EPA Biosolids

1
EPA Biosolids Program Update
Rick Stevens Office of Water Michigan Water
Environment Association Bay city, MI February 21,
2008
2
Office of Water
Management Operations Staff
Communications Team
Office of the Assistant Administrator Assistant
Administrator, Benjamin Grumbles
American Indian Environmental Office
Water Policy Staff
Resources Management Staff
Senior Policy Advisor
Office of Ground Water Drinking Water
Office of Science Technology Director, Ephraim
S. King Deputy Dir, Suzanne Rudzinski
Office of Wastewater Management
Office of Wetlands, Oceans Watersheds
Water Security Division
Engineering Analysis Division Director, Mary
T. Smith
Municipal Support Division
Assessment Watershed Protection Division
Drinking Water Protection Division
Health Ecological Criteria Division Director,
Edward Ohanian
Water Permits Division
Oceans Coastal Protection Division
Standards Health Protection Division Director,
Denise Keehner
Wetlands Division
Standards Risk Management Division
3
Program AreasHealth Ecological Criteria
Division

• Water Quality Criteria
• Drinking and recreational waters
• Nutrients / Sediment
• Biosolids
• Emerging Contaminants

applying science technology to protect water
quality
4
Pathogens
PFOA
Prions
Nanomaterials
PBDEs
Not an exhaustive list.
5
Estimating the Universe of ECsChemicals

• CAS Registry
• 31 million organic and inorganic substances
• Updated daily with 4000 new substance records
• American Chemical Societys Chemical Abstracts
  Service

applying science technology to protect water
quality
6
Estimating the Universe of ECsPathogens

• Known
• Viruses
• Hepatitis
• Adenovirus 12
• Norovirus
• Bacteria
• Salmonella spp. (to include S. enterica)
• Escherichia coli
• Enterococcus spp.
• Campylobacter spp.
• Parasites
• Giardia
• Cryptosporidium
• Emerging
• E. coli strains
• Escherichia coli O157H7 enterohemorrhagic/Shiga-
  toxin producing EHEC or STEC
• Antibiotic-resistant (focus on vancomycin- and
  methicillin-)
• Analogous Salmonella typhimurium strains

applying science technology to protect water
quality
7
Emerging Contaminants (ECs)What are they?

• EU Definition
• New chemicals produced to offer improvements in
  industry, agriculture, medicine, and common
  conveniences.
• New reasons for concern for existing
  contaminants.
• New capabilities enabling improved examination of
  contaminants.

applying science technology to protect water
quality
8
Whats in a Name

• What to call these compounds without negatively
  branding them as worry or concern
• Emerging Contaminants of Concern
• Emerging Substances of Concern
• Compounds of Potential Concern
• Pollutants of Potential Concern
• Compounds of Emerging Concern
• Emerging Contaminants
• Microconstituents

applying science technology to protect water
quality
9
Biosolids Micro/Trace ConstituentsThe Latest
Hype?

• Even with respect to their environmental
  impacts, the trace amounts released to the
  environment from biosolids land application are
  insignificant
• Source Viewpoint in a November/December 2006 WEF
  Newsletter

applying science technology to protect water
quality
10
So Why the Interest?

• ECs illustrate the connection of individuals
  activities with their environment
• A large number of chemicals are getting into the
  environment with known and unknown concentrations
  and effects
• Detection of these chemicals is likely to
  increase
• Analytical methods are developed
• Look
• Numerous reports of intersex fish and other
  species have triggered Congressional and public
  interest
• No evidence of adverse human health effects

applying science technology to protect water
quality
11
Key Biosolids Issues

• To ensure that Part 503 standards are protective
• The US population is expected to double in 72
  years
• What to do with increased volume of residuals
• 55 current production
• is land-applied

applying science technology to protect water
quality
12
Key Biosolids Issues

• lt1 of nearly 470 million acres of agricultural
  land
• US is essentially self supportive in food
  productionindications of potential concern
• Reaching food-production capacity
• Loss of arable land and population increase
• Biosolids helps replenish OM, nutrients, buffer
  pH
• Less a nuisance and more a resource
• Must first address the technical, regulatory and
  communication challenges

applying science technology to protect water
quality
13
Current knowledge and future concerns

