Search USGSSearch

Geology topics

Michael T. Meyer

Publications and source records attributed to Michael T. Meyer.

78 records · Page 5Linked to original sources

Presence and distribution of organic wastewater compounds in wastewater, surface, ground, and drinking waters, Minnesota, 2000-02

Selected organic wastewater compounds (OWCs) such as household, industrial, and agricultural-use compounds, pharmaceuticals, antibiotics, and sterols and hormones were measured at 65 sites in Minnesota as part of a cooperative study among the Minnesota Department of Health, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and the U.S. Geological Survey. Samples were collected in Minnesota during October 2000 through November 2002 and analyzed for the presence and distribution of 91 OWCs at sites including wastewater treatment plant influent and effluent; landfill and feedlot lagoon leachate; surface water; ground water (underlying sewered and unsewered mixed urban land use, a waste dump, and feedlots); and the intake and finished drinking water from drinking water facilities. There were 74 OWCs detected that represent a wide variety of use. Samples generally comprised a mixture of compounds (average of 6 OWCs) and 90 percent of the samples had at least one OWC detected. Concentrations for detected OWCs generally were less than 3 micrograms per liter. The ten most frequently detected OWCs were metolachlor (agricultural-use herbicide); cholesterol (sterol primarily associated with animal waste); caffeine (stimulant), N,N-diethyl- meta -toluamide (DEET) (topical insect repellant); bromoform (disinfection by product); tri(2-chloroethyl)phosphate (flame-retardant and plastic component); beta -sitosterol (plant sterol that is a known endocrine disruptor); acetyl-hexamethyl-tetrahydro- naphthalene (AHTN) (synthetic musk widely used in personal care products, and a known endocrine disruptor); bisphenol-A (plastic component and a known endocrine disruptor); and cotinine (metabolite of nicotine). Wastewater treatment plant influent and effluent, landfill leachate, and ground water underlying a waste dump had the greatest number of OWCs detected. OWC detections in ground-water were low except underlying the one waste dump studied and feedlots. There generally were more OWCs detected in surface water than ground water, and there were twice as many OWCs detected in the surface water sites downstream from wastewater treatment plant (WWTP effluent than at sites not directly downstream from effluent. Comparisons among site classifications apply only to sites sampled during the study. Results of this study indicate ubiquitous distribution of measured OWCs in the environment that originate from numerous sources and pathways. During this reconnaissance of OWCs in Minnesota it was not possible to determine the specific sources of OWCs to surface, ground, or drinking waters. The data indicate WWTP effluent is a major pathway of OWCs to surface waters and that landfill leachate at selected facilities is a potential source of OWCs to WWTPs. Aquatic organism or human exposure to some OWCs is likely based on OWC distribution. Few aquatic or human health standards or criteria exist for the OWCs analyzed, and the risks to humans or aquatic wildlife are not known. Some OWCs detected in this study are endocrine disrupters and have been found to disrupt or influence endocrine function in fish. Thirteen endocrine disrupters, 3- tert -butyl-4-hydoxyanisole (BHA), 4- cumylphenol, 4- normal -octylphenol, 4- tert -octylphenol, acetyl-hexamethyl-tetrahydro-naphthalene (AHTN), benzo[α]pyrene, beta-sitosterol, bisphenol-A, diazinon, nonylphenol diethoxylate (NP2EO), octyphenol diethoxylate (OP2EO), octylphenol monoethoxylate (OP1EO), and total para -nonylphenol (NP) were detected. Results of reconnaissance studies may help regulators who set water-quality standards begin to prioritize which OWCs to focus upon for given categories of water use.

Minnesota

Response to comment on "Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants in U.S. streams, 1999-2000: A national reconnaissance"

Till (1) raised concerns that several aspects of how we handled the data in our study (2) may have caused unintended bias. First, Till (1) considers the “median detectable concentrations” listed in Table 1 (2) to be misleading because “higher median concentrations than is actually the case” were suggested. We interpret this concern raised by Till (1) to be that some readers may misinterpret our median detectable concentration to be an overall median concentration. Our intention was to provide the reader with information that could not easily be determined independently. For example, by examining the frequency of detection (2), it could easily be determined that the overall median concentration was less than the reporting level for all but six compounds (those having a detection frequency of>50%). Our goal for providing a median detectable concentration was to give a better sense of the concentrations when a particular compound was detected. Thus, we felt the combination of frequency of detection (how often a compound was found), median detectable concentration (median concentration when a compound was detected), and maximum concentration (highest concentration measured) would provide the greatest benefit to the readers. In future reports, we will modify the table headings to ensure that overall median concentration and median detectable concentration are clearly differentiated.

Environmental Science & Technology

Response to comment on "Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants in U.S. streams, 1999-2000: A national reconnaissance"

We concur with the response of Eckel to our recent publication in this Journal (1). As the author notes, the topic of emerging contaminants is currently receiving extensive media coverage and scientific notice, but there are earlier reports that foreshadow this current interest. Eckel’s comment regarding the detection of pharmaceuticals and other organic wastewater contaminants (OWC) at a Superfund landfill site (2) is well taken, as other reports confirm the presence of such compounds at waste-disposal and landfill sites (3). In fact, literature from more than 20 years ago documented the occurrence of OWCs in the environment (4-7). A significant difference between these reports and our study is that we have systematically documented the frequent presence and low concentrations of a broad suite of OWCs in a wide variety of streams across the United States.

Environmental Science & Technology

Response to comment on "Pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants in U.S. streams, 1999-2000: A national reconnaissance"

We thank Ericson et al. (1) for their careful review and thoughtful comments on the synthetic hormone data presented in our recent publication summarizing the results from the USGS nationwide reconnaissance for pharmaceuticals and other organic wastewater contaminants (2). Their efforts have helped raise the awareness of the difficulties in accurately measuring these compounds at the low concentrations that occur in the environment and reinforce the need for continued research in the area of analytical methods development for synthetic hormones

Environmental Science & Technology

Water-quality data for pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants in U.S. streams, 1999-2000

Water-quality data collected during 1999 and 2000 as part of the first nationwide reconnaissance of the occurrence of pharmaceuticals, hormones, and other organic wastewater contaminants (OWCs) are presented in this report. A network of 139 streams in 30 states were sampled and analyzed for 95 different OWCs using five new research methods developed by the U.S. Geological Survey. Site selection was biased toward streams more susceptible to OWC contamination because of proximity to urban areas or livestock production. At least one OWC was detected in 80% of the streams sampled, with 82 of the 95 analyzed OWCs determined in this study detected in at least one sample.

Open-File Report