most frequently detected chemicals in surface water
189 were cholesterol, metolachlor, cotinine, β-sitosterol, and 1,7-dimethylxanthine. The second
190 USGS study reported on 63 different organic wastewater compounds in groundwater.
191
192 Synder et al 2008 also analyzed source waters, finished waters, and distribution system water
193 supplies for 62 EDCs and PPCPs for 18 drinking water utilities across the United States
194 (AWWAwwaRF 2008a). The suite of 62 chemicals included 20 pharmaceuticals, 26 potential
195 EDCs, five steroid hormones, and 11 phytoestrogens. Forty-one of the 62 targeted chemicals
196 were detected in at least one sample. Overall, pharmaceuticals were the most frequently detected
197 in raw waters. The five most frequently detected chemicals in raw waters were
198 sulfamethoxazole, carbamazepine, atrazine, phenytoin, and meprobamate. Both steroid hormones
199 and phytoestrogens had low frequency of detection in raw water.
200
201 Although the nationwide studies provide a baseline of knowledge for the occurrence of PPCPs, it
202 is important to note that occurrence patterns of PPCPs in wastewater effluent is region specific,
203 based on prescription practice and consumption practice,, and dependent on per-capita water
204 consumption (AWWAwwaRF 2008b). In addition, the occurrence of PPCPs in surface waters
205 highly depends on the degree of wastewater impact upon the source water. Therefore, it is
206 important to derive occurrence information based on studies which have occurred in the
207 watersheds draining to the State Water Project.
208
209 National Water Research Institute Study

210 In 2010, the National Water Research Institute (NWRI) completed a source, fate, and transport
211 study of endocrine disruptors, pharmaceuticals, and personal care products which contained
212 eleven sampling sites associated with the State Water Project (Guo et al, 2010). Sample
213 collection was conducted quarterly from April 2008 to April 2009. Table 3-E112-1 shows the
214 sampling locations and significance of the location. The treated effluents from the Sacramento
215 and Stockton WWTPs were not made available for sampling by the respective sanitation
216 districts. However, samples were collected upstream and downstream of both WWTPs.
217

Draft Report 12-5 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

218 Table 3-E112-1. Sampling Locations Associated with the SWP, 2010 NWRI Study
219
Sampling Location Significance of the Location
Natomas East Main drainage canal (NEMDC) Urban Drainage
American River at E.A. Fairbairn DWTP Upstream of Sacramento WWTP
Sacramento River at W. Sacramento DWTP Upstream of Sacramento WWTP
Sacramento River at Hood Downstream of Sacramento WWTP
San Joaquin River at Mossdale Landing Upstream of Stockton WWTP
San Joaquin River at Holt Road Downstream of Stockton WWTP
H.O. Banks Delta Pumping Plant Entry into State Water Project
O’Neill Forebay (Check 13O’Neill Forebay Outlet) Integration point of the Delta output
Check 41 Entry point into Southern California; impact by
agricultural runoff from the Central Valley
East Branch SWP at Devil Canyon Representing a terminal reservoir
West Branch SWP at Foothill PCS Representing a terminal reservoir
220
221 A total of 43 samples were collected during four sample events. Detectable amounts of PPCPs
222 and organic wastewater compounds (OWCs) were found at all locations, except for the American
223 River at the Fairbairn WTP in April 2008, which had no detectable levels of any PPCPs or
224 OWCs. Of the 49 PPCPs and OWCs analyzed, 21 analytes were detected at or above the
225 minimum reporting level, whereas the other 28 were not detected at any locations with the
226 existing MRLs. The occurrence of PPCPs is shown in Table 3-E212-2, from the most to least
227 frequently detected.
228

Draft Report 12-6 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

229 Table 3-E212-2. PPCPs and OWCs Detected in the State Water Project Watershed, Formatted: Font: 11 pt
230 NRWI 2010 Study Formatted: Font: 11 pt
231 Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New
Location Roman, 11 pt
Detection where Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Minimum, Median, Maximum,
Analyte Use Frequency Maximum
(ng/L) (ng/L) (ng/L) Formatted: Font: 11 pt
(n=40) was
Formatted: Font: 11 pt
detected
Carbamazepine Anti- 88% <1 3 26 Holt Road Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Convulsant Formatted ...
Diuron Herbicide 88% <5 81 873 O’Neill Formatted ...
Forebay Formatted Table
Sulfamethoxazole Antibiotic 88% <1 11 71 Holt Road
Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Caffeine 83% <5 8 67 Holt Road
Primidone Anti- 70% <2 4 21 Holt Road Formatted: Centered

Convulsant Formatted ...
TCEP 70% <5 7 34 Holt Road Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Gemfibrozil Anti- 53% <5 5 162 Hood Formatted ...
Cholesterol
Formatted ...
Dilantin Anti- 50% <5 4 33 Holt
Formatted ...
Convulsant
Simazine Herbicide 38% <20 <20 408 Devil Formatted ...
Canyon Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Atrazine Herbicide 25% <1 <1 2 Devil Formatted ...
Canyon Formatted ...
O,p-DDD Medicine 20% <20 <20 82 Banks
Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Methoxychlor Insecticide 18% <20 <20 66 O’Neill
Formatted: Font: 11 pt
DEET Insect 13% <20 <20 35 Holt
Repellant Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Methylparaben Anti- 10% <20 <20 744 Check 41 Formatted: Font: 11 pt
fungal Formatted: Font: 11 pt
agent Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Acetaminophen Medicine 5% <1 <1 28 Banks
Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Linuron Pesticide 5% <5 <5 5 Banks
Bisphenol A Plastics 3% <30 <30 140 Check 41 Formatted: Font: 11 pt

Desisopropyl- Herbicide 3% <20 <20 25 Formatted: Font: 11 pt
atrazine Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Ibuprofen Analgesic 3% <10 <10 47 Holt Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Octylphenol Rubber, 3% <20 <20 68 Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Pesticide,
Formatted: Font: 11 pt
Paints
Propylparaben Cosmetic 3% <20 <20 83 Check 41 Formatted: Font: 11 pt

232 Formatted: Font: 11 pt
233 Overall, the median occurrence of targeted PPCPs was less than 30 ng/L, except for diuron (81 Formatted: Font: 11 pt
234 ng/L). Diuron is used extensively in California as a pre-emergent herbicide. Table 3-E2 also Formatted: Font: 11 pt
235 shows the location of where the maximum concentrations were detected. It is interesting to note Formatted: Font: 11 pt
236 that many of the maximums for the most frequently detected compounds were located at the San Formatted: Font: 11 pt
237 Joaquin River at Holt Road, just downstream of the Stockton WWTP. Formatted: Font: 11 pt
238
Formatted: Font: 11 pt

Draft Report 12-7 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

239 Seasonal variations of PPCPs in wastewater effluent could not be determined, as the Sacramento
240 and Stockton WWTPs were not available for sampling. The seasonal variations of selected
241 PPCPs downstream of the Sacramento WWTP and the Stockton WTTP were evaluated as shown
242 in Figures 3-E112-1 and 3-E212-2. At both locations, caffeine was highest in winter (January
243 2009), possibly reflecting less biodegradation at the WWTPs or less biodegradation in the rivers
244 during this season. In addition, there might also be less photolysis in the winter. Concentrations
245 of PPCPs downstream of the Stockton WWTP were highest in January 2009. As stated in the
246 NRWI study, sSince WWTP discharge rates do not vary that much from season to season, the
247 flow in the San Joaquin River may have been lower than normal in January 2009.
248
249 Figure 3-E112-1. Concentrations of five representative PCCPs in the Sacramento River at
250 Hood (downstream of Sacramento WWTP), April 2008-January 2009*

251
252 *Adapted from Guo et al 2010 NWRI Study
253

Draft Report 12-8 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

254 Figure #-12-2E2. Concentrations of five representative PCCPs in the San Joaquin River at
255 Holt Road (downstream of Stockton WWTP), April 2008-January 2009*

256
257 *Adapted from Guo et al 2010 NWRI Study
258
259 The NWRI study also provides an upstream to downstream comparison for selected PPCPs along
260 the State Water Project, beginning with sites just downstream of the Sacramento WWTP (Hood)
261 and downstream of the Stockton WWTP (Holt). Certain PPCPs (carbamazepine, primidone,
262 gemfibrozil, and sulfamethoxazole) are highly attenuated as shown in Figures 3-E312-3
263 through 312-E5 5. Since carbamazepine and primidone have been shown to be highly
264 recalcitrant (Loffler et al., 2005;Krasner et al., 2006), the attenuation of carbamazepine and
265 primidone can be attributed to dilution with non-wastewater-impacted water, such as
266 groundwater pumpins. Sulfamethoxazole has been shown to undergo biodegradation and
267 sorption to sediments or soils (Boxall, 2008; Radke et al., 2009) and gemfibrozil has been shown
268 to be attenuated by photolysis and biodegradation (Fono et al., 2006). Therefore, the attenuation
269 of gemfibrozil and sulfamethoxazole were most likely due to a combination of dilution and
270 natural degradation. However, detectable levels of some PPCPs were found at terminal reservoirs
271 in Southern California.
272

