Summary
The Riverkeeper Project was completed in April of 1998. During the course of the project monthly river water samples were taken at six sites on the Mississippi River between Baton Rouge and New Orleans. Each sample was tested for metals, trace elements, volatile organic chemicals, semi-volatile organic chemicals, organic pesticides, PCB’s (Polychlorinated Biphenyls), PCP’s (Polychlorinated Phenyls), odor, pH, turbidity, water hardness and dissolved oxygen. These samples showed alarmingly high levels of metals, volatile organics, semi-volatile organics and organic pesticides. Pesticides presented the largest health hazard, where maximum levels were found to be 60 to 360 times the EPA’s Maximum Contamination Level (MCL) for drinking water. Unfortunately, it was also found that with the exception of Jefferson Parish no other groups or state agencies were testing for pesticides in the Mississippi River. Volatile organics and metals levels were also significantly above the EPA’s MCL levels. A complete report was produced each month by the Riverkeeper Project detailing the results of the analyses
A survey was performed to determine what groups and organizations sample Mississippi River water in the industrial corridor for chemical or metals contamination, what information is obtained and what is done with the results. It was found that three different groups obtain water quality data that is reported to the public or the state. These are the eight members of the EWOCDS (Early Warning Organic Chemical Detection System) who report daily volatile organics information to the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ), the DEQ Water Lab which takes monthly volatile organic and dissolved metals, and the Jefferson Parish Water Quality Laboratory which performs weekly volatiles, pesticides and metals analyses.
The survey revealed a significant lack of semi-volatiles analysis, metals analysis, pesticides analysis, PCB analysis and PCP analysis by the public and state groups. This results from the lack of adequate chemical analysis equipment at many of the sampling sites. Specifically, most facilities lack mass spectrometers and rely solely on the use of gas chromatograms (GC’s), which are not as capable of performing these analyses. The DEQ water lab has two mass spectrometers used for testing river water, but not in the industrial corridor. Jefferson and Orleans Parishes do have mass spectrometers, but use these only on a limited basis.
Sadly, LEAN’s Riverkeeper program was found to be the only group that performs the broad range of water analysis needed to determine the extent of chemical and metal contamination in the industrial corridor of the Mississippi River. The lack of the state and the public water works ability to analyze riverwater for a broad range of chemical contaminants was very troubling given the high levels of contamination found during the Riverkeeper program.
An introduction to the Riverkeeper Project is given next, followed by a report on the activities performed and the results found. Information on the toxicity of the most common contaminants found during the project is also discussed.
Introduction
The Riverkeeper program has grown in scope over the course of the project. It now uses the resources of Southern University and the abilities of Southern graduate student Lewis Ross Brown, III, and undergraduate Shamira A. Jones to perform a thorough, monthly chemical analysis of Mississippi River water at six sites in the Mississippi River industrial corridor between Baton Rouge and New Orleans. The six sampling sights are listed in Table 1.
Table 1. List of sampling sites for the Riverkeeper project.
————————————————————-
(1) Baton Rouge @ the Centroplex from the levee in the Mississippi River
(2) Plaquemine from the levee in the Mississippi River
(3) Saint Gabriel from the levee in the Mississippi River
(4) South of Taft from the levee in the Mississippi River
(5) Destrahan from the levee in the Mississippi River
(6) New Orleans from the levee in the Mississippi River
The Riverkeeper Project has been quite successful and has shown that chemical contamination in the Mississippi River is worse than commonly thought. The project is fortunate to have access to sophisticated analytical equipment not available to the water works companies that take their drinking water from the Mississippi River. The use of this analytical equipment allows the Riverkeeper Project to obtain chemical contamination data that the state and the public don’t otherwise get. This data shows very high concentrations of volatile chemical compounds, metals, and pesticides in the Mississippi River.
LEAN is currently working to make this information available to the public by distributing it to affected water works and posting this report on LEAN’s internet web site for public access.
