• Home

  • Documents

  • ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE...
84
ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE: EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR-PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory St. Cloud State University

ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    8

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR-PREY RELATIONSHIP

IN FRESHWATER FISH

Victoria KornAquatic Toxicology Laboratory

St Cloud State University

INTRODUCTION

bull Exposure to multiple forms of anthropogenic stress

bull Adverse effects molecular physiological behavioral

bull Estrogenic pollutants are ubiquitous

bull Potential impacts on population dynamics

bull Varied susceptibility between species

bull Variation in ambient environment

HYPOTHESIS

bull Estrogenic exposure and temperature will independently or interactively decrease survival rate of larval fathead minnows following predation through an impairment in the predator avoidance response

EXPOSURE SYSTEMS

Larval static renewal exposure system Adult flow through exposure system

PREDATOR AVOIDANCE RESPONSE

bull High speed camera (1000 framess)

bull Analyze video for length (mm) latency (ms) velocity (BLs) angle (degrees) and total escape response (BLs)

CALCEIN STAINING

Bath treatment 250 mgL from 1 stock solution

Duration 6 hours

httpwwwlehighedu~inbiosFacultyIovineimagesslideshowIovine1jpg

Calcein stained larva 30 days exposure

Caudal fin stained with calcein

15 hoursAcclimation Period Predation Trial

PREDATION TRIAL DESIGN

1 hour

Control

E1LOW

E1HIGH

Percent survival of larval fathead minnows in competitivepredation trials

RESULTS

Predation success of predatory sunfish ( of totallarvae in the trial consumed)

Predator avoidance responses of larvae at 21 days exposure

Average body length (mm) of larval fathead minnows at21 days exposure

RESULTS RECAP

bull E1 independently affected larval survival following predation as well as predator success

bull Temperature independently affected the predator avoidance response

bull No interactive effects or trends to suggest temperature modulation

bull Individuals at the larval stage are more susceptible to effects from exposure and temperature fluctuation

DISCUSSION

bull Alteration of predator-prey relationships and aquatic food webs

bull Survival Control 742 E1LOW 492 E1HIGH 529bull Similar to past study using estradiolbull Multi-generation population modeling projected declinebull Mitigation of effects on larvae through reduced predator

success

SIGNIFICANCE

bull Risk assessment

bull Ecological management plans

bull Identification of vulnerable populations

bull Prediction of population dynamics in real world settings

httpfishing-in-minnesotacomblog20130607lake-osakissthashRo5pgr3Jdpbs

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 2: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

INTRODUCTION

bull Exposure to multiple forms of anthropogenic stress

bull Adverse effects molecular physiological behavioral

bull Estrogenic pollutants are ubiquitous

bull Potential impacts on population dynamics

bull Varied susceptibility between species

bull Variation in ambient environment

HYPOTHESIS

bull Estrogenic exposure and temperature will independently or interactively decrease survival rate of larval fathead minnows following predation through an impairment in the predator avoidance response

EXPOSURE SYSTEMS

Larval static renewal exposure system Adult flow through exposure system

PREDATOR AVOIDANCE RESPONSE

bull High speed camera (1000 framess)

bull Analyze video for length (mm) latency (ms) velocity (BLs) angle (degrees) and total escape response (BLs)

CALCEIN STAINING

Bath treatment 250 mgL from 1 stock solution

Duration 6 hours

httpwwwlehighedu~inbiosFacultyIovineimagesslideshowIovine1jpg

Calcein stained larva 30 days exposure

Caudal fin stained with calcein

15 hoursAcclimation Period Predation Trial

PREDATION TRIAL DESIGN

1 hour

Control

E1LOW

E1HIGH

Percent survival of larval fathead minnows in competitivepredation trials

RESULTS

Predation success of predatory sunfish ( of totallarvae in the trial consumed)

Predator avoidance responses of larvae at 21 days exposure

Average body length (mm) of larval fathead minnows at21 days exposure

RESULTS RECAP

bull E1 independently affected larval survival following predation as well as predator success

bull Temperature independently affected the predator avoidance response

bull No interactive effects or trends to suggest temperature modulation

bull Individuals at the larval stage are more susceptible to effects from exposure and temperature fluctuation

DISCUSSION

bull Alteration of predator-prey relationships and aquatic food webs

bull Survival Control 742 E1LOW 492 E1HIGH 529bull Similar to past study using estradiolbull Multi-generation population modeling projected declinebull Mitigation of effects on larvae through reduced predator

success

SIGNIFICANCE

bull Risk assessment

bull Ecological management plans

bull Identification of vulnerable populations

bull Prediction of population dynamics in real world settings

httpfishing-in-minnesotacomblog20130607lake-osakissthashRo5pgr3Jdpbs

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 3: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

HYPOTHESIS

bull Estrogenic exposure and temperature will independently or interactively decrease survival rate of larval fathead minnows following predation through an impairment in the predator avoidance response

EXPOSURE SYSTEMS

Larval static renewal exposure system Adult flow through exposure system

PREDATOR AVOIDANCE RESPONSE

bull High speed camera (1000 framess)

bull Analyze video for length (mm) latency (ms) velocity (BLs) angle (degrees) and total escape response (BLs)

CALCEIN STAINING

Bath treatment 250 mgL from 1 stock solution

Duration 6 hours

httpwwwlehighedu~inbiosFacultyIovineimagesslideshowIovine1jpg

Calcein stained larva 30 days exposure

Caudal fin stained with calcein

15 hoursAcclimation Period Predation Trial

PREDATION TRIAL DESIGN

1 hour

Control

E1LOW

E1HIGH

Percent survival of larval fathead minnows in competitivepredation trials

RESULTS

Predation success of predatory sunfish ( of totallarvae in the trial consumed)

Predator avoidance responses of larvae at 21 days exposure

Average body length (mm) of larval fathead minnows at21 days exposure

RESULTS RECAP

bull E1 independently affected larval survival following predation as well as predator success

bull Temperature independently affected the predator avoidance response

bull No interactive effects or trends to suggest temperature modulation

bull Individuals at the larval stage are more susceptible to effects from exposure and temperature fluctuation

DISCUSSION

bull Alteration of predator-prey relationships and aquatic food webs

bull Survival Control 742 E1LOW 492 E1HIGH 529bull Similar to past study using estradiolbull Multi-generation population modeling projected declinebull Mitigation of effects on larvae through reduced predator

success

SIGNIFICANCE

bull Risk assessment

bull Ecological management plans

bull Identification of vulnerable populations

bull Prediction of population dynamics in real world settings

httpfishing-in-minnesotacomblog20130607lake-osakissthashRo5pgr3Jdpbs

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 4: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

