USGS ScienceSearch

Geology topics

Jeffery D. Cahill

Publications and source records attributed to Jeffery D. Cahill.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Determination of human-health pharmaceuticals in filtered water by chemically modified styrene-divinylbenzene resin-based solid-phase extraction and high-performance liquid chromatography/Mass Spectrometry

In 1999, the Methods Research and Development Program of the U.S. Geological Survey National Water Quality Laboratory began the process of developing a method designed to identify and quantify human-health pharmaceuticals in four filtered water-sample types: reagent water, ground water, surface water minimally affected by human contributions, and surface water that contains a substantial fraction of treated wastewater. Compounds derived from human pharmaceutical and personal-care product use, which enter the environment through wastewater discharge, are a newly emerging area of concern; this method was intended to fulfill the need for a highly sensitive and highly selective means to identify and quantify 14 commonly used human pharmaceuticals in filtered-water samples. The concentrations of 12 pharmaceuticals are reported without qualification; the concentrations of two pharmaceuticals are reported as estimates because long-term reagent-spike sample recoveries fall below acceptance criteria for reporting concentrations without qualification. The method uses a chemically modified styrene-divinylbenzene resin-based solid-phase extraction (SPE) cartridge for analyte isolation and concentration. For analyte detection and quantitation, an instrumental method was developed that used a high-performance liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry (HPLC/MS) system to separate the pharmaceuticals of interest from each other and coextracted material. Immediately following separation, the pharmaceuticals are ionized by electrospray ionization operated in the positive mode, and the positive ions produced are detected, identified, and quantified using a quadrupole mass spectrometer. In this method, 1-liter water samples are first filtered, either in the field or in the laboratory, using a 0.7-micrometer (μm) nominal pore size glass-fiber filter to remove suspended solids. The filtered samples then are passed through cleaned and conditioned SPE cartridges at a rate of about 15 milliliters per minute. Excess water is eliminated from the cartridge sorbent bed by passing air through the cartridges, and the analytes retained on the SPE bed are eluted from the cartridge sequentially, first with methanol, followed by acidified methanol, and combined in collection tubes. This sample extract then is reduced from about 10 milliliters (mL) to about 0.1 mL (or 100 microliters) under a stream of purified nitrogen gas with the collection tubes in a heated (40°C) water bath. The reduced extracts then are fortified with an internal standard solution (when using internal standard quantitation), brought to a final volume of 1 mL with an aqueous ammonium formate buffer solution, and filtered through a 0.2-μm Teflon syringe filter as they are transferred into vials for instrumental analysis. Instrumental analysis by the HPLC/MS procedure permits determination of individual pharmaceutical concentrations from 0.005 to 1.0 microgram per liter, based on the lowest and the highest calibration standards routinely used. The reporting levels for this method are compound dependent, and have been experimentally determined based on the precision of quantitation of compounds from eight fortified organic-free water samples in single-operator experiments. The method detection limits and interim reporting levels for the compounds determined by this method were calculated from recoveries of the pharmaceuticals from reagent-water samples amended at 0.05 microgram per liter, and ranged between 0.0069 and 0.0142 microgram per liter, and 0.015 and 0.10 microgram per liter, respectively. Concentrations for 12 compounds are reported without qualification, and for two compounds are reported as qualified estimates. After initial development, the method was applied to more than 1,800 surface-, ground-, and wastewater samples from 2002 to 2005 and documented in a number of published studies. This research application of the method provided the opportunity to collect a large data set of ambient environmental concentrations and also permitted the collection of an extensive set of reagent blanks and spike quality-control (QC) samples. This multiple-year set of QC samples enabled further evaluation of method performance under multiple operator and multiple instrument conditions typical of routine laboratory operation. These results are an important part of the entire data set contained in this report because they document method performance over an extended time. Because sample matrix can substantially affect method performance, inclusion of environmental matrix-spike samples is required as a routine component of study plan quality control. Method performance has been measured by long-term tracking of observed recoveries from fortified organic-free water samples processed with environmental samples (laboratory reagent spikes), as well as by observed recoveries from multiple fortified environmental water samples. The fortified environmental samples included surface water, wastewater effluent-dominated surface water, and ground water, fortified at two environmentally relevant concentrations and corrected for ambient environmental concentrations. Because the responses of individual pharmaceuticals vary as a function of proton affinity, the ionization efficiency, and thus relative response, of each pharmaceutical, the quality-control surrogate compounds, and the quantitation internal standard can be suppressed or enhanced by the presence of the sample matrix. As a result, several quality-control sample types are required to properly interpret the ambient environmental concentrations of pharmaceuticals in aqueous samples. The quality-control sample types and results include laboratory reagent spikes and laboratory reagent blanks to provide insight into the performance of the method in the absence of a sample matrix, and matrix-spike recovery samples and replicate environmental samples, collected from representative sample matrix types within the aquatic system under study.