Draft Report 12-9 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

273 Figure 3-E312-3. Occurrence of carbamazepine Carbamazepine in the State Water Project
274 *

275
276 *Adapted from Guo et al 2010 NWRI Study
277
278 Figure 3-E412-4. Occurrence of gemfibrozil Gemfibrozil in the State Water Project*
Formatted: Centered

279
280 *Adapted from Guo et al 2010 NWRI Study
281

Draft Report 12-10 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

282
283 Figure 3-E512-5. Occurrence of sulfamethoxazole Sulfamethoxazole in the State Water
284 Project*
285

286
287 *Adapted from Guo et al 2010 NWRI Study
288
289 The general conclusion from the Guo et al 2010 NWRI study is that there is no evidence of
290 human health risk from low levels of the commonly detected EDCs and PPCPs in drinking water
291 or drinking water supplies. However, more toxicological studies are needed.
292
293 University of California, Davis Aquatic Ecosystems Analysis Laboratory

294 A pilot study was conducted by the University of California Davis Aquatic Ecosystems Analysis
295 Laboratory to evaluate the presence of PPCPs in the Sacramento River (Schaefer et al, 2009).
296 This work was conducted for the State Water Resources Control Board. Four locations along the
297 Sacramento River were monitored using passive sampling devices: Freeport Marina
298 (approximately 100 meters upstream of the Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment plant
299 effluent discharge), West Bank (approximately 525 meters downstream of the effluent
300 discharge), Cliff’s Marina (approximately 1,180 meters downstream of the effluent discharge),
301 and a private dock approximately 1,900 meters downstream of the effluent discharge).
302 Deployment of sampling devices occurred on May 28, 2009 and was removed on June 29, 2009.
303 Table 3-E312-3 shows a summary of all detectable compounds during the study, as well as a
304 comparison to concentrations found at Hood during the NWRI Study. It should be noted that
305 none of the analytes were detected at the Freeport Marina site, which is upstream of the
306 Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment effluent discharge.

Draft Report 12-11 January 2012
Formatted ...
California State Water Project Chapter 12 Formatted ...
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern
Formatted ...

307 Formatted Table ...
308 Table 3-E312-3. Detectable Results from 2009 PPCP Study of Sacramento River, Aquatic Formatted ...
309 Ecosystems Analysis Laboratory, UC Davis Formatted ...
310 Formatted ...
Method Hood Formatted ...
Freeport West Cliff’s Private
Detection (NRWI Formatted
Analyte Marina Bank Marina Dock ...
Limit Study)
(µg/L) (µg/L) (µg/L) (µg/L) Formatted ...
(µg/L) (µg/L)
Caffeine 0.020 ND 7.5 ND ND ND - 51 Formatted ...
Trimethoprim 0.002 ND 2.00 28.3 26.3 NS Formatted ...
Sulfamethoxazole 0.005 ND 5.92 13.0 13.0 28-43 Formatted ...
Gemfibrozil 0.002 ND 19.3 ND 214 83 - 162 Formatted ...
Ibuprofen 0.02 ND ND 182 ND ND Formatted ...
Carbamazepine 0.005 ND ND 45.6 43.2 3 - 11
Formatted ...
Fluoxetine 0.005 ND 17.6 20.8 20.8 NS
Xylene 0.1 ND 1140 ND 100 NS Formatted ...
(polycyclic Formatted ...
musk) Formatted ...
Nonylphenol 0.5 ND ND 160 68.5 NS Formatted ...
Nonylphenol 0.5 ND ND 800 730 NS
Formatted ...
Ethoxylates
Formatted ...
311 NS – Not sampled
Formatted ...
312
313 California Department of Water Resources/Metropolitan Water District of Southern California Formatted ...
314 (MWDSC) Joint Study Formatted ...
Formatted ...
315 Formatted ...
316 MWDSC and the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) completed a two-year study Formatted ...
317 in April 2010 of the sources and occurrence of NDMA, other nitrosamines, and their precursors Formatted ...
318 in the Delta (DiGiorgio et al, 2010). Major conclusions from this study include:
Formatted ...
319
Formatted
320  To date, the onlyno instantaneous nitrosamines have been detected in sampling locations ...
Formatted ...
321 of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta was NDMA. . It was detected once at the Mossdale
322 sampling location at 4.2 ng/L, and also at the Vernalis sampling location at 2.5 ng/L. Formatted ...
323 Photodegradation and/or dilution may be one explanation for nondetection. Formatted ...
324  N-nitrosodimethylamine formation potential concentrations were generally twohree to Formatted ...
325 four times higher downstream of the wastewater treatment plants. Sacramento WWTP Formatted ...
326 compared to upstream, and three times higher downstream of the Stockton WWTP Formatted ...
327 compared to upstream. Formatted ...
328  Primidone concentrations were generally three times higher downstream of the Formatted ...
329 Sacramento WWTP compared to upstream, and three times higher downstream of the Formatted ...
330 Stockton WWTP compared to upstream. These findings are generally similar to the
Formatted ...
331 NRWI study above.
Formatted ...
332  Diuron does not appear to be a major source of NDMA precursors.
Formatted ...
333  Dissolved organic carbon (DOC), trihalomethane formation potential (THMFP), and
Formatted ...
334 haloacetic acid formation potential (HAAFP) are not good predictors of NDMA
335 formation potential. Comment [p1]: Row 414, line 955
Comment [p2]: Row 415, line 958

Draft Report 12-12 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

336
337 The second phase of this study began in early 2011 and will focus sampling efforts on the
338 Sacramento Regional Wastewater Treatment Plant and the City of Stockton Regional
339 Wastewater Control Facility. Unlike the previous study, this new study will collect samples by
340 boat to better quantify nitrosamines, their precursors and WWTP tracers (i.e., selected PPCPs) in
341 discharge effluent as well as continue to quantify WWTP impacts in the Sacramento and San
342 Joaquin Rivers. The City of Stockton has agreed to sampling of their treated effluent
343 immediately prior to discharge, but no agreement has been made with the Sacramento Regional
344 Wastewater Treatment Plant. Cryptosporidium and Giardia will also be assessed in the treated
345 effluent. The study will conclude at the end of 2012.
346
347 Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board

348 Under the Central Valley Water Board’s Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program, a special
349 study was conducted to assess the potential for aquatic life impairment in the Sacramento-San
350 Joaquin River Delta due to the occurrence and toxicity of pyrethroid pesticides in the water
351 column. The current use of pyrethroids in California is 50 percent greater than what it was just
352 five years ago (CDPR, 2007). Samples were collected for the eight commonly used pyrethroid
353 pesticides: bifenthrin, cyfluthrin, cypermethrin, esfenvalerate, lambda-cyhalothrin, deltamethrin,
354 fenpropathrin, and permethrin. Water toxicity testing was done with a native crustacean,
355 Hyalella azteca. Major conclusions from this study include:
356
357  For several of the pyrethroids, threshold for water toxicity was as low as 2 parts per
358 trillion.
359  Virtually all urban runoff contained pyrethroids, typically at about four times the
360 concentration that would paralyze Hyalella.
361  Bifenthrin and cyfluthrin are the pyrethroids of greatest toxicological concern in urban
362 runoff.
363  Pyrethroids were present in 66 percent of the final effluent samples from wastewater
364 treatment plants. They were found most often, and in highest concentration at the
365 Sacramento WWTP, followed by the Vacaville WWTP, and then the Stockton WWTP.
366 The typical wastewater treatment plant effluent contains pyrethroids at about 1 to 1.5
367 times the concentrations that would paralyze Hyalella.
368  Pyrethroids were present in 30 percent of agricultural discharges.
369  Pyrethroids (most often bifenthrin) were found in the Sacramento River as it passed
370 through the City of Sacramento. Concentrations peaked near the threshold of causing
371 toxicity.
372
373 United States Geological Survey

374 After the national reconnaissance study was conducted by USGS from 1999 to 2000, there have
375 been no USGS CEC follow-up studies for surface water within the Central Valley. The national
376 reconnaissance study conducted by USGS from 1999 to 2000 included six sites within or
377 tributary to the Delta: the Sacramento River at Freeport; the San Joaquin River near Vernalis;
378 Mud Slough and Orestimba Creek, west-side tributaries to the San Joaquin River that are
379 dominated by agricultural drainage; Turlock Irrigation District (TID) Lateral 5, a canal that