• Are biosolids a human health or environmental
  concern?
• Do we understand all the risks?
• Do we have all the needed risk assessment tools?
• Do we fully understand how well treatment of
  biosolids eliminates health and environmental
  risks?

applying science technology to protect water
quality
14
EPAs Biosolids Action Plan

• In setting priority actions, we considered
  certain questions
• Would the action provide a link for detecting and
  quantifying pollutants
• Would the action help ensure protectiveness of
  Part 503
• Would the action address scientific and policy
  complexities posed by land application
• We also considered input form a variety of
  sources
• NAS recommendations
• Public comments / WERF Research Summit
• EPA priorities

applying science technology to protect water
quality
15
EPAs Biosolids Action Plan Three categories /
objectives

1. Advancing our understanding of science,
   technology, and risks
2. Ensuring implementation of laws and regulations
3. Communicating the best available information
   related to public fears and perceptions

applying science technology to protect water
quality
16
Summary of Select Biosolids Activities Current

• Targeted National Sewage Sludge Survey includes
  100 PPCPs
• Analytical techniques for virus and helmith
• Reactivation / sudden increase
• Incident tracking and rapid response
• Quantitative microbial risk assessment
• Antimicrobial resistance and HGT
• Wastewater modeling for predicting pollutant
  concentrations
• Biennial review cycles
• 2003
• 2005 and 2007

applying science technology to protect water
quality
17
Risk-Based Standards HEI/RME Scenario Ag
Land-Application Exposure-Risk Model
18
14 - Pathway Risk Assessment
HUMAN
HUMAN
HUMAN
HUMAN
GROUNDWATER
GARDENER
AIR
PLANT
14
PLANT
13
1
WATER
2
12
CHILD
ANIMAL
S o i l B i o s o l i d s
HUMAN
3
PLANT
4
11
DUST
10
SOILBIOTA
5
9
ANIMAL
HUMAN
6
8
SOILBIOTA
7
PLANT
PLANT
HUMAN
ANIMAL
19
Summary of SelectBiosolids ActivitiesNeeded

• Research effective pathogen destruction or
  appropriate indicators and pathogens
• Do Part 503 operational standards work
• Analytical capabilities for a host of pathogens
  and other pollutants
• Pathogen uptake by plants
• Global warming issues
• Appropriate measures of biosolids stability
• Complex or aggregate mixtures
• Biennial Review cycles 2009, 2011
• Promulgate Part 503 rule changes
• Better understanding of odor generation control
• Aggressively encourage and implement EMS
• Develop better risk communication tools

applying science technology to protect water
quality
20
Communication Challenge Voluntary vs. Involuntary

• The public sees voluntary risk differently than
  involuntary risk
• Voluntary
• Ingestion
• Bathing
• Use
• Disposal
• Involuntary finding them in our environment in
  trace amounts

applying science technology to protect water
quality
21
Communication ChallengeWe All Contribute

• Behavior
• Ingest / use
• Excretion
• Bathing
• Disposal
• May make their way into soil and water
• Wastewater
• Biosolids
• Irrigation
• Effluent

voluntary
voluntary leading to involuntary
applying science technology to protect water
quality
22
Focusing on Source Control
applying science technology to protect water
quality
Courtesy of CH2M Hill
23
Key Message Focus on Source Control

• Everyone contributes
• Clear linkages between individual behaviors and
  the presence of trace constituents
• We all should strive to minimize the amount of
  material we introduce into the water environment
• Think about product choices and source control

applying science technology to protect water
quality
24
White House Office of NationalDrug Control
Policy