EXPOSURE SYSTEMS

Larval static renewal exposure system Adult flow through exposure system

PREDATOR AVOIDANCE RESPONSE

bull High speed camera (1000 framess)

bull Analyze video for length (mm) latency (ms) velocity (BLs) angle (degrees) and total escape response (BLs)

CALCEIN STAINING

Bath treatment 250 mgL from 1 stock solution

Duration 6 hours

httpwwwlehighedu~inbiosFacultyIovineimagesslideshowIovine1jpg

Calcein stained larva 30 days exposure

Caudal fin stained with calcein

15 hoursAcclimation Period Predation Trial

PREDATION TRIAL DESIGN

1 hour

Control

E1LOW

E1HIGH

Percent survival of larval fathead minnows in competitivepredation trials

RESULTS

Predation success of predatory sunfish ( of totallarvae in the trial consumed)

Predator avoidance responses of larvae at 21 days exposure

Average body length (mm) of larval fathead minnows at21 days exposure

RESULTS RECAP

bull E1 independently affected larval survival following predation as well as predator success

bull Temperature independently affected the predator avoidance response

bull No interactive effects or trends to suggest temperature modulation

bull Individuals at the larval stage are more susceptible to effects from exposure and temperature fluctuation

DISCUSSION

bull Alteration of predator-prey relationships and aquatic food webs

bull Survival Control 742 E1LOW 492 E1HIGH 529bull Similar to past study using estradiolbull Multi-generation population modeling projected declinebull Mitigation of effects on larvae through reduced predator

success

SIGNIFICANCE

bull Risk assessment

bull Ecological management plans

bull Identification of vulnerable populations

bull Prediction of population dynamics in real world settings

httpfishing-in-minnesotacomblog20130607lake-osakissthashRo5pgr3Jdpbs

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 5: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

PREDATOR AVOIDANCE RESPONSE

bull High speed camera (1000 framess)

bull Analyze video for length (mm) latency (ms) velocity (BLs) angle (degrees) and total escape response (BLs)

CALCEIN STAINING

Bath treatment 250 mgL from 1 stock solution

Duration 6 hours

httpwwwlehighedu~inbiosFacultyIovineimagesslideshowIovine1jpg

Calcein stained larva 30 days exposure

Caudal fin stained with calcein

15 hoursAcclimation Period Predation Trial

PREDATION TRIAL DESIGN

1 hour

Control

E1LOW

E1HIGH

Percent survival of larval fathead minnows in competitivepredation trials

RESULTS

Predation success of predatory sunfish ( of totallarvae in the trial consumed)

Predator avoidance responses of larvae at 21 days exposure

Average body length (mm) of larval fathead minnows at21 days exposure

RESULTS RECAP

bull E1 independently affected larval survival following predation as well as predator success

bull Temperature independently affected the predator avoidance response

bull No interactive effects or trends to suggest temperature modulation

bull Individuals at the larval stage are more susceptible to effects from exposure and temperature fluctuation

DISCUSSION

bull Alteration of predator-prey relationships and aquatic food webs

bull Survival Control 742 E1LOW 492 E1HIGH 529bull Similar to past study using estradiolbull Multi-generation population modeling projected declinebull Mitigation of effects on larvae through reduced predator

success

SIGNIFICANCE

bull Risk assessment

bull Ecological management plans

bull Identification of vulnerable populations

bull Prediction of population dynamics in real world settings

httpfishing-in-minnesotacomblog20130607lake-osakissthashRo5pgr3Jdpbs

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 6: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

CALCEIN STAINING

Bath treatment 250 mgL from 1 stock solution

Duration 6 hours

httpwwwlehighedu~inbiosFacultyIovineimagesslideshowIovine1jpg

Calcein stained larva 30 days exposure

Caudal fin stained with calcein

15 hoursAcclimation Period Predation Trial

PREDATION TRIAL DESIGN

1 hour

Control

E1LOW

E1HIGH

Percent survival of larval fathead minnows in competitivepredation trials

RESULTS

Predation success of predatory sunfish ( of totallarvae in the trial consumed)

Predator avoidance responses of larvae at 21 days exposure

Average body length (mm) of larval fathead minnows at21 days exposure

RESULTS RECAP

bull E1 independently affected larval survival following predation as well as predator success

bull Temperature independently affected the predator avoidance response

bull No interactive effects or trends to suggest temperature modulation

bull Individuals at the larval stage are more susceptible to effects from exposure and temperature fluctuation

DISCUSSION

bull Alteration of predator-prey relationships and aquatic food webs

bull Survival Control 742 E1LOW 492 E1HIGH 529bull Similar to past study using estradiolbull Multi-generation population modeling projected declinebull Mitigation of effects on larvae through reduced predator

success

SIGNIFICANCE

bull Risk assessment

bull Ecological management plans

bull Identification of vulnerable populations

bull Prediction of population dynamics in real world settings

httpfishing-in-minnesotacomblog20130607lake-osakissthashRo5pgr3Jdpbs

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 7: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

15 hoursAcclimation Period Predation Trial

PREDATION TRIAL DESIGN

1 hour

Control

E1LOW

E1HIGH

Percent survival of larval fathead minnows in competitivepredation trials

RESULTS

Predation success of predatory sunfish ( of totallarvae in the trial consumed)

Predator avoidance responses of larvae at 21 days exposure

Average body length (mm) of larval fathead minnows at21 days exposure

RESULTS RECAP

bull E1 independently affected larval survival following predation as well as predator success

bull Temperature independently affected the predator avoidance response

bull No interactive effects or trends to suggest temperature modulation

bull Individuals at the larval stage are more susceptible to effects from exposure and temperature fluctuation

DISCUSSION

bull Alteration of predator-prey relationships and aquatic food webs

bull Survival Control 742 E1LOW 492 E1HIGH 529bull Similar to past study using estradiolbull Multi-generation population modeling projected declinebull Mitigation of effects on larvae through reduced predator

success

SIGNIFICANCE

bull Risk assessment

bull Ecological management plans

bull Identification of vulnerable populations

bull Prediction of population dynamics in real world settings

httpfishing-in-minnesotacomblog20130607lake-osakissthashRo5pgr3Jdpbs

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 8: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Control

