Waste water irrigation on farms contaminates food - PDF document

Pesticides and You A quarterly publication of Beyond Pesticides Vol. 34, No. 3 Fall 2014 Page 19 by Nikita Naik The use of recycled wastewater, an increasingly a�rac�ve op - �on in face of growing water shortages and droughts in the U.S. and abroad for uses such as agriculture, landscaping, and drink - ing water, raises serious ques�ons about dietary exposure to toxic chemicals such as an�bacterial pes�cides. Concerns about chemical exposure through the food supply are being raised just as water recycling is being advanced as a sound environmental alterna�ve that reduces strain on water resources and vulnerable ecosystems, decreases wastewater discharge, and cuts down on Recycled wastewater presents a risk to human health and the en - vironment due to contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) that are not removed even by high level water treatment processes, and can persist in the water for long periods of �me, especially when used for agricultural irriga�on. Residues of pes�cides, phar - maceu�cal drugs, and other chemicals in irriga�on water can end up on plant surfaces, be taken up by crops, or contaminate the soil, thus increasing human exposure risk and environmental con tamina�on, as evidenced by a recent study conducted in Irvine, California. The study, “Treated Wastewater Irriga�on: Uptake of Pharmaceu�cal and Personal Care Products by Common Vegeta - bles under Field Condi�ons,“ published in Environmental Science & Technology (2014), found that 64% of vegetables irrigated with treated wastewater contained traces of CECs, including DEET (a repellent) and triclosan (an an�bacterial). Wastewater recycling, which is typically regulated at the state level in the U.S., lacks spe - ci�c criteria governing the presence of these CECs in agricultural irriga�on and on crops due to signi�cant data gaps, such as lack Wastewater Irrigation on Farms Contaminates Food of informa�on on the chronic e�ects of CEC exposure on human health, their persistence in and e�ects on the environment, the ef - fec�veness of various treatments in removing these contaminants from wastewater e�uents, lack of analy�cal detec�on methods, and more. Addi�onally, the cost of decontamina�on, if techno - logically feasible, is typically le� to taxpayers and local water and sewage authori�es. Background The U.S. Environmental Protec�on Agency (EPA) describes the recycling of wastewater or “water recycling” as “reusing treated wastewater for bene�cial purposes such as agricultural and land - - ishing a ground water basin.” While the terms “water recycling” and “water reuse” may seem redundant since all water is reused in one way or another within the water cycle, the dis�nc�on sug - gests the use of technology to hasten the reuse process or mul - �ple use before returning to the natural water cycle. The prac�ce of reusing wastewater in the U.S. has been established for nearly 100 years. The earliest history of large-volume water re - use involved applica�ons like pasture irriga�on near wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) that did not require high-quality e�u - ent. In 1912, the �rst small urban reuse system was the irriga�on of Golden Gate Park in San Francisco. By the 1960s, landscape ir - riga�on had become a major use for wastewater recycling. As ur - ban popula�ons grew, so did municipal reuse systems. In 1977, St. Petersburg, Florida built the �rst large-scale urban reuse system in the country. Over the years, other countries followed suit, includ - ing Israel, Japan, and Spain. 3 Now, as water shortages increase due to growing popula�ons and climate change, ci�es are beginning T h e use of recycled wastewater in Pesticides and You A quarterly publication of Beyond Pesticides Page 20 Vol. 34, No. 3 Fall 2014 to view wastewater reuse as a viable op�on for everything from agricultural irriga�on to drinking water. Implications for Health and the Environment While wastewater recycling has many bene�ts, there are a host of issues that must be addressed, chief among them being contami - nants of emerging concern. Contaminants of emerging concern are chemicals that typically have not been monitored in the envi - ronment, but have only recently been detected in waterways and municipal wastewater and include chemicals like �ame retardants, personal care products, pharmaceu�cals, and pes�cides. CECs can enter municipal wastewater through bathing, cleaning, and the dis - posal of human waste and unused