• Prescription Drug
• Abuse Guidance

25
Key Message Strategic Risk Communication

• We need better expertise in communicating complex
  technical material to citizens
• Process of scientific methods and strategies
• Someone verse in best practice SRC
• Up on the research literature
• Analysis of information needs
• Empirical evaluation of SRC impacts
• SRC success is satisfaction of the people
  involved that they have been adequately informed
  within the limits of available knowledge, and
  their needs are met.

applying science technology to protect water
quality
26
What have we been doing sinceNAS report (issued
2002)

• No documented evidence to indicate that Part 503
  has failed to protect public health
• However, additional scientific work is needed to
  reduce persistent uncertainty about the potential
  for adverse health effects from exposure to
  biosolids
• 60 recommendations

• The Agency Developed an Action Plan
• 14 projects
• 10.5 completed
• 3.5 ongoing

applying science technology to protect water
quality
NAS / NRC Report, July 2002
27
Field Study

• The application and study at the Piedmont
  Research Station in Salisbury, NC commenced at a
  time of the year that is typical for the
  application of biosolids using routine agronomic
  practices
• This research was not designed to investigate
  health-related incidents and therefore does not
  constitute a health effects research study
• Measured air emissions, biosolids, and related
  environmental and other conditions associated
  with the test application
• The goal of this research study was to
  investigate air and soil sampling methods and
  approaches and to optimize them if necessary in
  order to develop a protocol

28
applying science technology to protect water
quality
29
Exposure Measurements WorkshopAbstract

• The final Agency response to the NRC report was
  published in the Federal Register in 2003
• One of these projects was to conduct a Biosolids
  Exposure Measurement Workshop
• This workshop was held March 16-17, 2006,
  Cincinnati, OH.
• This document is a summary of the workshop.
• It describes presentations given by 16 experts
• It concludes with a list of research needs
• In the long-run, the goal of this workshop is to
  help enable the Agency to better assess the risk
  associated with the land application of
  biosolids.

applying science technology to protect water
quality
30
Just completed report
applying science technology to protect water
quality
31
PPCP Inventory Development

• Sought to look at PPCP research conducted in the
  U.S.
• What chemicals have researchers tested for?
• Where? (location, media)
• What analytical methods were used?
• What concentrations did they find?
• Will aid EPAs regulatory or guidance development
  activities
• Drinking/recreational water regulations
• Use and disposal of sewage sludge
• Ambient aquatic life criteria
• Will significantly expand EPAs existing PPCP
  scientific inventory

applying science technology to protect water
quality
32
Preliminary FindingsPPCP Inventory

• 1537 Samples
• 176 PPCP
• 14 Media Types

applying science technology to protect water
quality
33
(No Transcript)
34
What We Found So FarPPCP Inventory

• Analytical methods are highly variable
• Many found at ppt-ppb levels in the environment
• Locations are often vague or missing
• Results arent always presented as single values,
  but as a range or average, or in a graph
• One chemical can have many names, and they arent
  always easy to find

applying science technology to protect water
quality
35
Alternate names for Triclosan

• trichloro-2'-hydroxydiphenylether
• CH 3635
• Microban
• DP-300
• Lexol 300
• Ster-Zac
• Cloxifenolum
• Biofresh

• 2,4,4-Trichloro-2-hydroxydiphenyl ether
• 2'-hydroxy-2,4,4'-trichlorodiphenyl ether
• 2'-hydroxy-2,4,4'-trichlorophenyl ether
• 5-chloro-2-(2,4-dichlorophenoxy)phenol
• Cloxifenolum
• Irgasan
• Irgasan CH 3635
• Irgasan DP 300