E1LOW

E1HIGH

Percent survival of larval fathead minnows in competitivepredation trials

RESULTS

Predation success of predatory sunfish ( of totallarvae in the trial consumed)

Predator avoidance responses of larvae at 21 days exposure

Average body length (mm) of larval fathead minnows at21 days exposure

RESULTS RECAP

bull E1 independently affected larval survival following predation as well as predator success

bull Temperature independently affected the predator avoidance response

bull No interactive effects or trends to suggest temperature modulation

bull Individuals at the larval stage are more susceptible to effects from exposure and temperature fluctuation

DISCUSSION

bull Alteration of predator-prey relationships and aquatic food webs

bull Survival Control 742 E1LOW 492 E1HIGH 529bull Similar to past study using estradiolbull Multi-generation population modeling projected declinebull Mitigation of effects on larvae through reduced predator

success

SIGNIFICANCE

bull Risk assessment

bull Ecological management plans

bull Identification of vulnerable populations

bull Prediction of population dynamics in real world settings

httpfishing-in-minnesotacomblog20130607lake-osakissthashRo5pgr3Jdpbs

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 9: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Predation success of predatory sunfish ( of totallarvae in the trial consumed)

Predator avoidance responses of larvae at 21 days exposure

Average body length (mm) of larval fathead minnows at21 days exposure

RESULTS RECAP

bull E1 independently affected larval survival following predation as well as predator success

bull Temperature independently affected the predator avoidance response

bull No interactive effects or trends to suggest temperature modulation

bull Individuals at the larval stage are more susceptible to effects from exposure and temperature fluctuation

DISCUSSION

bull Alteration of predator-prey relationships and aquatic food webs

bull Survival Control 742 E1LOW 492 E1HIGH 529bull Similar to past study using estradiolbull Multi-generation population modeling projected declinebull Mitigation of effects on larvae through reduced predator

success

SIGNIFICANCE

bull Risk assessment

bull Ecological management plans

bull Identification of vulnerable populations

bull Prediction of population dynamics in real world settings

httpfishing-in-minnesotacomblog20130607lake-osakissthashRo5pgr3Jdpbs

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 10: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Predator avoidance responses of larvae at 21 days exposure

Average body length (mm) of larval fathead minnows at21 days exposure

RESULTS RECAP

bull E1 independently affected larval survival following predation as well as predator success

bull Temperature independently affected the predator avoidance response

bull No interactive effects or trends to suggest temperature modulation

bull Individuals at the larval stage are more susceptible to effects from exposure and temperature fluctuation

DISCUSSION

bull Alteration of predator-prey relationships and aquatic food webs

bull Survival Control 742 E1LOW 492 E1HIGH 529bull Similar to past study using estradiolbull Multi-generation population modeling projected declinebull Mitigation of effects on larvae through reduced predator

success

SIGNIFICANCE

bull Risk assessment

bull Ecological management plans

bull Identification of vulnerable populations

bull Prediction of population dynamics in real world settings

httpfishing-in-minnesotacomblog20130607lake-osakissthashRo5pgr3Jdpbs

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 11: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Average body length (mm) of larval fathead minnows at21 days exposure

RESULTS RECAP

bull E1 independently affected larval survival following predation as well as predator success

bull Temperature independently affected the predator avoidance response

bull No interactive effects or trends to suggest temperature modulation

bull Individuals at the larval stage are more susceptible to effects from exposure and temperature fluctuation

DISCUSSION

bull Alteration of predator-prey relationships and aquatic food webs

bull Survival Control 742 E1LOW 492 E1HIGH 529bull Similar to past study using estradiolbull Multi-generation population modeling projected declinebull Mitigation of effects on larvae through reduced predator

success

SIGNIFICANCE

bull Risk assessment

bull Ecological management plans

bull Identification of vulnerable populations

bull Prediction of population dynamics in real world settings

httpfishing-in-minnesotacomblog20130607lake-osakissthashRo5pgr3Jdpbs

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 12: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

RESULTS RECAP

bull E1 independently affected larval survival following predation as well as predator success

bull Temperature independently affected the predator avoidance response

bull No interactive effects or trends to suggest temperature modulation

bull Individuals at the larval stage are more susceptible to effects from exposure and temperature fluctuation

DISCUSSION

bull Alteration of predator-prey relationships and aquatic food webs

bull Survival Control 742 E1LOW 492 E1HIGH 529bull Similar to past study using estradiolbull Multi-generation population modeling projected declinebull Mitigation of effects on larvae through reduced predator

success

SIGNIFICANCE

bull Risk assessment

bull Ecological management plans

bull Identification of vulnerable populations

bull Prediction of population dynamics in real world settings

httpfishing-in-minnesotacomblog20130607lake-osakissthashRo5pgr3Jdpbs

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 13: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

DISCUSSION

bull Alteration of predator-prey relationships and aquatic food webs

bull Survival Control 742 E1LOW 492 E1HIGH 529bull Similar to past study using estradiolbull Multi-generation population modeling projected declinebull Mitigation of effects on larvae through reduced predator

success

SIGNIFICANCE

bull Risk assessment

bull Ecological management plans

bull Identification of vulnerable populations

bull Prediction of population dynamics in real world settings

httpfishing-in-minnesotacomblog20130607lake-osakissthashRo5pgr3Jdpbs

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 14: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

SIGNIFICANCE

bull Risk assessment

bull Ecological management plans

bull Identification of vulnerable populations

bull Prediction of population dynamics in real world settings

httpfishing-in-minnesotacomblog20130607lake-osakissthashRo5pgr3Jdpbs

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 15: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Funding by the Minnesota Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund (Grant ML 2014 Chp 226 Sec 2 Subd 03d)

Jessica Ward and Heiko Schoenfuss experimental design and data analysis

Members of the SCSU aquatic toxicology laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 16: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

QUESTIONS

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 17: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

US Department of the InteriorUS Geological Survey

Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land

Application SitesSarah M Elliott Melinda L Erickson

and Aliesha L KrallUS Geological SurveyByron A Adams

MN Pollution Control Agency

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 18: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Some Definitions Land Application Site Types Large subsurface treatment systems

(LSTS) Small communities

Rapid infiltration basins (RIB) Municipalities Allow rapid infiltration of wastewaters into

soils amp groundwater

Micropollutants Contaminants of emerging concern

(pharmaceuticals personal care products etc)