Draft Report 12-13 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

380 receives agricultural drainage and municipal wastewater effluent and drains to the San Joaquin
381 River; and French Camp Slough, a tributary to the San Joaquin River that is dominated by urban
382 runoff. The key findings for this study were summarized in the previous watershed sanitary
383 survey. The key findings for the Central Valley sites are:
384
385  Steroid and Hormone Compounds – Samples were collected from the Sacramento River
386 at Freeport and TID Lateral 5 and analyzed for seven steroid and hormone compounds.
387 Cholesterol was detected at 0.383 µg/L in the Sacramento River and at 1.11 µg/L in TID
388 Lateral 5. Coprostanol was found at 0.624 µg/L in TID Lateral 5.
389
390  Pharmaceuticals – The samples were analyzed for ten pharmaceuticals. None of the
391 pharmaceuticals was detected in the Sacramento River at Freeport, Mud Slough, and
392 French Camp Slough. Acetaminophen was estimated to be 0.004 µg/L in Orestimba
393 Creek and the San Joaquin River at Vernalis. Five pharmaceuticals were detected in TID
394 Lateral 5; acetaminophen at 0.39 µg/L, caffeine at 0.68 µg/L, diltiazem at 0.017 µg/L,
395 1,7-Dimethylxanthine at 0.21 µg/L and codeine was estimated at 0.019 µg/L.
396
397  Antibiotics – The USGS study reported that the antibiotic data were not yet analyzed for
398 the sites in the Central Valley. The data are not available through the USGS National
399 Water Information System (NWIS) database.
400
401  Selected Organic Wastewater Contaminants – The samples were analyzed for eight
402 organics that the USGS has identified as being present in wastewater. TID Lateral 5 was
403 estimated to contain 0.01 µg/L of 1,4-dichlorobenzene and 0.04 µg/L of 2,6-di-tert-p-
404 benzoquinone. None of the organics was detected at the other five sites.
405
406 These data indicate that TID Lateral 5, which receives municipal wastewater from the City of
407 Turlock contained a number of compounds associated with human wastewater at low
408 concentrations. Although the Freeport site on the Sacramento River is downstream of the
409 Sacramento urban area, it is upstream of the discharge from the Sacramento Regional
410 Wastewater Treatment Plant (SRWTP). Due to tidal influence in the Sacramento River, the
411 Freeport site can be influenced by the discharge from the treatment plant but these data do not
412 adequately characterize the quality of water downstream from the discharge.
413
414 USGS also sampled for 63 organic wastewater compounds at the intake to West Sacramento’s
415 Bryte Bend WTP on the Sacramento River just upstream from the confluence with the American
416 River. This location is upstream of the urban Sacramento area and downstream of a number of
417 large agricultural drains. Eleven samples were collected between October 2004 and June 2005.
418 Nine pesticides were detected and nine organics were verified but not quantified in the samples,
419 including caffeine, cholesterol, and the insect repellant, DEET. The Bryte Bend site does not
420 adequately characterize the quality of water entering the Delta because the largest wastewater
421 discharger in the watershed (SRWTP) is downstream of this site.
422
423

Draft Report 12-14 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

424 Occurrence in Drinking Water

425
426 In general, the occurrence of PPCPs is more frequent and at higher median concentrations in
427 source waters than in finished drinking water. The occurrencepersistence of these contaminants
428 in finished drinking waters depends on their occurrence in source waters, the drinking water
429 treatment processes, and the analytical detection limit. Some pharmaceuticals and their
430 metabolites have been reported to occur at very low concentrations in some finished drinking
431 water samples in the U.S. A recent, comprehensive study of source, raw and finished waters for
432 EDCs and pharmaceuticals was conducted for the AWWARF study “Toxicological Relevance of
433 EDCs and Pharmaceuticals in Drinking Water”. In this study, finished drinking water samples
434 were collected from 18 water utilities across the United States. The five most frequently detected
435 PPCPs were atrazine, meprobamate, phenytoin, atenolol, and carbamazepine, with median
436 concentrations less than 10 ng/L, with the exception of atrazine at median 49 ng/L (Benotti et
437 al., 2009 and Synder et al, 2008). Atrazine exhibited the highest frequency of occurrence (83%),
438 followed by meprobamate (78%), phenytoin (56%), atenolol (44%), carbamazepine (44%), and
439 gemfibrozil (39%).
440
441 Fate and Transport

442 As presented in the 2008 AWWAwwaRF Study (AWWAwwaRF 2008b), concentrations of
443 PPCPs in surface waters can be potentially reduced due to phase partitioning and abiotic and
444 biotic transformation processes. Trace organic wastewater compounds, such as fragrances
445 galaxolide and tonalide, have high octanol-water partition coefficients and can absorb onto river-
446 bed sediments (Rimkus 1999). However, most pharmaceuticals have low sorption potential and
447 volatility, thus sorption and volatilization removal mechanisms are negligible. Abiotic
448 transformation processes include hydrolysis and photolysis. Photolysis can occur either by direct
449 absorption of light or indirectly by photosensitizers, such as nitrate and humic acids. Several
450 pharmaceuticals such as diclofenac, triclosan, sulfamethoxazole and propranolol have been
451 found to be amenable to photolytic decay in surface waters (AWWAwwaRF, 2008b).
452 Biotransformation mechanisms become more important for hydraulic travel times on the order of
453 weeks. Ibuprofen, gemfibrozil, caffeine, and naproxen have been shown to be transformed via
454 biotransformation processes.
455
456 As discussed earlier, the Guo et al 2010 NWRI Study presents fate and transport information on
457 three selected PPCPs through the State Water Project.
458
459 Analytical Methods

460 One of the major challenges in evaluating CECs in water is that there are no national or
461 international standardized methods. Currently the Water Research Foundation is sponsoring a
462 project entitled “Evaluation of Analytical Methods for EDCs and PPCPs via Interlaboratory
463 Comparison #4167”. This project will evaluate current methodology commonly used for the
464 analysis of EDCs and PPCPs by multiple laboratories in various water matrices.
465
466 The goal of the project is to provide guidelines to drinking water utilities on optimizing data
467 quality for EDCs and PPCPs. The study will determine which factors are most important in

Draft Report 12-15 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

468 determining the performance of a method at environmentally relevant (ng/L) concentrations. To
469 accomplish this goal, a literature review and single-blind, multi-round interlaboratory studies
470 will be carried out. Using statistical analysis and expert review of results from the interlaboratory
471 studies, major factors that have the most important role in determining the performance of a
472 method will be identified. After testing and evaluating various sample collection related
473 parameters such as bottle type and preservation and quenching agents, the optimized method(s)
474 will be implemented in several laboratories and further tested in a variety of matrices to ensure
475 widespread applicability of the technique(s). This project will provide reliable data on the
476 capabilities of both analytical methods and laboratories for measuring EDCs/PPCPs in typical
477 drinking water related matrices. More importantly, the product of this research will provide the
478 foundation for the establishment of standardized protocols for a representative target list of
479 EDCs/PPCPs with supportable reporting levels. The final report should be completed by the end
480 of 2011.
481
482 Health Effects

483 The initial concerns when EDCs and PPCPs were first reported in surface waters were focused
484 on increased bacterial resistance to antibiotics and interference with growth and reproduction of
485 aquatic organisms. More recently, concerns for human health due to exposure in drinking water
486 have been expressed. Cause-effect relationships between low-level environmental exposures to
487 specific EDCs and human health have not been established. Although no known health effects
488 have been linked to exposure to drinking water with EDCs and PPCPs at trace levels, drinking
489 water providers are concerned about potential effects and their consumers’ perception of the
490 safety of drinking water. Human and animal studies of the effects of continual, long-term
491 exposure to environmentally relevant doses are lacking for most known or potential EDCs, but
492 results of some animal studies indicate that certain EDCs can produce effects at low doses. There
493 is sufficient evidence to conclude that adverse endocrine-mediated effects have occurred in some
494 wildlife species. However, to date there is little evidence that levels of EDCs found in source
495 waters have produced adverse endocrine effects in humans (Snyder et al, 2005). Studies
496 examining EDC-induced effects in humans have yielded inconsistent and inconclusive results,
497 highlighting the need for more rigorous studies.
498
499 An AWWAwwaRF study titled “Toxicological Relevance of EDCs and Pharmaceuticals in
500 Drinking Water” evaluated health effects by comparing levels of 16 pharmaceuticals, ten EDCs
501 and three steroid hormones in drinking water to calculated health risk thresholds such as
502 acceptable daily intakes (ADIs) and drinking water equivalent levels (DWELs) (AWWAwwaRF,
503 2008a). Water samples were collected from 20 geographically diverse sites within the United
504 States. ADIs are defined as the amount of a chemical to which a person can be exposed on a
505 daily basis over an extended period of time (usually a lifetime) without suffering deleterious
506 effect. ADIs were calculated using methods consistent with USEPA approaches for determining
507 levels of exposure to environmental contaminants that are not likely to be associated with
508 adverse health effects. A cautious, conservative approach was taken in developing the ADI
509 values. ADIs can be converted to DWELs by multiplying the ADI by an assumed body weight
510 and dividing by an average daily drinking water ingestion rate. Estradiol equivalents (EEq) were
511 also used as another approach to evaluate health effects.
512