pharmaceu�cals. Although they typically exist at extremely minute concentra�ons, there is a grow - ing concern regarding their impact on public health and ecology. Table 1 contains examples of trace chemical cons�tuents that are poten�ally detectable in recycled wastewater. The uptake of contami - nants by crops treated with recycled wastewa - ter present a serious hu - man exposure risk. The recent Irvine, California study measured levels of 19 commonly occur - ring pharmaceu�cal and personal care products (PPCPs) in eight types of vegetables irrigated with treated wastewater under �eld condi�ons. The analytes studied included 16 pharmaceu - �cals (e.g., acetamino - phen, ca�eine, mep - robamate, atenolol, trimethoprim, carba - mazepine, diazepam, gem�brozil, and primi - done) and three per - sonal care pes�cide products (DEET, triclo - san, and triclocarban). The vegetable species, such as le�uce, car - rots, and tomatoes, include those o�en consumed raw by peo - ple and are among the most important cash crops in arid and semi- arid regions, such as southern California, where there has been a rapid increase in irriga�on with treated wastewater. The study �nds that 64% of the edible por�ons of vegetables grown with treated wastewater have at least one PPCP detected, while for��ed water-irrigated vegetables, in which treated wastewater was deliberately spiked with 15 PPCPS, have a detec�on frequency of 91%. In treated wastewater-irrigated vegetables, meprobamate (31%) and carba - mazepine (31%) are the most frequently detected compounds. In for��ed water-irrigated vegetables, the detec�on frequencies of carbamazepine, dilan�n, and primidone signi�cantly increased to 89%, 57%, and 39%, respec�vely. The study’s researchers found that, based on their results, the greatest annual exposure due to the consump�on of contaminat - ed vegetables is ca�eine, followed by the an�bacterial pes�cide triclosan, then carbamazepine, while meprobamate is the lowest. Triclosan is a toxic an�microbial pes - �cide that contains the contaminant dioxin and is asso - ciated with a range of adverse e�ects, from skin irrita�on, endocrine disrup - �on, bacterial and compounded an - �bio�c resistance, to the contamina - �on of water and its nega�ve impact on fragile aqua�c ecosystems. The Centers for Disease Control and Preven - �on (CDC) reports Table 1: Categories of trace chemical constituents (natural and synthetic) potentially detectable in reclaimed water and illustrative example chemicals End use category Examples Industrial chemicals 1,4-Dioxane, per�urooctanoic acid, methyl ter�ary butyl ether, tetrachloroethane Pes�cides, biocides , and herbicides Atrazine, lindane, diuron, �pronil Natural chemicals Hormones (17β-estradiol), phytoestrogens, geosmin, 2-methylisoborneol Pharmaceu�cals and metabolites An�bacterials (sulfamethoxazole), analgesics (acetominophen, ibupro�n), beta - blockers (atenolol), an�epilep�cs (phenytoin, carbamazepine), veterinary and human an�bio�cs (azithromycin), oral contracep�ves (ethinyl estradiol) Personal care products Triclosan, sunscreen ingredients, fragrances, pigments Household chemicals and food Sucralose, bisphenol A (BPA), dibutyl phthalate, alkylphenol polyethoxylates, �ame retardants (per�uorooctanoic acid, per�ourooctane sulfonate) Transforma�on products NDMA, HAAs, and THMs The Deer Island Massachuse�s wastewater plant and surrounding park area. Photo by Fletcher6. From EPA’s Guidelines for Water Reuse (2012) Pesticides and You A quarterly publication of Beyond Pesticides Vol. 34, No. 3 Fall 2014 Page 21 document triclosan in the urine of 75% of the U.S. popula�on, with the most recent 2010 update �nding that the levels of triclosan in the U.S. popula�on con�nue to increase. The researchers in the California study also note that ca�eine and triclosan are mostly detected in carrots, while carbamazepine is detected widely in all vegetables. The study also �nds that some PPCPs display a higher tendency for accumula�on in plants than others, which may have harmful implica�ons for vulnerable human popula�ons like preg - nant women. For example, carbamazepine, an an�convulsant and an�depressant drug used to treat epilepsy, bipolar disorder, and other condi�ons, is detected consistently in all plant samples, in - cluding roots, leaves, and fruits. According to the study, the chem - ical is known to be immune to wastewater treatment processes and is found ubiquitously in wastewater treatment plant e�uents. There is evidence that pregnant women’s exposure to carbamaze - pine may