Nationwide reconnaissance of contaminants of emerging concern in source and treated drinking waters of the United States: Pharmaceuticals

Abstract

Mobile and persistent chemicals that are present in urban wastewater, such as pharmaceuticals, may survive on-site or municipal wastewater treatment and post-discharge environmental processes. These pharmaceuticals have the potential to reach surface and groundwaters, essential drinking-water sources. A joint, two-phase U.S. Geological Survey-U.S. Environmental Protection Agency study examined source and treated waters from 25 drinking-water treatment plants from across the United States. Treatment plants that had probable wastewater inputs to their source waters were selected to assess the prevalence of pharmaceuticals in such source waters, and to identify which pharmaceuticals persist through drinking-water treatment. All samples were analyzed for 24 pharmaceuticals in Phase I and for 118 in Phase II. In Phase I, 11 pharmaceuticals were detected in all source-water samples, with a maximum of nine pharmaceuticals detected in any one sample. The median number of pharmaceuticals for all 25 samples was five. Quantifiable pharmaceutical detections were fewer, with a maximum of five pharmaceuticals in any one sample and a median for all samples of two. In Phase II, 47 different pharmaceuticals were detected in all source-water samples, with a maximum of 41 pharmaceuticals detected in any one sample. The median number of pharmaceuticals for all 25 samples was eight. For 37 quantifiable pharmaceuticals in Phase II, median concentrations in source water were below 113ng/L. For both Phase I and Phase II campaigns, substantially fewer pharmaceuticals were detected in treated water samples than in corresponding source-water samples. Seven different pharmaceuticals were detected in all Phase I treated water samples, with a maximum of four detections in any one sample and a median of two pharmaceuticals for all samples. In Phase II a total of 26 different pharmaceuticals were detected in all treated water samples, with a maximum of 20 pharmaceuticals detected in any one sample and a median of 2 pharmaceuticals detected for all 25 samples. Source-water type influences the presence of pharmaceuticals in source and treated water. Treatment processes appear effective in reducing concentrations of most pharmaceuticals. Pharmaceuticals more consistently persisting through treatment include carbamazepine, bupropion, cotinine, metoprolol, and lithium. Pharmaceutical concentrations and compositions from this study provide an important base data set for further sublethal, long-term exposure assessments, and for understanding potential effects of these and other contaminants of emerging concern upon human and ecosystem health.

Occurrence of Pharmaceuticals in Wastewater and Their Interaction with Shallow Aquifers: A Case Study of Horní Beřkovice, Czech Republic

“…The occurrence of pharmaceuticals in drinking water sources were addressed by Furlong et al [26]. Their study detected 118 different pharmaceuticals in drinking water samples from 25 treatment plants in the USA.…”

The importance of quality control in validating concentrations of contaminants of emerging concern in source and treated drinking water samples

“…Note that the boxplots in Figure 1 contain median recoveries for all compounds determined by each method. Fewer analytes were ultimately used for purpose of interpretation in papers by Glassmeyer et al 34 , Furlong et al 35 , and Wilson et al 36 There were differences in matrix-free performance between individual methods as seen in Figure 1. Method 1, which included the highest number of analytes and was a direct analysis of the sample, displayed the least bias and narrowest range of median recoveries.…”

“…46 of the 174 pharmaceuticals and personal care products were analyzed in more than one of these six chemical methods. To address the necessity of using multiple methods to determine such a broad array of contaminants, a QA/QC program was designed that assesses relative performance of the methods used, with the fate of these compounds within drinking water treatment being evaluated in detail elsewhere 35,36 . The QA/QC program had three components: a common field sampling protocol and sample design for all chemical analysis methods; a method-specific QA/QC developed by individual investigators to assess within-method performance; and analysis of the suite of 46 organic compounds, referred to as intermethod comparator analytes (ICAs), by two or more analytical methods.…”

Potable Water Reuse in Small Inland Communities: Oasis or Mirage?

“…The US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) categorizes CECs by their end use (e.g., pharmaceuticals, personal care products, biocides), impact on human health and the environment (e.g., endocrine disruption, carcinogenesis), or type of compound (e.g., phenolic or polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon) (USEPA ). A wide variety of CECs have been detected in wastewater and drinking water sources (Boone et al , Furlong et al , Glassmeyer et al , Tang et al , Sima et al , da Silva et al , Kolpin et al ). Any commercially available chemical could theoretically end up in municipal wastewater (USEPA ), and the concentration of CECs in wastewater is likely to rise with increasing water conservation.…”