Draft Report 12-16 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

513 The AWWAwwaRF report showed that none of the EDCs and PPCPs detected in their drinking
514 water samples exceeded the ADIs and DWELs, therefore none occurred at concentrations
515 predicted to be of relevance to human health. Additionally, EEqs in the drinking water were
516 either not detected or extremely low, much lower than some common food and beverage items
517 like vegetable juice, coffee and soy milk. The evaluation indicates that although some
518 pharmaceuticals and EDCs were detected in U.S. drinking waters, there is no evidence of human
519 health risk from consumption of these waters. Furthermore, the exposure through water is
520 expected to be small compared to medications, food and beverages, occupational exposures, and
521 residential activities.
522
523 Similarly, the AWWAwwaRF study titled “State of Knowledge of Endocrine Disruptors and
524 Pharmaceuticals in Drinking Water” evaluated health effects by comparing maximum levels of
525 pharmaceuticals in source and raw waters, to the lowest therapeutic dosage (i.e. the lowest
526 recommended dosage level indicated on the package labeling, assumed to be the lowest exposure
527 level at which the chemical produces the desired pharmacologic effect). The therapeutic dose
528 was translated into a water concentration, assuming that a person drinks two liters of water at this
529 concentration every day. To provide an additional margin of safety, the lowest therapeutic dose
530 was divided by 1,000. For each pharmaceutical, the highest detected concentration in source or
531 raw water was well below the concentration based on the lowest therapeutic dose divided by
532 1,000. (TABLE 6.2 can be put in as an appendix). Furthermore, the maximum detected
533 concentrations in drinking water were a factor of 5 to 12,000 lower than the therapeutic dose
534 divided by 1,000.
535
536 Removal in Wastewater Treatment Plants

537 Although PPCPs and EDCs can potentially originate from numerous sources and enter the
538 environment by many routes, numerous studies have reported the occurrence of CECs in effluent
539 from municipal wastewater treatment plants. EDCs and PCPPs are biologically active
540 compounds. These compounds and their metabolites are not completely removed by current
541 wastewater treatment technologies and are often found in treated effluents. As discussed in
542 Chapter 4, approximately 350 mgd of treated wastewater is discharged to surface waters in the
543 Sacramento, San Joaquin and Delta watersheds. There have been a number of studies to address
544 removal of CECs using conventional wastewater treatment processes, with some of the larger
545 studies as cited below. It is difficult to draw absolute conclusions regarding removal as there are
546 numerous CECs, and removal studies tend to focus on a small group of
547 contaminantsconstituents.
548
549 Conventional wastewater treatment facilities are not specifically designed to remove EDCs, and
550 the degree with which they are removed varies from nearly complete to very little during primary
551 and secondary treatment. Overall, biological treatment (namely activated sludge) is the most
552 effective treatment process for CEC removal when conventional wastewater processes are
553 employed.
554
555 AWWARF Study # 2617 Occurrence Survey of Pharmaceutically Active Compounds

556 This study focused on PhACs likely to be present in wastewater at 18 wastewater treatment
557 plants (AWWAwwaRF, 2006). The key findings from that study are:

Draft Report 12-17 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

558
559  PhACs are detectable in the effluent of conventional wastewater treatment plants.
560 Diclofenac, gemfibrozil, metoprolol, naproxen, sulfamethoxazole, and trimethoprim were
561 detected in almost all of the wastewater effluent samples. The median concentrations of
562 the PhACs in effluent ranged from less than 10 to 1,400 ng/L.
563
564  Reverse osmosis treatment plants remove most PhACs however metoproiol and
565 propranolol were detected in the effluent from one reverse osmosis plant.
566
567 Some preliminary work by researchers at U.C. Berkeley indicates that hormones such as
568 estradiol are not transformed or removed by secondary treatment and that more advanced
569 treatment is required before significant removals are observed. Others have reported similar
570 results on a range of pharmaceutical compounds (Sakaji, 2004).
571
572 Water Environmental Research Foundation (WERF) Study 01-HHE-20T Removal of
573 Endocrine Disrupting Compounds in Water Reclamation Processes

574 A WERF study conducted by Drewes et al 2006 assessed conventional water reclamation trains
575 and advanced treatment processes to determine their ability to reduce concentrations of
576 endocrine disrupting compounds and activity. Studies were conducted at seven full-scale water
577 reclamation facilities located in California, Arizona, Florida, Virginia, and Wisconsin. The target
578 compounds included several steroid hormones (testosterone, 17β-estradiol, 17α-ethinylestradiol,
579 estrone, estriol) and phenolic compounds (bisphenol A, 4-t-octylphenol, nonylphenol). In
580 addition to chemical measurements, estrogenic activity was evaluated. Removal efficiencies after
581 secondary treatment for total estrogenic activity, 17β-estradiol, estriol, and bisphenol A were at
582 90 percent or greater, while estrone, 4-nonylphenol, 4-t-octylphenol, and 17α-ethinylestradiol
583 had lower removals of 48, 61, 80, and 71 percent respectively. This study also concluded that
584 estrogenic activity in the influent correlated strongly with BOD loading, as well as BOD
585 removal. Other findings included:
586
587  High removal of EDCs and activity was achieved at solid retention times (SRT)
588 exceeding two days.
589  Additional removal of steroid hormones was achieved during chlorination, but only
590 partial oxidation occurred for phenolic compounds.
591  UV using low pressure, high intensity radiation had no effect on EDCs.
592  Small amounts of activated carbon (10 mg/L) were required to remove steroid hormones
593 to below detection limits and significantly reduce phenolic compounds.
594  Microfiltration followed by reverse osmosis was proven to remove EDCs and biological
595 activity to no detection levels.
596
597 WERF Study 03-CTS-22UR Fate of Pharmaceuticals and PCP Through Municipal
598 Wastewater Treatment Processes

599 A study conducted by Stephenson et al 2007 evaluated the passage of personal care products
600 through full-scale wastewater facilities located in the Southwestern United States. The focus of
601 the study was to evaluate the impact of SRT on personal care product removal through secondary

Draft Report 12-18 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

602 treatment, as well as media filtration. As shown in Table 3-E412-4, the study concluded that for
603 the target list of 20 personal care product compounds, half of the compounds were well removed
604 (greater than 80 percent) at SRTs equal to or less than 5 days. DEET required a longer SRT of
605 greater than 13 days and TCEP, musk ketone, and galaxolide required greater than 25 days.
606 Media filtration offered little additional removal of these compounds.
607
608 Table 3-E412-4. Percent Removals for Personal Care Products and Minimum Solids
609 Retention Times Needed to Consistently Achieve Over 80 Percent Removal
610
SRT80 (Minimum
Solids Retention
Median Percent Time Required to Formatted: Centered
Removal Bin Compound
Removal Consistently Achieve Formatted Table
Removal greater
than 80%), days
Greater than 80 Methyl-3- 0-5
Excellent Removal Percent Removal phenylpropionate
Caffeine 5
Ibuprofen 5
Oxybenzone 5
Chloroxylenol 5
Methylparaben 0-5
Benzyl Salicylate 5
3-Phenylpropionate 0-5
Butylbenzyl Phthalate 5
Octylmethoxycinnamate 5
Benzophenone 13
Moderate Removal Greater than 50 Octylphenol 5-28
Percent Removal but Ethyl-3- >5
less than 80 Percent phenylproprionate
Removal Triclosan 10
Poor Removal Less than 50 Percent TCEP >25
Removal Triphenylphosphate >5
BHA >8
DEET >13
Musk Ketone >25
Galaxolide >25
611
612 Source: WERF 2007
613
614 In 2003, the USGS and Metcalf and Eddy devised a multi-disciplinary collaborative research
615 program to investigate concentrations of 63 trace contaminants at four wastewater treatment
616 plants in New York. Samples were collected after the primary, secondary, tertiary and
617 disinfection stages at each plant. A comparison of removal percentages among plants indicated
618 that in general, the plants operating with activated sludge processes (plants A, B, C) were
619 consistently capable of effecting greater emerging contaminant removal than the plant operating
620 with the trickling filter process (plant D). Table 3-E512-5 shows results for seven of the 63
621 compounds, as these compounds are among the most frequently detected. The wastewater
622 treatment plants examined were effective in removing significant amounts of emerging