result in congenital malforma�ons in o�spring. The use of recycled wastewater in agriculture may have indirect health e�ects resul�ng from an�bio�c resistance in soil bacteria. Samples taken and archived in the Netherlands between 1940 (when an�bio�c use began increasing) and 2008 supported evi - dence that resistance to an�bio�cs is increasing in both pathogen - ic and nonpathogenic bacteria. Wastewater e�uent from hospi - tals, which contain major discharge of chemicals that are di�cult to remove in WWTPs, may also result in the contamina�on of soils by trace levels of an�bio�cs. Certain pharmaceu�cals have been shown to be phytotoxic (e.g., plant growth inhibi�on) to various wild and cul�vated plant spe - cies, but these e�ects are s�ll not fully understood. 8 Regulations Governing Wastewater Recycling According to EPA’s Guidelines for Water Reuse (2012), wastewater recycling standards are the responsibility of state and local agen - cies. The majority of states have regula�ons governing quality for recycling of reclaimed wa - ter from centralized treat - ment facili�es, and these can vary considerably ac - cording to region. As of 2012, 30 states and one territory have adopted regula�ons, and 15 states have guidelines or design standards. A few states have no speci�c regula - �ons, but may permit pro - grams with approval on a case-by-case basis. - lines for Water Reuse serves as a resource for states that desire to de - velop new regula�ons and guidelines for wastewater reuse. The guidelines also exist to inform and supplement state regula�ons and guidelines by providing technical informa�on and outlining key implementa�on considera�ons. State regula�ons for wastewater recycling must be consistent with and, in some cases, func�on within the boundaries imposed by other federal and state laws, regula�ons, rules, and policies. State regulatory programs are a�ected or superseded by federal water laws where reuse a�ects interna�onal boundaries, Na�ve American rights, mul�ple states with a claim on limited water supplies, or instream �ow requirements to support threatened or endangered �sheries under the Endangered Species Act. Federal and state agencies have jurisdic�on over the quan�ty and quality of wastewater discharge into U.S. public waterways. The primary federal law is the Clean Water Act (CWA) for water quality man - agement designed to ensure that all surface waters are “�shable and swimmable.” CWA requires states to set water quality stan - dards, establishing the right to manage the pollu�on that comes from wastewater treatment plants, as long as the standards, at minimum, meet federal rules. Another federal standard regulat - ing recycled wastewater end use is the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) for water diverted to potable use. Standards governing recycled wastewater irriga�on on crops can di�er in stringency by state. For example, California’s Water Re - cycling Criteria requires some of the most stringent water qual - ity standards for disinfec�on. Some states ban the prac�ce al - together, by prohibi�ng the use of recycled wastewater on food crop irriga�on or allowing it only if the food is to be processed or not eaten raw. Florida, Nevada, and Virginia require that recycled wastewater does not come in contact with the crop or that the crop is to be peeled or heated before ea�ng. While California does not have these requirements, the state does have stringent, near- potable quality standards for food crop irriga�on. For other states that allow food crop irriga�on with treated wastewater, treatment The Future of Recycled Wastewater Use in Agricultural Irrigation in California California has been at the forefront of wastewater reuse, propelled by necessity due to frequent water shortages in the state. The Recycled Water Policy, adopted in 2009, establishes a set of goals to help move California toward more sustainable management of surface waters and groundwater, along with water conserva�on, water reuse, and the use of storm water. One of these goals include the increase in use of recycled water over 2002 levels by at least one million acre-feet per year (afy) by 2020 and by at least two million afy by 2030, as well as the subs�tu�on of as much recycled water for potable water as possible by 2030. The State Water Board has mandated the increase in use of recycled water by 200,000 afy by 2020 and by an addi�onal 300,000 by 2030. In California, water reuse for agricultural purposes makes up a he�y chunk of total recycled water use at