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 19: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Problem amp Significance Micropollutants detected in surface waters

upstream of point sources What are other important sources

Many micropollutants can move through septic treatment untreated Source to surface waters Contamination of downgradient drinking wells

Carrera et al 2008

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 20: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Problem amp SignificanceIn Minnesota LSTS ~125 large (1MGY) 1000rsquos more mid-size amp

smaller systems RIB 30 large 20 other

LSTSRIBSurficial sand amp gravel

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 21: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Objectives

Objective - Determine occurrence of micropollutants in

(a) shallow groundwater near 7 on-site treatment facilities (LSTSRIB)

(b) soil at one land application site irrigating with domestic septage

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 22: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater

near 7 LSTSRIB facilities

Objective (a)

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 23: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Objective (a) - Methods

5 LSTS and 2 RIB facilities One downgradient well per site Three sample events

Chemical analyses Physical water quality parameters Nutrients ndash MDH Ions ndash MDH Pharmaceuticals (109) ndash USGS NWQL Other wastewater indicators (67) ndash USGS NWQL Sterols amp hormones (20) ndash USGS NWQL Antibiotics amp Pharmaceuticals (33) ndash USGS KS OGRL

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 24: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Facility Locations

Erickson et al (submitted)

LSTS

RIBStatic water level 2 - 40 ft

10 ndash 100 m

10 ndash 100 m

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 25: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

LSTSRIB Results

34 micropollutants detected at least once Pharmaceuticals (19) flame retardants pesticides

industrial chemicals Mixtures of 2 ndash 26 micropollutants in all samples Sulfamethoxazole was detected in ALL samples

(7 ndash 965 ngL)

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 26: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - A

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Num

ber o

f det

ectio

ns

LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - G

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 27: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

OtherPharmaceuticalsPesticidesP flame retardants

LSTSRIB Results

Erickson et al (submitted)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - A

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

Conc

entr

atio

n n

anog

ram

s per

lite

r LSTS - E

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

RIB - F

Sep-14 Jun-15 Aug-15

RIB - GSep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - B

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - C

Sep-14 May-15 Aug-15

LSTS - D

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 28: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Comparison to MN Ambient

Groundwater Methyl-1H-benzotriazole (BTA) Carbamazepine (CBZ) NN-Diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET) Fluconazole (FLC) Lidocaine (LID) Sulfamethoxazole (SMX) Tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate

(TCEP) Tris(dichloroisopropyl) phosphate

(TDCPP)

Erickson et al (submitted)

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 29: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Human Health MDH Pharmaceutical

Rapid AssesmentScreening Values (Suchomel et al 2015)

Concentration consumed daily with no anticipated health risk Not based on

toxicological data so lower values = more conservative

PrioritizationScreening AssessmentAquatic Health

Water quality criteria lacking Prioritization scores

(Berninger et al 2016)

Scores range 1 to 10 Based on adsorption

metabolism elimination in mammals

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 30: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10Pr

iorit

izat

ion

Scor

e

Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water

Prioritization rank scores from Berninger et al (2016)

3 115 6 15 1

2 25 6

21 1 1 21

3

2 1 10

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 31: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Screening Assessment ndash Human Health

Screnning values (SV) from Minnesota Department of Health (Suchomel et al 2015)

Pharmaceutical Common Use times detected

Concentrationrange ngL

SV Value ngL

Concentration SV ratio

Alprazolam anti-anxiety 3 062 ndash 24 30 002 ndash 008

Meprobamate anti-anxiety 5 30 ndash 57 10000 lt001

Warfarin blood thinner 2 25 ndash 51 70 004 ndash 007

Carbamazepine anticonvulsant 12 99 - 534 900 001 ndash 059

Metformin antidiabetic 3 76 ndash 206 4000 002 ndash 005

Glyburide antidiabetic 1 012 4 003

Fluconazole antifungal 15 65 ndash 124 400 002 ndash 031

Carisoprodol muscle relaxant 2 12 ndash 13 30000 lt001

Sulfamethoxazole antibiotic 19 85 - 965 400 002 ndash 24

Tramadol pain reliever 6 26 ndash 186 7000 lt001 ndash 003

Temazepam sleep aid 1 203 80 025

Facility

Averageannual

discharge MG

Average Total

Sample SV ratio

LSTS ndash D 54 076

RIB ndash F 83 055

LSTS ndash B 51 031

LSTS ndash A 23 008

LSTS ndash C 39 005

LSTS ndash E 42 004

RIB ndash G 21 004

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 32: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site

Objective (b)

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 33: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Objective (b) - Methods1 agricultural field ndash irrigates with domestic septage

Soil 4 sample locations 1 sample event

Chemical analyses Other wastewater

indicators Sterols amp hormones Antibiotics amp

pharmaceuticals

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 34: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Agricultural Field Results

32 micropollutants detected in soil Fragrances bisphenol A PAHs etc More hormones and sterols detected relative to

other analyzed chemicals Carbamazepine ciprofloxacin ofloxacin in all

samples Ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin in mgkg range

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 35: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Agricultural FieldResults - Soil

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 36: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Agricultural Field Results - Soil

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 37: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Summary 34 micropollutants detected in groundwater

near LSTSRIB facilities mostly pharmaceuticals Some detectionsconcentrations of potential

concern to aquatic and human health Soils receiving wastewater may be a

repository for some organic contaminants More research on fate amp transport needs to

be conducted to better understand how these BMPs contribute to contaminant load to environment

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 38: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Acknowledgements

Funding State of Minnesota Clean Water Fund USGS Cooperative Matching Fund

Daniel Morel and Brent Mason sampling Facility owners and operators

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 39: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Questions

Sarah Elliottselliottusgsgov

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 40: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities

18 October 2017

Shalene Thomas Amec Foster WheelerHannah Albertus-Benham Amec Foster Wheeler

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 41: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Outline

1 Introduction and Background The Concern What are Emerging Contaminants Why are they different PFAS what are they and where are they used

2 The Response PFAS Case Study Regulatory Landscape and overview Case Study Summary Facility Management Considerations

3 Summary

2 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 42: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

PFAS ndash General overview

Federal and State Programs

What is the concern

Why are they different

What are Emerging Contaminants

3 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 43: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

What is an emerging contaminant

4

DoD and EPA definitions generally state

1 Presents potential unacceptable risk

2 Has no published standard3 New science detection or

exposure pathway available12 3

1DoD Instruction 471518 Emerging Contaminants June 11 2009 DUSD (IampE) is Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Installation and Environment2EPA Federal Facilities Restoration and Reuse Officehttpwwwepagovfedfacdocumentsemerging_contaminantshtmadditional_ec