Draft Report 12-19 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

623 contaminantsconstituents using conventional wastewater treatment processes. Similar to the
624 Stephenson study, biological treatment was the most important process for the reduction of the
625 studied compounds, as compared to the filtration or disinfection processes. The median removals
626 observed through the filtration and disinfection processes were less than ten percent at all plants,
627 except for plant D.
628
629 Table 3-E512-5. Median Influent and Effluent Concentration (µg/l) of Selected Emerging
630 Contaminants and percent removals (from influent to effluent)
631
Analyte
Plant Plant % Plant Plant % Plant Plant % Plant Plant %
A inf. A eff. rem B inf. B eff. rem C inf. C eff. rem D inf. D eff. rem
3.7 2.1 44 1.0 0.48 53 3.3 1.8 41 2.3 1.8 21
AHTN
Caffeine 130 0.075 >99 51 0.056 >99 70 0.11 >99 41 20 39
Cholesterol 11 ND 100 17 ND 100 21 0.88 96 9.0 1.7 66
DEET 0.94 ND 100 0.56 ND 100 2.1 ND 98 1.6 1.3 24
Para- 13 ND 100 4.3 1.1 75 59 0.93 98 18 18 8.1
nonylpheno
l
Triclosan 2.6 0.13 94 2.8 0.13 94 2.4 0.12 94 1.8 1.0 36
TBEP 14 0.15 99 3.1 ND 100 140 ND 100 12 11 15
632
633 % rem. = percent removal
634
635 Source: Esposito et al. 2006
636
637 AWWA Research Foundation Study #3012 Comparing Nanofiltration and Reverse Osmosis
638 for Treating Recycled Water

639 Today, the industry standard for subsurface injection of treated wastewater for groundwater
640 recharge or for surface water augmentation projects is to have an integrated membrane system
641 such as microfiltration pretreatment followed by reverse osmosis. In this study, nanofiltration
642 and ultra-low pressure RO (ULPRO) membranes were compared to conventional RO membranes
643 with respect to removing TOC, total nitrogen, and both regulated and unregulated trace organic
644 compounds. The findings of this study reveal that ULPRO membranes can “consistently meet
645 potable water quality requirements for treating source water of impaired quality with respect to
646 TOC, total nitrogen, and both regulated and unregulated trace organic compounds.” ULPRO
647 membranes potentially offer lower operating expenses than conventional RO. Certain low
648 fouling loose NF membranes were tested, and although they demonstrated effluent rejection of
649 TOC and a high selectivity for a wide range of trace organics, they resulted in lowered permeate
650 water quality for ammonia and nitrate.
651
652
653 Removal in Water Treatment Plants

654 There has been a number of research projects conducted to evaluate specific water treatment
655 processes in removing pharmaceuticals, and both regulated and unregulated trace organic
656 compounds. Relevant information from four research projects is discussed below. The projects
657 studied removal by potassium permanganate and potassium ferrate salts, ozonation, conventional

Draft Report 12-20 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

658 water treatment processes (coagulation, sedimentation), chlorine, chloramines, UV, activated
659 carbon, and membranes.
660
661 AWWA Research Foundation Study #2758 Removal of EDCs and Pharmaceuticals in
662 Drinking in Drinking and Reuse Treatment Processes

663 This study evaluated various physical, chemical, and biological drinking water treatment plant
664 processes on the removal/transformation efficiencies of EDCs and PPCPs in natural waters
665 (AWWAwwaRF, 2007). The key findings from this study are:
666
667  Conventional Processes - Coagulation, flocculation, and sedimentation are ineffective for
668 removing the majority of EDCs and PPCPs that were evaluated.
669
670  Disinfectants - Free chlorine disinfection can remove many target compounds depending
671 on the structure of the contaminant. Chloramines are less effective than free chlorine at
672 removing EDCs and PPCPs. Ozone is more effective than chlorine, and is able to
673 significantly remove the majority of target analytes. Ozone is likely the most cost
674 effective measure for removing the majority of EDCs and PPCPs for water treatment. UV
675 irradiation at typical disinfection doses is ineffective for removing most EDCs and PCPs;
676 however, high energy UV at oxidative doses can be effective, and the combination of UV
677 and hydrogen peroxide can achieve removal rates similar to ozone. As adapted from the
678 NWRI study, Table 3-E6 summarizes the findings from the various disinfection
679 processes.
680
681  Activated Carbon – Activated carbon is highly effective, although exhausted activated
682 carbon is ineffective.
683
684  Magnetic Ion Exchange – Magnetic ion exchange processes are ineffective.
685
686  Membranes – Reverse osmosis and nanofiltration are highly effective while ultrafiltration
687 and microfiltration are largely ineffective.
688
689

Draft Report 12-21 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

690
691 Table 3-E612-6. PPCP Removal/Transformation Efficiencies in Selected Drinking Water
692 Treatment Processes #

693
694
695 Little is known about the occurrence and potential toxicity of degradation products of EDCs and
696 PCPPs that might result from treatment processes such as oxidation that alter chemical structures
697 rather than removing chemicals from water. UV and ozone are possible treatment schemes but
698 they create numerous oxidation products, thereby increasing the number of chemicals present
699 (Daughton, 2006b).
700

Draft Report 12-22 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

701 AWWA Research Foundation Study #3033 State of Knowledge of Endocrine Disruptors and
702 Pharmaceuticals in Drinking Water

703 As this project was developed to provide the water industry with a current status of science
704 available on EDCs and PPCPs, much of the information presented in AWWAwwaRF project
705 #2758 is repeated in this report. Therefore, only additional findings on water treatment will be
706 presented.
707
708  Chlorine dioxide is generally a stronger oxidant than free chlorine.
709  Chlorine and chlorine dioxide react primarily with electron functional groups like amines
710 and phenols. Ozone also attacks carbon-carbon double bonds and activate benzene rings.
711  Advanced oxidation processes such as UV/hydrogen peroxide, ozone/hydrogen peroxide,
712 and UV/ozone are very effective in oxidizing EDCs and PPCPs, however they provide
713 only a small increase in removal efficiency compared to ozone.
714  High-pressure membranes such as NF or RO can remove a wide range of EDCs and
715 PPCPs. However, low-molecular weight organics, such as N-nitrosamines or certain
716 pharmaceuticals (acetaminophen, phenacetine) can be problematic.
717
718 Water Research Foundation Study #4066 Oxidation of Pharmaceutically Active Compounds
719 During Water Treatment

720
721 One of the major objectives of this study was to identify pharmaceutically active compounds that
722 are susceptible to rapid oxidation by permanganate and ferrate salts. Results from the initial
723 bench-scale experiments indicated that permanganate and ferrate are selective oxidants that can
724 be expected to oxidize only a fraction of pharmaceutically active compounds present in source
725 waters. Of the eighteen compounds studied, only ten showed high or moderate activity with
726 permanganate, and only eight showed high or moderate activity with ferrate. It is important to
727 note that carbamazepine, one of the compounds with the highest (88%) detection frequency in
728 the 2010 NWRI study, and resistant to oxidation by chlorine, is rapidly oxidized by
729 permanganate and ferrate.
730
731 Water Research Foundation Study #3071 PPCPs and EDCs – Occurrence in the Detroit River
732 and Their Removal by Ozonation

733 The efficiency of ozonation in removing PPCPs and EDCs at the bench and pilot-scale was
734 studied, and the effects of operating parameters including ozone dose, contact time, pH and
735 temperature on process efficiency were investigated. In general, ozone dose, contact time and
736 DOC loading were the governing factors in contaminant removal, while temperature and pH
737 played secondary roles. The experiments which had the lowest removal rates had low ozone dose
738 (0.8 mg/L) and high DOC loading (4.5 mg/L).
739
740 Results indicated that under optimized water quality and operating conditions, close to complete
741 transformation of 12 (bisphenol A, carbamazepine, erythromycin, gemfibrozil, indomethacin,
742 lincomycin, naproxen, sulfachloropyradizine, sulfamethazin, sulfamethoxazol, tetracycline,
743 tylosin) of the 16 target substances is possible. Ibuprofen and clofibric acid were found to be
744 most difficult to transform, as removal was limited to an average of 50 percent. Bezafibrate

Draft Report 12-23 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

745 removal increased from 50 percent to 90 percent when ozone dose increased from 0.3 to 1.5
746 mg/L. Experiments with monensin were not conclusive.
747
748 AWWA Research Foundation Study #3012 Comparing Nanofiltration and Reverse Osmosis
749 for Treating Recycled Water

