CONTAMINANTS OF EMERGING CONCERN: ENDOCRINE DISRUPTORS

1
CONTAMINANTS OF EMERGING CONCERNENDOCRINE
DISRUPTORS

• Presentation to COG
• Chief Administrative Officers Committee
• August 1, 2007
• Tanya T. Spano
• Dept. of Environmental Programs

2
Overview

• Background
• Local Focus on EDCs
• COG Board Direction
• Summary of Research
• What? / Why? / Where? / How?
• Key Findings / Technical Efforts
• Policy Guidance / Potential Actions
• Recommendations Next Steps

3
Local Focus on EDCs

• USGS Report (2006)
• Intersex fish found in Potomac River
• Endocrine disruptors identified as likely cause
• Washington Post articles (Sept. 3, 6, 26, 2006)
• Intersex fish EDCs in Potomac River
• House Govt. Reform Committee Hearing on
• intersex fish
• (Oct. 4, 2006)
• Congressman Tom Davis, Chair
• Speakers EPA, USGS, Fairfax Water, WSSC,
• Washington Aqueduct, ICPRB, Potomac Riverkeepers,
  NRDC
• COG Board Briefing on intersex fish (Oct. 11,
  2006)
• Speakers EPA and American Water Works
  Association
• Adopted Resolution R46-06

4
COG Board Direction

• Resolution charged the CBPC to
• Work with key stakeholders to assess EDCs other
  Compounds of Emerging Concern re
• Public health and
• Environmental concerns
• Present joint findings recommendations to COG
  Board to include
• Existing data on water quality environmental
  effects
• Potential solutions to reduce concentrations

5
What Are Endocrine Disruptors?

• Part of larger category of Compounds of Emerging
  Concern (CECs)
• Substances
• Known or suspected to inhibit or disrupt the
  function of endocrine systems of humans
  animals
• That can produce impacts at extremely low levels
  (many only recently detectable)
• Endocrine systems control or regulate many
  biological processes (e.g., development, growth,
  reproduction, metabolism, etc.)

• Detected in humans, animals the environment -
  at increased levels
• Ubiquitous nationally globally
• Includes synthetic naturally-occurring
  synthetic substances

6
Congressional Briefing (3/23/07)EPA, Office of
Science Technology
Nanomaterials Microscopic scale materials to
control/manipulate matter at an atomic scale
(i.e., at one billionth of a meter or
nanometer). PFOA Perfluorooctanoic Acid, a
synthetic (man-made) chemical used in
industrial/commercial products (e.g., non-stick
cookware, breathable all-weather clothing). PPCPs
Pharmaceuticals and Personal Care Products,
used in veterinary medicine, agricultural
practice, and human health and cosmetic
care. PBDEs Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers, a
group of brominated flame retardant chemicals
used in manufactured products (e.g., foam
cushions plastics in televisions computers) to
slow the ignition/rate of fire growth. Prions
Microscopic particles made of protein that can
cause disease (e.g., Chronic Wasting Disease in
cows).
7
Why Is There Concern?

• Known Potential Environmental Impacts
• Abnormal sexual functions of fish, frogs,
  mollusks, etc. (e.g., intersex fish, decreased
  fertility, etc.)
• Fish lesions (perhaps due to compromised immune
  systems)

• Potential Human Health Impacts
• Behavioral changes, cancers, Type II diabetes,
  fertility declines, compromised immunity,
  neurological effects, etc.
• Intergenerational/heritable implications
• Developmental impacts greatest on vulnerable
  population groups
• Substances exhibit endocrine disrupting impacts
  well below toxic or neurological levels

8
What Are the Sources?

• Naturally-occurring
• Human, animal, fungus plant hormones
• Caffeine

9
What Are the Sources?

• Synthetic (man-made)
• Pesticides Herbicides Insecticides
• (commercial home)
• PCBs Dioxins, Cadmium Lead
• Plastic Products
• (e.g., electronics, food containers, toys,
  household products, packaging, etc.)
• Personal Care Products
• (e.g., cosmetics, perfumes, shampoos, soap,
• detergents, insect repellants, anti-microbials)
• Pharmaceuticals
• (e.g., antibiotics and hormones for humans
  animals medicines prescription, over-the
  counter illegal)
• Others
• (e.g., fire retardants, rocket fuel, diesel
  fuel,
• animal feed additives)