3 httptoxicsusgsgovregionalemc

EC News

Phase IAssessment

Phase IIAssessment

DoD Scan Watch Action Process

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 44: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 20175

Department of Defense Emerging Contaminants

EPA Office of Water Contaminants of Emerging Concern

Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products Polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) Perfluorinated compounds (PFCs)

PBDEs

List of Emerging Contaminants

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 45: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

A Moving Target Why Concerned

Persistent Bioaccumulative

Toxic

Use and Contamination is

Widespread

Regulatory and Legal Actions

Rising

Risk Review Management Mitigation

6 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 46: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)

Unregulated Contaminant

Monitoring Rule(UCMR)

Center for Disease Control and

Prevention (CDC)

National Health and Nutrition

Examination Survey (NHANES)

State Biomonitoring Cooperative Agreement

Seven States with Specific Risk Management Programs Addressing Emerging Contaminants

WA AZ MN NY ME VT

Federal and State EC Programs

7 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 47: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

What are PFAS

8

Fluorinated Substances

Perfluoroalkylsubstance

(formerly PFCs)Polyfluoroalkyl

substance

ie FTOH

ie82 FTOH

Note This is a simplified representation of fluorinated substance sub-classes and in no way represents the entire fluorinated substances class

3 RC Buck et al Guide to PFASs in the Environment- Integr Environ Assess Manag 7 2011

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

PFSA

ie PFOSie PFOA

PFCA

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 48: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

UsesSources

Oil and Gas Extraction Electroplating(mist suppressants)

Manufacturing Processes Intermediates By-products

Consumer ProductsSemiconductor

Industry

Aqueous film forming foams

9 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 49: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

The Response Perspectives for PFAS

10

Case Study

Regulatory Landscape

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Facility Management

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 50: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

US Water Criteria

11

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

USEPA 007 007 1

04 04 2

Alaska (AK) 040 040 2

Connecticut (CT) 007 007 2

Delaware (DE) 007 007 2

Iowa (IA) 007 007 2

Maine (ME) 007 007 1

013 056 2

005 12 3

Michigan (MI) 042 0011 4

007 007 2

Minnesota (MN) 0035 0027 2

Nevada (NV) 1

New Hampshire (NH) 007 007 2

New Jersey (NJ) 0014 1

North Carolina (NC) 2 2

Oregon (OR) 24 300 4

Texas (TX) 029 056 2

Vermont (VT) 002 002 12

US EPA

US by State

NOTES

1= drinking water2= groundwater3= recreational water4= surface water

= Promulgated rule (AK IA MI NH NC OR TX VT) = Promulgation anticipated proposed or recommended (MN NJ)= Calculated using the EPA RSL calculator

OTHER NOTABLES

bull 70 of the states adopted criteria within the last 2 yrsbull Several states have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull CT DE MN NV NJ OR and TXbull CERCLA 5-Year reviews serving as Site ldquoRe-Openersrdquobull Administrative Orders from EPA despite promulgated

rulebull States have adopted Emergency Rules bull Site Clean-Up Goals vary broadly

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 51: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

International Water Criteria

12

Concentration (ugL ppb) PFOA PFOS

Australia health-based 056 007 1health-based 56 07 2

Canada screening value 02 06 1Denmark screening value 01 01 1Germany health-based 03 03 1

administrative 01 01 1Italy health-based 05 1

screening value 01 3Netherlands health-based 053 1

administrative 00053 1

Sweden health-based 009 1

administrative 009 009 1

UK health-based 10 03 1

admin Level 1 03 03 1

admin Level 2 10 10 1

admin Level 3 90 9 1

InternationalNOTES

1= drinking water2= recreational water3= freshwater

OTHER NOTABLES

bull Most countries adopted criteria earlier than US (2006-2014)

bull Several countries have adopted criteria for other PFAS

bull Australia Canada Denmark Italy Sweden

bull Substantial variability across countriesbull Several countries are re-evaluating criteriabull Stockholm convention has been a primary

driver

copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 52: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

2009 Provisional

Health Advisory 2016 Final Lifetime Health

Advisory

Out

com

e Criteria dropped an order of magnitude

Site Re-openersExpanded Plumes

The Impetus for Change

Driver USEPA Health Advisories

Driver Social Momentum amp Risk Perception

Driver DoD Policies

Guidance established in 2012 with policies published through 2017

13 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 53: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

The Case Study Data Summary

Over 100 US DoD Installations in our PFAS program

TODAYrsquoS FOCUS 22 Installations 125 potential PFAS

release areas of AFFF 405 soil borings 769 monitoring wells

AFFF = Aqueous Film Forming Foam

14 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 54: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Media and Constituents

Short name

Formula PFAS constituent (16)

PFBA C4HF7O2 Perfluorobutanoic acidPFPeA C5HF9O2 Perfluoropentanoic acidPFBS C4F9SO3H Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid

PFHxA C6HF11O2 Perfluorohexanoic acidPFHpA C7HF13O2 Perfluoroheptanoic acidPFHxS C6F13SO3H Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid62 FTS C8H5F13SO3 62 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFOA C8HF15O2 Perfluorooctanoic acidPFOS C8F17SO3H Perfluorooctanesulfonic acidPFNA C9HF17O2 Perfluoronanoic acidPFDA C10HF19O2 Perfluorodeconoic acid

82 FTS C10H5F17O3S 82 Fluorotelomer sulfonatePFUnA C11HF21O2 Perfluoroundecanoic acidPFDoA C12HF23O2 Perfluorodecanoic acidPFTrDA C13HF25O2 Perfluorotridecanoic acidPFTeDA C14HF27O2 Perfluorotetradecanoic acid

3 Functional Groups 11 PFCAs 2 FTSs 3 PFSAs

7 Media of Concern Soil Groundwater Stormwater Porewater Sediment Surface water Fish tissue

15 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 55: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Data Summary

Summary data for 22 installations

of samples

PFOS detects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOS gtHA

PFOA dectects

Median Maximum (ppb) PFOAgtHA

Soil samples 1562 60 324 108000 NA 45 0514 697 NAGW samples 1381 75 0050 7150 34 67 0011 215 30Stormwater samples 80 96 0231 370 55 68 0013 0033 16Porewater samples 40 98 0052 430 83 93 0011 0052 85Sediment samples 123 76 864 984 NA 47 0289 244 NASurface water samples 119 97 0138 240 67 91 00028 0037 35Fish tissue samples 17 100 591 457 NA 35 0576 128 NA

