Evaluating approaches and technologies for monitoring organic contaminants in the aquatic environment, Ann Arbor, MI, July 21-23, 2006: workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) convened a workshop on Evaluating Approaches and Technologies for Monitoring Organic Contaminants in the Aquatic Environment in Ann Arbor, MI on July 21-23, 2006. The primary objectives of this workshop were to: 1) identify the priority management information needs relative to organic contaminant loading; 2) explore the most appropriate approaches to estimating mass loading; and 3) evaluate the current status of the sensor technology. To meet these objectives, a mixture of leading research scientists, resource managers, and industry representatives were brought together for a focused two-day workshop. The workshop featured four plenary talks followed by breakout sessions in which arranged groups of participants where charged to respond to a series of focused discussion questions. At present, there are major concerns about the inadequacies in approaches and technologies for quantifying mass emissions and detection of organic contaminants for protecting municipal water supplies and receiving waters. Managers use estimates of land-based contaminant loadings to rivers, lakes, and oceans to assess relative risk among various contaminant sources, determine compliance with regulatory standards, and define progress in source reduction. However, accurately quantifying contaminant loading remains a major challenge. Loading occurs over a range of hydrologic conditions, requiring measurement technologies that can accommodate a broad range of ambient conditions. In addition, in situ chemical sensors that provide a means for acquiring continuous concentration measurements are still under development, particularly for organic contaminants that typically occur at low concentrations. Better approaches and strategies for estimating contaminant loading, including evaluations of both sampling design and sensor technologies, need to be identified. The following general recommendations were made in an effort to advance future organic contaminant monitoring: 1. Improve the understanding of material balance in aquatic systems and the relationship between potential surrogate measures (e.g., DOC, chlorophyll, particle size distribution) and target constituents. 2. Develop continuous real-time sensors to be used by managers as screening measures and triggers for more intensive monitoring. 3. Pursue surrogate measures and indicators of organic pollutant contamination, such as CDOM, turbidity, or non-equilibrium partitioning. 4. Develop continuous field-deployable sensors for PCBs, PAHs, pyrethroids, and emerging contaminants of concern and develop strategies that couple sampling approaches with tools that incorporate sensor synergy (i.e., measure appropriate surrogates along with the dissolved organics to allow full mass emission estimation).[PDF contains 20 pages]

Analysis of soils and sediments for organic pollutants

20 samples of soil or sediment (7 of which were predominantly sand) from various locations were received for analysis of their content of organic pollutants. These analyses were performed using a capillary column gas chromatograph equipped with an electron impact (E.I.) mass spectrometer as detector and using computerised data storage. In addition to the target compounds, the full scan data were examined to determine the composition of natural organic products and a series of diagnostic fragment ions was used to search for additional anthropogenic products. Organic-rich environmental samples are notoriously difficult to analyse for pollutant organics owing to the presence of high concentrations of many natural organic compounds. A single procedure for extraction and clean-up was adopted. It was designed for chlorinated aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons and other pesticides containing acidic functional groups and was based on published methods for the determination of organic pollutants in soils and sediments. 4 soils and 2 sands showed levels of one or two groups of PCBs slightly in excess of the detection limit, one sample showed a similar level of 2,4-D and 3 samples contained dieldrin at or just above the detection limit.