approximately 37% (roughly 240,000 afy). Future demand is es�mated to increase agricultural reuse by a factor of 3.2 to 3.5 �mes current reuse levels by 2030. California’s Department of Public Health requires varying levels of water treatment requirements depending on purpose of use: orchards and vineyards for which there is no contact with edible crops (undisinfected secondary treatment); food crops with edible por�on above ground, no contact (disinfected secondary); and food crops, parks and playgrounds, golf courses (disinfected ter�ary). requirements can range from secondary treatment and disinfec - �on, to oxida�on, coagula�on, �ltra�on, and high level disinfec - �on. See Table 2 for more informa�on on state requirements re - garding the treatment of wastewater for agricultural irriga�on. Guidelines for Water Reuse recommends that as human exposure levels increase, so should the level of treatment. For example, for non-food crop irriga�on, wetlands, wildlife habitat, and stream augmenta�on, and industrial cooling processes, EPA suggests both primary (sedimenta�on) with secondary (biological oxida - �on, disinfec�on) treatment. For landscape and golf course irri - ga�on, toilet �ushing, and food crop irriga�on, EPA suggests pri - mary, secondary, and ter�ary/advanced (chemical coagula�on, �ltra�on, disinfec�on) treatment. Additional Concerns Lack of Treatment Technology. Nearly all wastewater treatment plants provide a minimum of secondary treatment as a result of CWA requirements. Treatment levels beyond secondary are called advanced treatment and can include physical-chemical separa - �on techniques such as adsorp�on, �occula�on/precipita�on, membranes for advanced �ltra�on, ion exchange, and reverse os - In 2008, only 37 percent of municipal facili�es produced and discharged e�uent at advanced levels of treatment that were Pesticides and You A quarterly publication of Beyond Pesticides Page 22 Vol. 34, No. 3 Fall 2014 Table 3: Indicative percent removals of organic chemicals during various stages of wastewater treatment Treatment Percent Removal An�bio�cs 1 Pharmaceu�cals Hormones DZP CBZ DCF IBP PCT Steroid 2 3 Secondary (ac�vated sludge) nd nd nd Soil aquifer treatment nd nd nd Aquifer sotrage nd nd Micro�ltra�on nd Ultra�ltra�on/powdered ac�vated carbon (PAC) nd nd Nano�ltra�on Reverse osmosis PAC Granular ac�vated carbon Ozona�on Advanced oxida�on High-level ultraviolet Chlorina�on Chloramina�on From EPA’s Guidelines for Water Reuse (2012) CBZ = carbamazepine DBP = disinfec�on by-product DCF = diclofenac DZP = diazepam IBP = ibuprofen nd = no data PAC = powdered ac�vated carbon PCT = paracetamol erythromycin, sulfamethoxa - zole, triclosan, trimethoprim ethynylestradiol; estrone, estradiol and estriol 3 progesterone, testosterone Table 2: Reclaimed water quality and treatment requirements for irrigation on food crops From EPA’s Guidelines for Water Reuse (2012) NS = not speci�ed by the state’s reuse regula�on TR = monitoring is not required but virus removal rates are prescribed by treatment requirement NP = not permi�ed by the state NWRI = Na�onal Water Research Ins�tute In Texas and Florida, spray irriga�on (i.e. direct contact) is not permi�ed on foods that may be consumed raw (except Florida makes an excep�on for citrus and tobacco), and only irriga�on types that avoid reclaimed water contact with edible por�ons of food crops (such as drip irriga�on) are ac - ceptable. In Florida when chlorine disinfec�on is used, the product of the total chlo - Treatment (System Design) Requirements Arizona California 1 Hawaii Nevada New Jersey North Carolina Texas 1 Virginia 3 Washington Processed Foods 4 Unprocessed Foods 5 Unit processes Secondary treat - ment, �ltra�on, disinfec�on Oxidized, coagulated, �l - tered, disinfected Secondary treatment, �ltra�on, high-level disinfec�on Oxidized, �ltered, disinfected NP Filtra�on, high-level disinfec�on Filtra�on (or equivalent) Filtra�on, dual UV/chlorina�on (or equivalent) Secondary treatment, �ltra�on, high-level disinfec�on Oxidized, coagulated, �ltered, disinfected disinfec�on used enforced, variance allowed NP 100 mJ/cm at max day �ow Dual UV/chlorina�on (or equivalent) Chlorine disinfec�on requirements, if used minutes modal contact �me at peak dry weather �ow TRC > 1 mg/L; 15 minutes contact �me at peak hr �ow Min residual > 5mg/L, actual modal contact �me of 90 minutes NP Min residual > 1 mg/L; 15 minutes contact at peak hr �ow Dual UV/chlorina�on (or equivalent) TRC CAT > 1 mg/L; 30 min - utes contact �me at avg �ow or 20 minutes