High frequency of detections for PFOS and PFOA

16 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 56: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

All installations compound highlights PFSAs account for most of the

mass Accumulated mass resides at

GW-SW interface in pore water and sediment

Some PFAS bioaccumulate in fish filet

17 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 57: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

All Installations- Aqueous Media

Low and mid-range C chain lengths dominate Widespread low-level detections in SW

62 FTS highest in groundwater PFHxS and PFOS dominate in ST PW SW

18 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 58: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

All installations SO SD FT

Longer chain compounds present in solid media

PFOS PFHxS dominate SO and SD

PFOS 100X other PFAS in fish tissue

19 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 59: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Managing and Mitigating Liability Active Remediation Considerations

bull Oxidation of precursorsbull Soil excavationbull Reinjection

ConstructionDemolitionbull Soil management bull Air translocationbull Dewatering considerations

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820

4 McGuire M E et al (2014) Evidence of remediation-induced alteration of subsurface poly- and perfluoroalkyl substance distribution at a former firefighter training area Environmental Science amp Technology 48(12) 6644-6652

20 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Stormwater Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 60: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Wastewater and Managementbull Water treatment containment

reusedischargebull Biosolids management reuse

5 Xindi C Hu et al Detection of Poly- and Perfluoroalkyl Substances (PFASs) in the US Drinking Water Linked to Industrial Sites Military Fire Training Areas and Wastewater Treatment Plants Environmental Science and Technology Letters (August 2016) 3 344-350 DOI 101021ascastlett6b00260

6 US Environmental Protection Agency FACT SHEET Perfluorochemical (PFC) Contaminationof Biosolids Near Decatur Alabama March 20117 httpwwwafcecafmilNewsArticle-DisplayArticle466187air-force-earth-day-2013-emphasis-on-water-conservation

Water reuse Source Construction (compaction dust suppression) Irrigation (grounds golf course)

21 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 61: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Managing and Mitigating Liability

Stormwaterbull gt95 detection across samples collectedbull Non-point source contributionbull Management via

passive treatment collection and treatment retention

Sampled Media

of samples

PFOS Frequency of Detects

PFOS Median Maximum (ppb)

PFOA Frequency of Detects

PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)

Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940

Investigation-Derived Waste (IDW) Management

bull Currently being maintained on propertybull Staged until later datebull Liabilities minimized by storing on-sitebull Some disposal facilities refusing to accept

AFFF Foam- Best Management Practices Consider entire life cycle

bull Procurement bull Management of wastewater during testing

and flushingbull Disposal practices

22 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Sheet1

Sheet2

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Sampled Media of samples PFOS Frequency of Detects PFOS Median Maximum (ppb) PFOA Frequency of Detects PFOA Median Maximum (ppb)
Soil samples 1562 5970 324 108000 4460 260 1450
Groundwater samples 1363 7450 0050 7150 6630 005 3820
Stormwater samples 80 9630 0140 370 6750 0040 0940
Porewater samples 40 9750 0520 430 9250 0110 0520
Sediment samples 123 7560 864 984 4630 0560 342
Surface water samples 119 9660 0150 240 9080 0050 115
Fish tissue samples 17 10000 591 457 3530 0460 0740
Examples Primary Source Secondary Source
FTAs uuml
Hangars uuml
Crash Sites uuml
Crash Stations uuml
Storm Water Systems uuml
Wastewater Systems uuml
Construction Activities uuml uuml
Remediation Activities uuml uuml
Page 62: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

The ldquotake-home messagesrdquohellip

1 Keep one eye open- the PFAS regulatory framework is evolving quickly

2 Science is not always driving decisions

3 Evaluate and manage liabilities proactively to avoid unintended consequences

PFAS Regulatory Status and Prognosis

PFAS Strategic Management Today

23 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 63: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Upcoming ConferencesAEHS Amherst MA- Oct 16-19SETAC Annual Conference Minneapolis MN- Nov 16-18Battelle Chlorinated Conference Palm Springs CA ndashApril 8-12

Industry PublicationsNGWA Groundwater and PFAS State of Knowledge and Practice- due out Fall 2017ITRC PFAS Fact Sheets- 6 in total before the end of 2017Podcast Understanding Emerging Contaminants and Regulatory Matters (httpsitunesapplecomuspodcastcivil-engineering-podcastid993416182mt=2) Woodard S et al 2017 Ion exchange resin for PFAS removal and pilot test comparison to GAC Remediation 2017 2719-27

Where to find us

24 copy Amec Foster Wheeler 2017

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 64: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Questions

Thank youShalene Thomas MS PMPEmerging Contaminants Program ManagerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3697M ndash 612-490-7606shalenethomasamecfwcomwwwamecfwcomec

Hannah Albertus-BenhamWater Resources amp Environmental EngineerWood dba Amec Foster Wheeler

800 Marquette Avenue 1200Minneapolis MN 55402T ndash 612-252-3657M ndash 605-222-7609hannahalbertusamecfwcom

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 65: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)

Nicholas Cipoletti Heiko L Schoenfuss

St Cloud State University

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

In collaboration with US Fish amp Wildlife Service and US Geological Survey

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 66: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Maumee River

Land use - agricultural to urban gradient

Identified as a heavily polluted tributary to the Great Lakes

Thomas et al 2017

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 67: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Maumee River

Toledobladecom

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 68: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Study Objective

How do differing aquatic inputs across a gradient of land use

impact the physiological organismal and population level of the Fathead Minnow and Sunfish Upstream (Agricultural) Downstream (Urban)

Toledobladecom

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 69: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Upstream Sampling Sites

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 70: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Downstream Sampling Sites

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 71: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Maumee bull 21 day FHM exposure -

static daily water renewal

bull Resident sunfish collection and caged sunfish deployment (14 day)

bull 21 day larval FHM exposure

bull ELISA hormone analysis

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 72: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

2016Fathead Minnow Sunfish

2017Fathead Minnow

httpcampusmurraystateeduacademicfacultyhwhitemanFieldfishredearsunfish1jpg

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 73: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Water Chemistry

Sites ranked by mean concentration for each detected chemical (1 lowest concentration to 9 highest concentration)

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Upstream Downstream

2016

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 74: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Fecal Indicator