750 Today, the industry standard for subsurface injection of treated wastewater for groundwater
751 recharge or for surface water augmentation projects is to have an integrated membrane system
752 such as microfiltration pretreatment followed by reverse osmosis. In this study, nanofiltration
753 and ultra-low pressure RO (ULPRO) membranes were compared to conventional RO membranes
754 with respect to removing TOC, total nitrogen, and both regulated and unregulated trace organic
755 compounds. The findings of this study reveal that ULPRO membranes can “consistently meet
756 potable water quality requirements for treating source water of impaired quality with respect to
757 TOC, total nitrogen, and both regulated and unregulated trace organic compounds.” ULPRO
758 membranes potentially offer lower operating expenses than conventional RO. Certain low
759 fouling loose NF membranes were tested, and although they demonstrated effluent rejection of
760 TOC and a high selectivity for a wide range of trace organics, they resulted in lowered permeate
761 water quality for ammonia and nitrate.
762
763 Regulations

764 The chemicals that are regulated in source waters and in treated drinking water by USEPA and
765 the State of California represent a minor subset of chemicals that are potentially present due to
766 natural occurrence and human actions. Regulatory programs are only just beginning to address
767 these emerging contaminantsconstituents.
768
769 Drinking Water Regulations

770 The concentrations of most PPCPs and EDCs are not regulated in drinking waters in the U.S.
771 From USEPA’s perspective, CECs remain something to be watched rather than actively pursued
772 for regulation (Water Education Foundation, 2011). Some chemicals (e.g. several pesticides,
773 PCBs) that are regulated in drinking water are not currently regulated based on their potential
774 endocrine disrupting effects. One exception is perchlorate. Please refer to the Regulatory
775 Environment Section for regulatory information regarding perchlorate.
776
777 MCLs are generally developed following detection of contaminantsconstituents in drinking water
778 sources at levels that are thought to potentially have an impact on human health. The
779 development of MCLs also requires identification of best available technologies for contaminant
780 removal and the ability to monitor and detect the contaminantsconstituents at levels of concern.
781 The analytical methods for many EDCs and PCPPs are still being developed and most
782 commercial laboratories are not capable of measuring these contaminantsconstituents at the
783 levels found in source waters and treated drinking water.
784
785 Based on the large number of potential endocrine disruptors, new regulations could shift towards
786 regulating compounds as a class based on a common mechanism for toxicity (e.g. endocrine
787 disruption) or similar chemical structure rather than by individual compound. Regulating
788 compounds by class will be an effective technique for regulating due to the growing number of

Draft Report 12-24 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

789 CECs being identified (Water Education Foundation, 2011). Another possible regulatory
790 approach could require a specific treatment technology (e.g. granular activated carbon) for an
791 array of chemicals, instead of setting standards for a class of chemicals or a proliferation of
792 specific MCLs (AWWAwwaRF, 2005).
793
794 Wastewater Effluent Limitations

795 The concentrations of most PPCPs and EDCs are not regulated in wastewater discharge permits.
796 As with drinking water standards, a few chemicals that have been found or suspected to be
797 EDCs, are regulated based on other effects such as acute and chronic toxicity to aquatic
798 organisms. Currently wastewater is primarily regulated on a chemical by chemical basis. It is not
799 possible to test all chemicals and possible combinations of chemicals that may occur in
800 wastewater effluent. As a result, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
801 permits include a requirement for Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) testing to determine the
802 aggregate toxicity of an effluent in the aquatic environment. WET testing exposes laboratory
803 populations of aquatic organisms (fish, invertebrates, and algae) to diluted and undiluted effluent
804 samples to determine environmental toxicity of that sample. Acute and chronic tests focus on
805 how well an organism survives, grows, and reproduces. However, current toxicity tests do not
806 screen for endocrine disrupting effects. Daughton (2006a) advocates that a more accurate
807 assessment of risks is needed; measuring and assigning toxicity based on the total amount of
808 chemicals in wastewater that share the same mode of action or way of working.
809
810 Groundwater Recharge Regulations

811 CDPH has addressed monitoring for pharmaceuticals and EDCs in the August 2008 Draft
812 Groundwater Recharge Reuse Regulations. The draft regulations specify monitoring for
813 regulated contaminants, contaminants with drinking water notification levels, and priority
814 pollutants, but they do not recommend monitoring specific CECs. CDPH mentions chromium 6,
815 diazinon, and nitrosamines for monitoring. However, the draft regulations state that groundwater
816 water recharge reuse projects should develop their own CEC monitoring program and conduct
817 ongoing monitoring to address public concerns. Depending on the results of analyses and the
818 consistency of the monitoring, subsequent monitoring may be reduced (i.e. twice a year for two
819 or three years). As stated in the draft regulation, a monitoring program could include analysis for
820 representatives of these categories of contaminants:
821
822  Hormones – representing both male and female hormones, or surrogates to represent
823 both.
824  Industrial EDCs - bisphenol A, nonylphenol and nonylphenol polyethoxylates,
825 octylphenol, octylphenol polyethoxylates, and polybrominated diphenyl ethers, or
826 surrogates that could represent one or more industrial EDCs.
827  Pharmaceuticals - acetaminophen, amoxicillin, azithromycin, carbamazepine,
828 ciprofloxacin, dilantin, gemfibrozil, ibuprofen, lipitor, meprobamate, sulfamethoxazole,
829 trimethoprin, and salicylic acid or surrogates.
830  Personal care products – triclosan and DEET, or surrogates.
831  Other chemicals – caffeine, iodinated contrast media, fire retardants.
832

Draft Report 12-25 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

833 Senate Bill 918, signed by the Governor and filed on Sept 30, 2010 states that CDPH must adopt
834 uniform water recycling criteria for groundwater recharge by December 31, 2013 and must adopt
835 uniform water recycling criteria for surface water augmentation by December 31, 2016. CDPH is
836 targeting to release another revised draft for criteria governing groundwater recharge by the end
837 of 2011. In addition, CDPH must investigate the feasibility of developing uniform water
838 recycling criteria for direct potable re-use and provide a report by December 31, 2016.
839
840 The State Water Resources Control Board convened a CEC Science Advisory Panel to develop
841 guidance for the establishment of monitoring programs to assess potential CEC threats from
842 water recycling activities. The final report was completed in June 2010 which was followed by a
843 Staff Report. The Staff Report provides recommendations for monitoring CECs in municipal
844 recycled water used for groundwater recharge/reuse and landscape irrigation. The Staff Report
845 also presents recommendations for additional research on CEC monitoring. A public hearing was
846 held on December 15, 2010 to accept comments on the Staff Report. The State Water Resources
847 Control Board is currently considering comments received on the Staff Report.

848 According to State Water Resources Control Board staff, an amendment will be written for the
849 existing Recycled Water Policy developed in 2009. This amendment will address what
850 constituents should be monitored for groundwater recharge/reuse projects. The amendment
851 would then be peer-reviewed, and then open for public comment before final adoption, likely
852 sometime in 2012.

853 The CEC Science Advisory Panel identified four indicator compounds based on their
854 toxicological relevance for groundwater recharge projects: NDMA, 17beta-estadiol, caffeine,
855 and triclosan. Four additional CECs were identified as viable performance indicators (N,N-
856 Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET), gemfibrozil, iopromide, and sucralose), along with certain
857 surrogate parameters. Surrogates for groundwater recharge projects by surface spreading are
858 ammonia, nitrate, DOC, and UVA. Surrogates for groundwater recharge by injection are
859 conductivity and DOC, and surrogates for landscape irrigation are turbidity, chlorine residual,
860 and total coliform. CDPH recommended monitoring for certain additional CECs (bisphenyl A,
861 boron, carbamazepine, chlorate, chromium 6, diazinon, 1,4-dioxane, naphthalene, N-
862 nitrosodiethyamine (NDEA), N-nitrosodi-n-propylamine (NDPA), N-nitrosodiphenylamine, N-
863 nitrosopyrrolidine (NPYR), 1,2,3-Trichloropropane, Tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphate, and
864 vanadium) which have been incorporated into the final Staff Report.