10
How Are Humans/the Environment Exposed?

• Human (via direct consumption, inhalation, and/or
  absorption)
• Food (primarily high-fat dairy animal products)
• Medicines / Hormones
• Emissions from products
• (i.e., from electronics, carpeting, textiles,
  plastic liners containers for food, etc.)
• Drinking water

11
How Are Humans/the Environment Exposed?

• Environmental (i.e., direct indirect points of
  release)
• Aquaculture / animal feedlots
• Biosolids animal manure runoff
• Wastewater plant effluents / septic systems
• Stormwater runoff / Sediments
• Air transport

12
Key Findings

• National international (e.g., European Union)
  issue
• Organizations studying conducting research
• (USGS, EPA, FDA, CDC, World Health Organization,
  National Academy of Sciences, American Water
  Works Association
• Water Environment Federation and associated
  research foundations)
• Regulatory efforts Precautionary Principles
• Much information still preliminary
• Many info. gaps uncertainties
• Human Health Risk (actual relative) not well
  defined
• Very technical topic with public concerns
  perceptions of risk
• Progress re cause and effect risk is slow
• Scope of issue much broader than anticipated
• Sources concerns exist beyond drinking water
• wastewater food indoor air
• Requires broad stakeholder input/public policy
  issues

13
Policy Technical Efforts (examples)

• EPA
• Research Field detection Laboratory methods
• Do Not Flush policy
• Drug Take-back Pilot Studies
• Universal Waste Rule
• Potentially develop drinking/water quality
  standards
• Water Wastewater Research Organizations
• Stormwater/wastewater/biosolids/stormwater
  testing
• Risk assessments / risk communication
• Water quality modeling fate transport studies
• Drinking water, wastewater biosolids treatment
  technologies
• Develop test/detection methodologies

14
Policy Guidance (Chesapeake Bay Water
Resources Policy and Health Directors Committees)

• Appropriate COG Role (given scope of issue)
• Identify whos responsible (federal/state level)
• Report on what is being done / by whom
• Involve integrate human health issues
• Public Health Environmental Health officials
• Get stakeholder input (e.g., indoor air, solids
  waste, etc.)
• Identify research needs / advocate funding
• Monitor / provide periodic updates
• Rely on Experts to Characterize Risk
• Urge caution - monitor learn first
• Need for balance given other environmental
  public health issues

15
Potential Actions

• Advocate for
• Additional Research
• EPA initial screening list (F.R. 6/18/07)
• Additional Monitoring
• Various localities (local national)
• Development of Risk Assessment/Communication
  tools
• Bans of most acute items
• Sierra Club Others petition to EPA (6/5/07)
• Investigate existing programs (e.g., Seattle,
• San Francisco, Los Angeles) for local
  applicability
• Drug Take-back programs
• Do Not Flush programs
• Apply for federal grants to develop pilot studies

16
Recommendations Next Steps

• Continue stakeholder
• consultation share findings
• (e.g., Potomac River Basin Drinking Water
• Source Protection Partnership, Northern
• Area Region Environmental Health Directors,
  etc.)
• Joint presentation to COGs Chesapeake Bay
  Water Resources Policy and Health Directors
  Committees
• Update on European Unions efforts programs
• Rationale for application of Precautionary
  Principle
• Hold/co-sponsor technical workshops/forums
• (e.g., 2006 2008 events)

17
Recommendations Next Steps

• COG Board policy briefing (fall 2007)
• Summary report
• Outline research and key findings
• Define an appropriate COG role
• Assessment versus definitive solutions
• Recommended actions
• Identify additional efforts over next year
• Technical background report
• Update to COG Board (summer 2008)
• Include feedback from proposed Water Quality
  Future Challenges forum ongoing
  research/regulatory action

18
Wrap-Up

• Questions?
• Further Information
• Tanya T. Spano
• [phone]
• tspano_at_mwcog.org
• Thanks to many COG staff others