Techniques and Methods

Organic wastewater compounds, pharmaceuticals, and coliphage in ground water receiving discharge from onsite wastewater treatment systems near La Pine, Oregon: Occurrence and implications for transport

The occurrence of organic wastewater compounds (components of 'personal care products' and other common household chemicals), pharmaceuticals (human prescription and nonprescription medical drugs), and coliphage (viruses that infect coliform bacteria, and found in high concentrations in municipal wastewater) in onsite wastewater (septic tank effluent) and in a shallow, unconfined, sandy aquifer that serves as the primary source of drinking water for most residents near La Pine, Oregon, was documented. Samples from two types of observation networks provided basic occurrence data for onsite wastewater and downgradient ground water. One observation network was a group of 28 traditional and innovative (advanced treatment) onsite wastewater treatment systems and associated downgradient drainfield monitoring wells, referred to as the 'innovative systems network'. The drainfield monitoring wells were located adjacent to or under onsite wastewater treatment system drainfield lines. Another observation network, termed the 'transect network', consisted of 31 wells distributed among three transects of temporary, stainless-steel-screened, direct-push monitoring wells installed along three plumes of onsite wastewater. The transect network, by virtue of its design, also provided a basis for increased understanding of the transport of analytes in natural systems. Coliphage were frequently detected in onsite wastewater. Coliphage concentrations in onsite wastewater were highly variable, ranging from less than 1 to 3,000,000 plaque forming units per 100 milliliters. Coliphage were occasionally detected (eight occurrences) at low concentrations in samples from wells located downgradient from onsite wastewater treatment system drainfield lines. However, coliphage concentrations were below method detection limits in replicate or repeat samples collected from the eight sites. The consistent absence of coliphage detections in the replicate or repeat samples is interpreted to indicate that the detections reported for ground-water samples represented low-level field or laboratory contamination, and it would appear that coliphage were effectively attenuated to less than 1 PFU/100 mL over distances of several feet of transport in the La Pine aquifer and (or) overlying unsaturated zone. Organic wastewater compounds were frequently detected in onsite wastewater. Of the 63 organic wastewater compounds in the analytical schedule, 45 were detected in the 21 samples of onsite wastewater. Concentrations of organic wastewater compounds reached a maximum of 1,300 ug/L (p-cresol). Caffeine was detected at concentrations as high as 320 ug/L. Fourteen of the 45 compounds were detected in more than 90 percent of onsite wastewater samples. Fewer (nine) organic wastewater compounds were detected in ground water, despite the presence of nitrate and chloride likely from onsite wastewater sources. The nine organic wastewater compounds that were detected in ground-water samples were acetyl-hexamethyl-tetrahydro-naphthalene (AHTN), caffeine, cholesterol, hexahydrohexamethyl-cyclopentabenzopyran, N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET), tetrachloroethene, tris (2-chloroethyl) phosphate, tris (dichloroisopropyl) phosphate, and tributyl phosphate. Frequent detection of household-chemical type organic wastewater compounds in onsite wastewater provides evidence that some of these organic wastewater compounds may be useful indicators of human waste effluent dispersal in some hydrologic environments. The occurrence of organic wastewater compounds in ground water downgradient from onsite wastewater treatment systems demonstrates that a subgroup of organic wastewater compounds is transported in the La Pine aquifer. The consistently low concentrations (generally less than 1 ug/L) of organic wastewater compounds in water samples collected from wells located no more than 19 feet from drainfield lines indicates that the reactivity (sorption, degradation) of this suite of organic waste.

Oregon

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

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

Minnesota