865 Numerous State Water Project contractors and their member agencies submitted comments on
866 the Staff Report including Alameda County Water District, Zone 7 Water Agency, Coachella
867 Valley Water District, Las Virgenes Municipal Water District, Metropolitan Water District of
868 Southern California, San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District, and the San Diego County
869 Water Authority. The main comments submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board
870 were: 1) to not add the 13 additional constituents for baseline CEC monitoring for groundwater
871 recharge spreading projects, as specified in a comment letter from the CDPH, as the letter
872 provided no scientific or technical basis, 2) the Regional Boards should not have the authority to
873 select and add CECs to be monitored to individual permits, even if the CECs identified by the
874 Panel are included as a minimum, and 3) the State Water Board should adopt the Panel’s
875 recommendation to conduct a one-year study of a particular class of CECs for which the Panel

Draft Report 12-26 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

876 felt it had insufficient occurrence information (Table 8.4 in Panel Report). A few of the letters
877 also recommended a clearer distinction for the monitoring requirements for irrigation projects
878 from those applied to groundwater recharge. No additional monitoring of CECs is necessary for
879 irrigation project beyond the monitoring specified in Title 22. The Los Angeles Regional Water
880 Quality Control Board commented that although the Panel chose to focus its recommendations
881 on toxicological relevance of CECs to human health, they believe that this focus was too narrow,
882 given that in the Los Angeles Region, most dischargers that recycle treated wastewater also
883 discharge directly to surface waters where resident aquatic life is exposed to nearly 100 percent
884 effluent. The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board believes it is imperative to
885 consider toxicological impacts on ecological receptors in developing a monitoring strategy for
886 CECs.

887 The Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board is currently developing salt and nutrient
888 management plans for groundwater basins within its region. Suggested elements of a salt/nutrient
889 management plan include a placeholder for CECs. Requirements for monitoring CECs will be
890 based on adoption of policy currently being developed by the State Water Resources Control
891 Board.
892
893 Environmental Risk Assessments

894 The U.S. Food and Drug Administration requires environmental risk assessments for new
895 pharmaceuticals with predicted environmental concentrations greater than 1 µg/L (Snyder et al,
896 2005). Daughton (2006b) points out that the conventional toxicological procedures used in these
897 risk assessments may not screen for the types of subtle effects that could occur from exposure to
898 the low-levels found in surface waters.
899
900 Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program

901 This is a monitoring program through the USEPA Office of Science that was finalized in April
902 2009. This program only applies to pesticide manufacturers, importers, and potentially users. The
903 USEPA developed criteria for screening endocrine disrupters to identify priority chemicals.
904 USEPA will implement the workplan by using assays in a two-tiered screening and testing
905 process (Endocrine Disrupters Screening Program):
906
907  Through Tier 1 screening, USEPA hopes to identify chemicals that have the potential
908 to interact with the endocrine system.
909  Through Tier 2 testing, USEPA will determine the endocrine-related effects caused
910 by each chemical and obtain information about effects at various doses.
911
912 USEPA will use this two-tiered approach to gather information needed to identify endocrine-
913 active substances and take appropriate action. The initial list of 67 chemicals considered for Tier
914 1 screening is primarily pesticides – both active ingredients and inerts. In December 2007,
915 USEPA issued draft procedures for the initial screening. For active ingredients, test orders will
916 be sent to technical registrants and for inert ingredients, test orders will be sent to manufacturers,
917 importers, and potentially users of chemicals on the list. . Some of these constituents are already
918 regulated in drinking water and some are on the Contaminant Candidate List 3.
919
Draft Report 12-27 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

920 A second list of chemicals for Tier 1 screening was published in November 2010. The list of 134
921 chemicals includes a large number of pesticides, two perfluorocarbon compounds (PFCs), and
922 three pharmaceuticals (erythromycin, nitroglycerin, and quinoline). This list also contains other
923 chemicals, such as those used for industrial manufacturing processes, plasticizers, or in the
924 production of pharmaceutical and personal care products (PPCPs).
925
926 Mandatory Control Programs

927 There are three main types of programs that collect home-generated pharmaceuticals in
928 California: continuous collection programs, events, or mail-back programs. The primary
929 locations for continuous collection programs are pharmacies, law enforcement sites, and
930 household hazardous waste collection sites. Mail-back collection programs are defined as
931 programs that transport drug waste through the U.S. Postal Service to an appropriate disposal
932 location. The three mail-back programs all began in the Bay Area in 2009: the City of San
933 Francisco, Teleosis (non-profit), and Santa Cruz County. CalRecycle has a directory that lists
934 facilities in California that collect pharmaceuticals for disposal.
935 http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/HomeHazWaste/HealthCare/Collection/Default.aspx
936
937 Based on information available to CalRecycle, collection programs in California currently collect
938 approximately 200,000 pounds of home-generated pharmaceutical waste per year. However,
939 several sources suggest that a very large amount is sold and that a significant percentage
940 becomes waste. The Associated Press estimated that Americans generate at least 250 million
941 pounds of pharmaceuticals and contaminated packaging in medical facilities each year. Relative
942 to California population, that would be approximately 30 million pounds in California hospitals
943 alone (CalRecycle, 2010).

944 The disposal of pharmaceutical waste is governed by provisions of SB 966 (Simitian, Chapter
945 542, Statutes of 2007). It requires the California Department of Resources Recycling and Formatted: No underline
946 Recovery (CalRecycle) to develop, in consultation with appropriate government agencies,
947 criteria and procedures for model programs for the collection and proper disposal of
948 pharmaceutical waste. Provisions of SB 966 remain in effect until January 1, 2013. The goal is to
949 provide local jurisdictions in California with the tools to implement collection programs as well
950 as work with manufacturers, retailers, pharmacies, hospitals, and other health-related constituents
951 for the proper disposition of medication and sharps in a single location.

952 As directed by SB 966, CalRecycle formed a working group that consisted of representatives
953 from the Pharmacy Board, State Water Resources Control Board, California Department of
954 Public Health (CDPH), and the Department of Toxic Substances Control. CalRecycle staff
955 convened the working group and conducted four workshops during 2008 to facilitate comments
956 and suggestions from stakeholders representing local government, pharmaceutical companies,
957 medical and hazardous waste haulers, for-profit and non-profit health care providers, and other
958 interested parties. As a result of this collaboration, criteria and procedures are available for
959 facilities willing to become model programs for the collection and proper disposal of
960 pharmaceutical waste.

961 SB 1305 revised a section of the State of California Medical Waste Management Act to make it a
962 violation of state law for home-generated sharps waste to be placed in solid waste collection
Draft Report 12-28 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

963 containers, including recycling and green waste containers. SB 1305 also require sharps waste to
964 be transported in an approved sharps containers and managed by a specified facility (i.e.,
965 household hazardous waste facility, medical waste generator facility, or a facility managed as
966 part of a mail back program). SB 1305 was approved by Gov. Schwarzenegger on July 12, 2006
967 and took effect on September 1, 2008.
968
969 Voluntary Control Programs

970 The United States Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Agency, in conjunction with state
971 and local law enforcement throughout the United States, conducted the first ever National
972 Prescription Take Back Day on September 25, 2010. Due to the overwhelming success of the
973 first event, the Second National Prescription Take Back Day was held on April 30, 2011.

974 Some communities have taken a proactive approach and started to educate their customers on
975 proper disposal practices for unused pharmaceuticals. One example is the “No Drugs Down the
976 Drain” Program sponsored by the City of Los Angeles, Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles
977 County, County of Los Angeles, Orange County Sanitation District, and the Cities of Riverside
978 of San Diego. The No Drugs Down the Drain program is a public outreach program to provide
979 California residents living in specific regions with available, safe and proper disposal choices.
980 These agencies have a web page that discusses how to dispose of drugs depending on your
981 geographical location Generally, the two recommended options are 1) take to a household
982 hazardous waste collection center and 2) put in a sturdy and sealed container and then in the
983 trash. In limited cases, unused or expired pharmaceuticals can be returned to pharmacies for
984 "take-back" programs. Chemotherapy pharmaceuticals need to be returned to the clinic that
985 dispensed them.

986 In addition, the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department in conjunction with the Los Angeles
987 County Department of Public Health and Public Works have developed a “Safe Drug Drop-Off
988 Program”. The program provides an opportunity for residents to safely and anonymously
989 surrender any unused or expired prescriptions, over the counter medications, needles or other
990 controlled substances. Controlled substances cannot be taken to a household hazardous waste
991 collection center.