Fragrance

Hormone

Insect Repellant

Other

Pesticide Herbicide Fungicide

Pharmaceutical

Contaminant Rank vs Treatment

Site

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Water Chemistry

Upstream Downstream

Sites most influenced by wastewater effluent

httpwwwtoledobladecomimage2014080910n1plant-4jpg

2016

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 75: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2016

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0

CUM

ULAT

IVE

MEA

N

EGG

S SP

AWN

ED F

EMAL

E D

AY

TREATMENT DAY

FATHEAD MINNOW FECUNDITY - MAUMEE 2016

TWP MIX USC PBG FMP CON SCR GRM BCR

UpstreamSites

DownstreamSites

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 76: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Larval Fathead Minnow2016 + 2017

Predator Avoidance Behaviorbull Latencybull Escape Velocitybull Escape Anglebull Total Escape Response

Apical Endpointsbull Feeding Efficiencybull Growthbull Survival

No significant effects for all variables

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 77: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Sunfish Blood Glucose

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Mean

Caged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BB

BB

CC

C

Mean Glucose vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140Mean

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

A ABAB

BC

CDD

D

2016

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 78: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Sunfish Hepatosomatic IndexCaged Sunfish Resident Sunfish

2016

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP00

05

10

15

20

25

30

35Mean

Mean HSI vs Treatment (Caged Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP BLN00

02

04

06

08

10

12

Mean

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

Upstream Downstream Upstream Downstream

AAB AB

BC CCCC

AAB

ABB

BB

B

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 79: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index2016

Mean GSI vs Treatment (Resident Sunfish)

Treatment

GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Mean

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

B

AB ABAB

ABAB

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 80: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Fathead Minnow Fecundity2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Cum

ulat

ive

Mea

n

Eggs

Spa

wne

dFe

mal

eDa

y

Treatment Day

Fathead Minnow Fecundity - Maumee 2017

BLK MIX TWP SCR USC PBG FMP BCR GRM

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 81: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Male Fathead Minnow Condition FactorMean BCF vs Treatment (Fathead Minnow)

Treatment

BLK GRM BCR FMP PBG USC SCR TWP MIX000

001

002

003

004

005

006Mean

2017

Upstream Downstream

Statistically different means indicated by differing letters

A

BBB

ABAB

ABABAB

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 82: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Discussion

Varied water chemistry depicts a system with multiple inputs from both known (effluent) and unknown (runoff) sources

Alterations to FHM fecundity and body condition factor represent a complex river system with varying inputs

Sunfish indices (glucose HSI GSI) detail the importance of entire life-cycle exposure due to strong upstream to downstream trends (glucose) and individual site effects (HSI GSI)

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 83: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Impacts

Potential improper re-direction of energy stores at a critical energy-intensive period of reproduction

Alterations to reproduction and reproductive indices could lead to population dynamic changes

Most pronounced effects observed on resident sunfish those which were exposed their entire life

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements
Page 84: ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- … · ESTRONE AND TEMPERATURE :EFFECTS ON THE PREDATOR- PREY RELATIONSHIP IN FRESHWATER FISH Victoria Korn Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

Acknowledgements

Thanks to our collaboratorsSt Cloud State University ndash

Aquatic Toxicology Laboratory

  • Estrone and Temperature Interactions Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationships in Freshwater Fish
    • Estrone and Temperature Effects on the Predator-Prey Relationship in Freshwater Fish
    • Introduction
    • Hypothesis
    • Exposure Systems
    • Predator Avoidance response
    • Calcein Staining
    • Slide Number 8
    • Slide Number 9
    • Slide Number 10
    • Slide Number 11
    • Slide Number 12
    • Results Recap
    • Discussion
    • Significance
    • Acknowledgements
    • Questions
      • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastwateer Land Application Sites
        • Micropollutants in Groundwater and Soil at Wastewater Land Application Sites
        • Some Definitions
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Problem amp Significance
        • Objectives
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in shallow groundwater near 7 LSTSRIB facilities
        • Objective (a) - Methods
        • Facility Locations
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • LSTSRIB Results
        • Comparison to MN Ambient Groundwater
        • PrioritizationScreening Assessment
        • Prioritization Assessment - Surface Water
        • Screening Assessment ndash Human Health
        • Determine the occurrence of micropollutants in soil at one land application site
        • Objective (b) - Methods
        • Agricultural Field Results
        • Agricultural FieldResults - Soil
        • Agricultural Field Results - Soil
        • Summary
        • Acknowledgements
        • Questions
          • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • PFAS Trends in Environmental Media and Facility Management Considerations to Limit Future Liabilities
            • Outline
            • PFAS ndash General overview
            • What is an emerging contaminant
            • List of Emerging Contaminants
            • A Moving Target Why Concerned
            • Federal and State EC Programs
            • What are PFAS
            • UsesSources
            • The Response Perspectives for PFAS
            • Slide Number 11
            • Slide Number 12
            • The Impetus for Change
            • Slide Number 14
            • Slide Number 15
            • Slide Number 16
            • Slide Number 17
            • Slide Number 18
            • Slide Number 19
            • Slide Number 20
            • Slide Number 21
            • Slide Number 22
            • Slide Number 23
            • Slide Number 24
            • Slide Number 25
              • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnows (pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Pollutant Stress in the Maumee River Impacted Physiology and Reproduction in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and Sunfish (Lepomis spp)
                • Maumee River
                • Maumee River
                • Study Objective
                • Slide Number 5
                • Slide Number 6
                • Slide Number 7
                • Slide Number 8
                • Water Chemistry
                • Water Chemistry
                • Fathead Minnow Fecundity
                • Larval Fathead Minnow
                • Sunfish Blood Glucose
                • Slide Number 14
                • Resident Sunfish Gonadosomatic Index
                • Slide Number 16
                • Male Fathead Minnow Condition Factor
                • Discussion
                • Impacts
                • Acknowledgements

Ratio-Dependent Predator-Prey Models with Nonconstant Predator Harvesting

Ratio-Dependent Predator-Prey Models with Nonconstant Predator Harvesting

Documents
Predator & Prey

Predator & Prey

Documents
A unique predator in a unique ecosystem: modelling the apex predator … · A UNIQUE PREDATOR IN A UNIQUE ECOSYSTEM: MODELLING THE APEX PREDATOR FROM THE LATE CRETACEOUS CROCODYLIFORM-DOMINATED