36
PPCP Inventory Next Steps

• Gather and compile data needed for human health
  and ecological risk assessment
• Physical chemical property data
• Fate and transport data
• Bioaccumulation factors
• Human health benchmarks
• Consistent effort needed to keep up with
  publication rate
• PPCP/EC resource
• Invaluable input to decision processes
• WQC
• DWS
• Biosolids

applying science technology to protect water
quality
37
Better models

• Nutrients Evaluating alternative approaches to
  model effects of nitrite oxidation in predicting
  concentrations
• Pathogen Risk Develop quantitative microbial
  risk assessment options for assessing pathogen
  risks following exposure to land-applied
  biosolids
• Exposure Develop/improve wastewater modeling
  options to estimate pollutant concentrations in
  biosolids
• Bioassay Evaluate available methods for applying
  screening approaches (e.g., the WET test or
  reasonable facsimile thereof) for biosolids
  residual toxicity in effluents or sewage sludge
• Aggregate or mixed stressors Utilize similar
  modes of action or chemistry to determine
  population and community effects

applying science technology to protect water
quality
38
Better methods

• Chemicals in the environment
• Non-standardized methods
• Sometimes we dont know
• More compounds in use
• Identify
• Prioritize
• Existing methods
• 100 PPCPs
• Fecal coliform (i.e., 1680 and 1681)
• Salmonella spp. (i.e., 1682)
• New holding time study
• Methods needed
• Viruses
• Ascaris (viable helminth ova)
• Plenty

applying science technology to protect water
quality
39
Targeted National Biosolids Survey

• Why
• Response to the 2002 NRC report
• Addressed a target list of pollutants identified
  in 2003
• Expanded the original survey scope to include
  semi-volatiles, inorganic ions, PPDEs, and PPCPs
• Randomly selected POTWs
• 84 samples collected
• 74 facilities

40
(No Transcript)
41
(No Transcript)
42
(No Transcript)
43
(No Transcript)
44
(No Transcript)
45
What about Certain Maximums?

• Calcium at 311,000 mg/kg was from Class A sludge
  produced by advanced alkaline stabilization with
  subsequent drying. The alkaline stabilization
  process involves addition of large amounts of
  lime (calcium carbonate) to the material.
• Iron at 299,000 mg/kg and elemental phosphorus at
  118,000 mg/kg occurred in the same sample
• The facility adds ferric chloride during its
  wastewater treatment process
• This treatment step results in high levels of
  iron and phosphorus
• Silver at 856 mg/kg occurred in a sludge sample
  from a POTW that employs a complete mix
  activated sludge process
• Could not easily ascertain source
• Incineration

applying science technology to protect water
quality
46
Comparison of Survey Maximums
47
Comparison of Mean ConcentrationsDry Wt
Metal 2006-2007 TNSSS 1988-1989 NSSS 40-City Survey
Arsenic (ug/kg) 7.0 9.9 6.7
Cadmium (mg/kg) 2.7 6.9 69
Chromium (mg/kg) 83.6 119 429
Copper (mg/kg) 569 742 602
Lead (mg/kg) 79.8 134 369
Mercury (mg/kg) 1.3 5.22 2.8
Molybdenum (mg/kg) 17 9.4 17.7
Nickel (mg/kg) 53.1 42.7 135
Selenium (mg/kg) 7.2 5.16 7.3
Zinc (mg/kg) 1029 1,202 1,594
2003 Region 8 Data
6.0
3.0
21.7
509
47.5
1.4
12.0
16.5
9.0
650
48
Summary

• Have little bits of activity ongoing in quite a
  lot of areas
• Fact we believe that Part 503 is protective,
  but much remains unknown
• Need focused Research in a few key areas to
  reduce our vulnerability in a few key areas
• Treatment efficacy
• Pathogen survival and natural attenuation
• Pathogen emergence mechanisms
• Pathogen uptake in plants
• Why
• To ensure public health and environmental safety
  of biosolids land application
• To provide sound biosolids management options,
  as well as information about these options to the
  public

applying science technology to protect water
quality
49
Rick Stevens
Quit treating biosolids like crap

• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
• Office of WaterOffice of Science and
  TechnologyHealth and Ecological Criteria
  Division
• Washington, D.C.
• 202-566-1135stevens.rick_at_epa.gov

applying science technology to protect water
quality