992 Websites for the cities of Sacramento and Stockton and the counties of Sacramento and San
993 Joaquin were searched for information on disposal of PPCPs. The City of Sacramento and
994 Sacramento County provide information on disposal of household hazardous waste (which
995 includes sharps), electronic wastes, paints, and universal wastes (e.g. batteries, fluorescent light
996 bulbs), but no information could be located on disposal of medications. The City of Stockton and
997 San Joaquin County lists prescription medicines as an example of household hazardous waste,
998 and also lists one location where home generated sharps (needles) and medications can be
999 disposed of.
1000
1001 The Sacramento Regional County Sanitation District has a “Don’t Flush Your Meds” website
1002 where locations are given for disposal of both prescription and over the counter medications, as
1003 well as controlled substances.
1004

Draft Report 12-29 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

1005 REFERENCES
1006
1007
1008 Aquatic Science Center, 2011. The Pulse of the Delta: Monitoring and Managing Water Quality
1009 in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Re-thinking Water Quality Monitoring. Contribution 630.
1010 Aquatic Science Center, Oakland, CA.
1011
1012 AwwaRF. 2005. AwwaRF Featured Topic: EDCs, PhACs, and PCPs. Accessed by internet at:
1013 www.awwarf.org/research/TopicsAndProjects/topicSnapshot.aspx?topic=EDCS.
1014
1015 AwwaRF. 2006. Project Abstract and Executive Summary Occurrence Survey of
1016 Pharmaceutically Active Compounds #2617.
1017
1018 AwwaRF. 2007. Removal of EDCs and Pharmaceuticals in Drinking and Reuse Treatment
1019 Processes. #2758.
1020
1021 AwwaRF. 2008a. Toxicological Relevance of Endocrine Disruptors and Pharmaceuticals in
1022 Drinking Water. #3085.
1023
1024 AwwaRF. 2008b. State of Knowledge of Endocrine Disruptors and Pharmaceuticals in Drinking
1025 Water. #3033.
1026
1027 AwwaRF. 2008c. Comparing Nanofiltration and Reverse Osmosis for Treating Recycled Water.
1028 #3012.
1029
1030 Barnes, K.K, D.W. Kolpin, M.T. Meyer, E.M. Thurman, E.T. Furlong, S.D. Zaugg, and L.B.
1031 Barber. 2002. Water-Quality Data for Pharmaceuticals, Hormones, and Other Organic
1032 Wastewater Contaminants in U.S. Streams, 1999-2000.U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report
1033 02-94.
1034
1035 Benotti, M. J., Trenholm, R. A., Vanderford, B.J., Holady, J.C., Stanford, B.D., and Synder, S.A.
1036 2009. Pharmaceuticals and Endocrine Disrupting Compounds in U.S. Drinking Water.
1037 Environmental Science and Technology, 43, 597-603.
1038
1039 Boxall, A.B.A. Fate and Transport of Veterinary Medicines in the Soil Environment. In Fate of
1040 Pharmaceuticals in the Environment and in Water Treatment Systems. Aga, D.S., Ed. CRC
1041 Press: Boca Raton, FL, 2008;123-137.
1042
1043 CalRecycle. 2010. Evaluation of Home-Generated Pharmaceutical Programs in California.
1044 Background Paper for July 20, 2010 Workshop.
1045
1046 Daughton, C.G. 2006a. Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products in the Environment:
1047 Overarching Issues and Overview.Accessed by internet at:
1048 www.EPA.gov/esd/chemistry/pharma/book-summary.htm.
1049

Draft Report 12-30 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

1050 Daughton, C.G. 2006b. Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products in the Environment.
1051 Accessed by internet at: www.EPA.gov/nerlesd1/chemistry/pharma/faq.htm.
1052 DiGiorgio, C.L., Krasner, S.W., Guo, Y.C., Dale, M.S., Sclimenti, M.J., and MWQI Field Unit.
1053 2010. Investigation into the Sources of Nitrosamines and Their Precursors in the Sacramento-
1054 San Joaquin Delta, California.
1055
1056 Esposito, K.M., P.J. Phillips, B.M. Stinson, R. Tsuchihashi, J. Anderson. 2005. “The Implication
1057 of Emerging Contaminants in the Future of Water Reuse.” WateReuse 2005 Symposium
1058 Proceedings.
1059
1060 Focazio, M.J., Kolpin, D.W., Barnes, K.K., Furlong, E.T., Meyer, M.T., Zaugg, S.D., Barber,
1061 L.B., Thurman, M.E. 2008. A national reconnaissance for pharmaceuticals and other organic
1062 wastewater contaminants in the United States- II) Untreated drinking water sources, Science of
1063 the Total Environment, 402, 201-216.
1064
1065 Fono, L.J., Kolodziej, E.P., Sedlak, D.L. 2006. Attenuation of Wastewater-Derived
1066 Contaminants in an Effluent-Dominated River. Environmental Science and Technology. 40,
1067 7257-7262.
1068
1069 Goodbred, S.L, R.J Gilliom, T.S. Gross, N.P. Denslow, W.L Bryant, and T.R. Schoeb. 1997.
1070 Reconnaissance of 17B-Estradiol, 11-Ketotestosterone, Vitellogenin, and Gonad Histopathology
1071 in Common Carp of United States Streams: Potential for Contaminant-Introduced Endocrine
1072 Disruption. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 96-627.
1073
1074 Guo, Y. C.; Krasner, S. W.; Fitzsimmons, S.; Woodside, G.; Yamachika, N. 2010. Source, Fate
1075 and Transport of Endocrine Disruptors, Pharmaceuticals, and Personal Care Products in
1076 Drinking Water Sources in California. National Water Research Institute, 2010.
1077 http://www.nwri-usa.org/CECs.htm
1078
1079 Johnson, C.S., Kroll, K., Denslow, N., and K. Aceituno. “Evaluation of Contaminants and
1080 Endocrine Disruption in Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary”, poster at 2010 Bay Delta
1081 Conference.
1082
1083 Kolodziej, E.P. and Sedlak, D.L. 2007. Rangeland Grazing as a Source of Steroid Hormones to
1084 Surface Waters. Environ. Sci. Tech. 41(10):3514-3520.
1085
1086 Krasner, S.W., Pastor, S.J., Garcia, E.A. 2006. Measurement of the Pharmaceutical Primidone
1087 as a Conservative Tracer of Wastewater Influences in Drinking Water Supplies. Proc. 2006
1088 American Water Works Association Water Quality Technology Conference, Denver, CO, 2006.
1089
1090 Lavado, R., Loyo-Rosales, J.E., Floyd, E., Kolodziej, E.P., Snyder, S.A., Sedlak, D.L. and D.
1091 Schlenk. Site-Specific Profiles of Estrogenic Activity in Agricultural Areas of California’s Inland
1092 Waters. Environ. Sci. Tech. 43:9110-9116.
1093

Draft Report 12-31 January 2012
California State Water Project Chapter 12
2011 Watershed Sanitary Survey Update Constituents of Emerging Concern

1094 Loffler, D., Rombke, J., Meller, M., and Ternes, T.A. 2005. Environmental Fate of
1095 Pharmaceuticals in Water/Sediment Systems. Environmental Science and Technology, 39, 5209-
1096 5218.
1097
1098 Radke, M., Lauwigi, C., Heinkele, G., Murdter, T.E., and Letzel, M. 2009. Fate of the Antibiotic
1099 Sulfamethoxazole and Its Two Major Human Metabolites in a Water Sediment Test.
1100 Environmental Science and Technology, 43, 3135-3141.
1101
1102 Rimkus, G.G. 1999. Polycyclic Musk Fragrances in the Aquatic Environment. Toxicology
1103 Letters 111 (1-2): 37-56.
1104
1105 Sakaji, R.H, S. Book, R. Hultquist, and R. Haberman. 2004. Xenobiotics: What Are They and
1106 Why Are We So Concerned About Them? Jour. AWWA 96:5:58.
1107
1108 Schaefer, M. and M.L. Johnson. 2009. Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products in the
1109 Sacramento River. Final Report: Activities from May-June 2008. Prepared for the State Water
1110 Resources Control Board. October 2009.
1111
1112 Sedlak, D.L. 2006. Identifying the Causes of Feminization of Chinook Salmon in the Sacramento
1113 and San JoaquinRiver System. Accessed by internet at: www.ce.berkeley.edu/~sedlak.
1114
1115 Snyder, E.C, R.C. Pleus, and S.A. Snyder. 2005. Pharmaceuticals and EDCS in the US Water
1116 Industry-An Update. Jour. AWWA 97:11:32.
1117
1118 Vlaming, V., A. Biales, D. Riordan, D. Markiewicz, R. Holmes, P. Otis, C. Leutenegger, R.
1119 Zander, and J. Lazorchak. 2006. Screening California Surface Waters for Estrogenic Endocrine
1120 Disrupting Chemicals (EEDC) with a Juvenile Rainbow Trout Liver Vitellogenin mRNA
1121 Procedure.
1122
1123 Water Education Foundation. Pervasive and Persistent: Constituents of Emerging Concern.
1124 Western Water, January/February 2011.
1125
1126 Water Research Foundation Study. 2010. Oxidation of Pharmaceutically Active Compounds
1127 During Water Treatment. #4066.
1128
1129 Water Research Foundation Study. 2009. PPCPs and EDCs – Occurrence in the Detroit River
1130 and Their Removal by Ozonation. #3071.
1131
1132 WERF. 2006. Removal of Endocrine Disrupting Compounds in Water Reclamation Processes.
1133
1134 WERF. 2007. Fate of Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Through Municipal
1135 Wastewater Treatment Processes
1136

Draft Report 12-32 January 2012