at peak �ow Chlorine residual > 1; 30 minutes contact Pesticides and You A quarterly publication of Beyond Pesticides Vol. 34, No. 3 Fall 2014 Page 23 higher than the federal minimum. Currently, there is no single treatment process that can provide a complete barrier to all chemicals (see Table 3) and most munici - pal wastewater treatment plants are not speci�cally designed to remove these types of contaminants from wastewater due to bar - riers such as cost and lack of research and data. Data and Regulatory Gaps. In addi�on to the presence of CECs in treated wastewater, these contaminants have been shown to occur in natural bodies of water as well, which indicates lack of su�cient wastewater treatment technology. A major study published in 2002 as a part of the U.S. Geological Survey discovered the presence of numerous pharmaceu�cals and organic wastewa - ter contaminants (OWCs) in 139 streams located across 30 states. Eighty-two (out of 95) OWCs were detected at least once in the study, with 80% of the streams sampled containing one or more OWC. Compounds included steroids, insect repellents, disinfectants, and detergent metabo - lites. While the majority of the compounds rarely exceeded drinking water guidelines, many did not have any guidelines. The lack of regulatory stan - dards, data on metabolites and poten�al synergis - �c e�ects, and other sources of incomplete data on these chemicals show a failure in the regula - tory framework. Conclusion Contaminants of emerging concerns (CECs) in re - cycled wastewater present a risk to both human health and the environment. However, their pres - ence in natural bodies of water as well as recycled wastewater points to a much larger problem, most notably lapses within federal laws, including the Toxic Substances Control Act , Federal Insec�cide, Fungicide, and Roden�cide Act , Clean Water Act , and others that govern both the introduc�on and use of toxic materials in commerce without an ad - equate assessment of their life-cycle (from manufacture, use, to dis - posal) e�ects. The Organic Foods Produc�on Act establishes a mod - el for analyzing life cycle impacts of synthe�c chemicals that should be used when determining allowances of any synthe�c chemical – thus prohibi�ng materials not eliminated by wastewater treatment. Un�l that happens, contaminated wastewater presents a serious challenge across all agricultural produc�on where it is used. This ar�cle was printed in Pes�cides and You, Vol. 34, No. 3, Fall Who should pay for the removal of CECs? Widespread water contamina�on with the herbicide atrazine, used to con - trol broadleaf weeds and annual grasses in crops, golf courses, and residen�al lawns, has been found across the U.S. Atrazine is used extensively for broadleaf weed control in corn. The herbicide does not cling to soil par�cles, but wash - es into surface water or leaches into groundwater, and then �nds its way into municipal drinking water. It is the most commonly detected pes�cide in rivers, streams and wells, with an es�mated 76.4 million pounds of atrazine applied in the U.S. annually. It has been linked to a myriad of environmental concerns and health problems in humans, including disrup�on of hormone ac�vity, birth defects, and cancer, as well as e�ects on human reproduc�ve systems. A class ac�on se�lement, City of Greenville v. Syngenta Crop Protec�on, Inc. , between plain��s and the manufacturer of atrazine, Syngenta, paid out $105 million in 2013 to se�le this nearly eight-year-old lawsuit and help reimburse community water systems (CWS) in 45 states that have had to �lter the toxic chemical from its drinking water. It provided �nancial recoveries for costs that have been borne for decades by more than 1,887 CWSs that provide drinking water to more than one in six Americans. Arizona California 1 Hawaii Nevada New Jersey North Carolina Texas 1 Virginia 3 Washington Processed Foods 4 Unprocessed Foods 5 Unit processes Secondary treat - ment, �ltra�on, disinfec�on Oxidized, coagulated, �l - tered, disinfected Secondary treatment, �ltra�on, high-level disinfec�on Oxidized, �ltered, disinfected NP Filtra�on, high-level disinfec�on Filtra�on (or equivalent) Filtra�on, dual UV/chlorina�on (or equivalent) Secondary treatment, �ltra�on, high-level disinfec�on Oxidized, coagulated, �ltered, disinfected disinfec�on used enforced, variance allowed NP 100 mJ/cm at max day �ow Dual UV/chlorina�on (or equivalent) Chlorine disinfec�on requirements, if used minutes modal contact �me at peak dry weather �ow TRC > 1 