A unique predator in a unique ecosystem: modelling the apex predator … · A UNIQUE PREDATOR IN A UNIQUE ECOSYSTEM: MODELLING THE APEX PREDATOR FROM THE LATE CRETACEOUS CROCODYLIFORM-DOMINATED

Documents
Femara - Food and Drug Administration...Femara suppress plasma concentrations of estradiol, estrone, and estrone sulfate by 75%-95% from baseline with maximal suppression achieved

Femara - Food and Drug Administration...Femara suppress plasma concentrations of estradiol, estrone, and estrone sulfate by 75%-95% from baseline with maximal suppression achieved

Documents
UAV Predator Manual

UAV Predator Manual

Documents
Hormonal Health - Health Remedies · significant in relation to PCOS, hirsutism, acne, and breast cancer. Estrogens Estrone sulfate (E1-S) is within the reference range. Estrone sulfate

Hormonal Health - Health Remedies · significant in relation to PCOS, hirsutism, acne, and breast cancer. Estrogens Estrone sulfate (E1-S) is within the reference range. Estrone sulfate

Documents
R. W. Baird Predator (usually silent) Familiar non-predator (frequently vocal) Unfamiliar non-predator (frequently vocal) Orcinus orca calls K. Starks

R. W. Baird Predator (usually silent) Familiar non-predator (frequently vocal) Unfamiliar non-predator (frequently vocal) Orcinus orca calls K. Starks

Documents
PREMARIN - Food and Drug Administration...(%CV) Estrone 87 (33) 9.6 (33) 50.7 (35) 5557 (59) Baseline-adjusted 64 (42) 9.6 (33) 20.2 (40) 1723 (52) estrone Equilin 31 (38) 7.9 (32)

PREMARIN - Food and Drug Administration...(%CV) Estrone 87 (33) 9.6 (33) 50.7 (35) 5557 (59) Baseline-adjusted 64 (42) 9.6 (33) 20.2 (40) 1723 (52) estrone Equilin 31 (38) 7.9 (32)

Documents
ESTRONE-RIA-CT · ESTRONE-RIA CT Radioimmunoassay for the Quantitative Determination of Estrone in Human Serum or Plasma KIPI9100 IN VITRO DIAGNOSTIC USE en DIAsource ImmunoAssays

ESTRONE-RIA-CT · ESTRONE-RIA CT Radioimmunoassay for the Quantitative Determination of Estrone in Human Serum or Plasma KIPI9100 IN VITRO DIAGNOSTIC USE en DIAsource ImmunoAssays

Documents
Predator-prey interactions under climate change: the importance of habitat vs body temperature

Predator-prey interactions under climate change: the importance of habitat vs body temperature

Documents
Predator Uav

Predator Uav

Documents
Predator Ecology and Management What is a predator?

Predator Ecology and Management What is a predator?

Documents
Baal Predator

Baal Predator

Documents
Effect of predator diet on predator-induced changes in life history

Effect of predator diet on predator-induced changes in life history

Documents
2254 Predator

2254 Predator

Documents
Predator UAV Manual

Predator UAV Manual

Documents
Predator Free Halfmoon Bay Project - Predator Fence Preliminary Outline

Predator Free Halfmoon Bay Project - Predator Fence Preliminary Outline

Documents
PRODUCT MONOGRAPH - Home - Searchlight Pharmasearchlightpharma.com/app/uploads/2016/10/Estragyn...1 PRODUCT MONOGRAPH PrESTRAGYN® VAGINAL CREAM Estrone vaginal cream containing estrone

PRODUCT MONOGRAPH - Home - Searchlight Pharmasearchlightpharma.com/app/uploads/2016/10/Estragyn...1 PRODUCT MONOGRAPH PrESTRAGYN® VAGINAL CREAM Estrone vaginal cream containing estrone

Documents
Predator (1)

Predator (1)

Documents
Cyber Predator Presentation

Cyber Predator Presentation

Education
Lesson 5: Eat and Be Eaten: Prey as Predator, Predator as Prey

Lesson 5: Eat and Be Eaten: Prey as Predator, Predator as Prey

Documents
PREDATOR - Institut francais

PREDATOR - Institut francais

Documents
Predator G2 motherboard

Predator G2 motherboard

Documents
ESTRONE-RIA-CT - diasource-diagnostics.com · ESTRONE-RIA CT Radioimmunoassay for the Quantitative Determination of Estrone in Human Serum or Plasma KIPI9100 IN VITRO DIAGNOSTIC USE

ESTRONE-RIA-CT - diasource-diagnostics.com · ESTRONE-RIA CT Radioimmunoassay for the Quantitative Determination of Estrone in Human Serum or Plasma KIPI9100 IN VITRO DIAGNOSTIC USE

Documents
10m2 Predator

10m2 Predator

Documents
Adaptation: Anti-predator and Foraging Behaviorcursa.ihmc.us/rid=1257863512885_1219534336_1055/...Also flash white hind quarters to predator Predator generally abandons chase when

Adaptation: Anti-predator and Foraging Behaviorcursa.ihmc.us/rid=1257863512885_1219534336_1055/...Also flash white hind quarters to predator Predator generally abandons chase when

Documents
Different anti-predator strategies Individual · Different anti-predator strategies Individual Make yourself unpalatable/toxic Aposematism Feign death Startle predator Mimic a predator

Different anti-predator strategies Individual · Different anti-predator strategies Individual Make yourself unpalatable/toxic Aposematism Feign death Startle predator Mimic a predator

Documents
USAF & Predator/Reaper EMPLOYEES RECREATION … · USAF & Predator/Reaper EMPLOYEES RECREATION ASSOCIATION Merchandise Predator/Reaper Lanyard $5.40 Predator/Reaper Key Chain $7.00

USAF & Predator/Reaper EMPLOYEES RECREATION … · USAF & Predator/Reaper EMPLOYEES RECREATION ASSOCIATION Merchandise Predator/Reaper Lanyard $5.40 Predator/Reaper Key Chain $7.00

Documents
Predator booklet

Predator booklet

Documents
PREDATOR PREY - Fairview Outdoor Schoolclaudekitchensoutdoorschoolatfai.weebly.com/... · Predator-Prey Relationships A predator is an organism that eats another organism. The prey

PREDATOR PREY - Fairview Outdoor Schoolclaudekitchensoutdoorschoolatfai.weebly.com/... · Predator-Prey Relationships A predator is an organism that eats another organism. The prey

Documents