mg/L; 15 minutes contact �me at peak hr �ow Min residual > 5mg/L, actual modal contact �me of 90 minutes NP Min residual > 1 mg/L; 15 minutes contact at peak hr �ow Dual UV/chlorina�on (or equivalent) TRC CAT > 1 mg/L; 30 min - utes contact �me at avg �ow or 20 minutes at peak �ow Chlorine residual > 1; 30 minutes contact rine residual and contact �me (CrT) at peak hour �ow is speci�ed for three levels of fecal coliform as measured prior to disinfec�on. If the concentra�on of fecal coliform prior to disinfec�on: is ≤ 1,000 cfu per 100 mL, the CrT shall be 25 mg min/L; is 1,000 to 10,000 cfu per 100 mL the CrT shall be 40 mg 3 The requirements presented for Virginia are for food crops eaten raw. Processed foods include those that will be peeled, skinned, cooked or ther - mally processed before consump�on. Unprocessed food refers to crops that will not be peeled, skinned, cooked or thermally processed before consump�on. References Cited Wu X, et al. Treated Wastewater Irriga�on: Uptake of Pharmaceu�cal and Personal Care Products by Common Vegetabls under Field Con - di�ons. Environmental Science & Technology. 2014. Available at: h�p://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es502868k U.S. Environmental Protec�on Agency (EPA). Water Recycling and Reuse: The Environmental Bene�ts. Available at: h�p://www.epa.gov/ region9/water/recycling/. Accessed: September 26, 2014. Sustainable Solu�ons for a Thirsty Planet. History. Available at: h�p://www.athirstyplanet.com/be_informed/what_is_water_reuse/his - tory. Accessed: October 3, 2014. Centers for Disease Control (CDC). Factsheet: Triclosan. Na�onal Biomonitoring Program. Last updated: July 23, 2013. Available at: h�p:// www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/Triclosan_FactSheet.html. Accessed: October 1, 2014. Wu X, et al. Treated Wastewater Irriga�on: Uptake of Pharmaceu�cal and Personal Care Products by Common Vegetabls under Field Con - di�ons. Environmental Science & Technology. 2014. Available at: h�p://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es502868k Knapp CW, et al. Evidence of increasing an�bio�c resistance gene abundances in archived soils since 1940. Environmental Science & Tech - nology. 2010; 44:580. Pauwels B and Verstraete W. The treatment of hospital wastewater: An appraisal. Journal of Water and Health. 2006;4:405. Available at: h�p://www.thewatchers.us/water/PauwelsTreatmento�ospitalWaterandHealth04-420405-416.pdf D’Abrosca B, et al. Phytotoxicity evalua�on of �ve pharmaceu�cal pollutants detected in surface water on germina�on and growth of cul�vated and spontaneous plants. Journal Environmental Science and Health, Part A: Toxic/Hazardous Substances and Environmental Engineering. 2008; 48:285-294. Available at: h�p://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10934520701792803?journalCode=lesa20#. VDMgVCtdWU4 Recycled Water Policy. h�p://www.waterboards.ca.gov/board_decisions/adopted_orders/resolu�ons/2013/rs2013_0003_a.pdf Na�onal Water Research Ins�tute. Final Report: Review of California’s Water Recycling Criteria for Agricultural Irriga�on. 2012. Avail - able at: h�p://www.waterboards.ca.gov/drinking_water/certlic/drinkingwater/documents/recharge/NWRI_AgPanelRepor�orCDPHFI - NAL-09-2012.pdf. Accessed: October 3, 2014. h�p://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/water_recycling_policy/docs/cec_monitoring_rpt.pdf U.S. Environmental Protec�on Agency (EPA). EPA 2012 Guidelines for Water Reuse. 2012. Available at: h�p://nepis.epa.gov/Adobe/PDF/ P100FS7K.pdf U.S. Environmental Protec�on Agency (EPA). Primer for Municipal Wastewater Treatment Systems. 2004. Available at: h�p://water.epa. gov/aboutow/owm/upload/2005_08_19_primer.pdf U.S. Environmental Protec�on Agency. Emerging Technologies for Wastewater Treatment and In-Plant Wet Weather Management. 2013. Available at: h�p://water.epa.gov/scitech/wastetech/upload/Emerging-Technologies-Report-2.pdf Kolpin D, et al. Pharmaceu�cals, Hormones, and Other Organic Wastewater Contaminants in U.S. Streams, 1999−2000:  A Na�onal Recon - naissance. Environmental Science & Technology. 2002;36:1202-1211. Available at: h�p://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es011055j Beyond Pes�cides. Atrazine Manufacturer to Pay $105 Million to Community Water Systems. Daily News Blog. Last updated: May 30, 2012. Available at: h�p://www.beyondpes�cides.org/dailynewsblog/?p=7464. Accessed on October 1, 2014. Pesticides and You A quarterly publication of Beyond Pesticides Vol. 34, No. 3 Fall 2014 Supplemental Page