As part of the Riverkeeper Project LEAN conducted a survey to determine who analyzes riverwater samples, what the samples are analyzed for, how often the samples are taken and what happens to the results of the analysis. This information was used to determine where the Riverkeeper Project fits into the larger picture, how effective existing river analyses are, and what improvements can or need to be made in analyzing riverwater. The survey concluded that current riverwater analysis and drinking water analysis are seriously inadequate and that drinking Mississippi riverwater has the potential to be hazardous to the public health.
Methodology
Mississippi River samples were taken at six sites in the Louisiana industrial corridor from March 1997 through April, 1998. Analysis of Mississippi riverwater showed high levels of chemical and metal contamination. Table 2 gives the maximum levels of selected contaminants found in the water samples, the accepted drinking water standard for that contaminant and the groups other than the Riverkeeper Project that test for that contaminant.
Table 2. Maximum level of selected chemicals identified in the Riverkeeper Project. The table also gives the EPA’s Maximum Contamination Level (MCL) for drinking water. The labs that test for these chemicals are also listed, where J stands for Jefferson Parish’s single site near New Orleans, DEQ stands for two DEQ Water Lab sampling sites and EWOCDS stands for all eight EWOCDS sites.
————————————————————–
Contaminant - Max. Found - MCL - Labs testing for it.
———————————————
Volatile Organics (Parts per billion)
Benzene 500 5 J, DEQ, EWOCDS
Carbon Tet. 710 5 J, DEQ, EWOCDS
Chlorotoulenes 660 100 J, DEQ, EWOCDS
Styrene 710 100 J, DEQ, EWOCDS
Heavy Metals (Parts per billion)
Arsenic 550 50 J, DEQ
Chromium 520 100 J, DEQ
Cadmium 550 5 J, DEQ
Nickel 230 100 J, DEQ
Pesticides (Parts per billion)
Atrazine 780 3 J
Cyanazine 620 1 J
Toxaphene 560 3
Semi-Volatiles (Parts per billion)
Nitrobenzene 260 No MCL No other labs.
Carbazole 230 No MCL No other labs.
Table 2 shows the potential health hazards that could occur because of the high levels of contaminants found in the Mississippi River and the lack of adequate chemical sampling being done. Except for Jefferson Parish, the water works companies have no procedures for testing for these potentially dangerous contaminants in either the intake water or the drinking water. Jefferson Parish and the EWOCDS sites take daily samples, while the DEQ takes monthly samples.
LEAN conducted a survey to determine the extent to which Mississippi riverwater is being tested for chemical contamination. The eight people contacted in this survey are listed in Table 3, with their phone numbers and affiliations.
Table 3. People contacted in LEAN's Riverkeeper survey.
----------------------------------------------
Elaine Sorbet David Wagenecht Patrick Dupuy Wayne Koffskey Patty Lee Robert Duhe Newlin Webber Les Lemond Norbert Redmond |
DEQ Water Lab DEQ EWOCDS Coordinator Town of Lutcher Jefferson Parish Orleans Parish Grammercy Municipality St. James Parish Dept. of Health and Hospitals Donaldsonville Peoples Water Co. |
504-765-2405 504-765-2682 504-869-5635 504-838-4300 504-865-0420 504-869-8580 504-265-6008 504-568-5109 504-473-7603 |
The Dept. of Health and Hospitals is the governing body for drinking water in the state of Louisiana. They test drinking water quarterly, but not for chemical contamination. The EWOCDS (Early Warning Organic Chemical Detection System) system is the largest and best organized water testing system found. It consists of eight sites that test for volatile organics. Each site was given a gas chromatogram (GC), a computer and a modem by the state. Each site takes at least two samples a day and tests them for volatiles. These results are then sent via modem to the DEQ, where they are stored. The eight sites are Exxon in Baton Rouge, Dow Chemical, Vulcan Materials, Donaldsonville Peoples Water Co., St. James Parish which tests six times per day, Shell Norco, Monsanto in Luling which tests hourly, and Orleans Parish. This data constitutes a tremendous database of information. The information is only used to warn water works about chemical spills and is not used to inform the general public.
DEQ’s water lab has an extensive testing system, but DEQ only tests once a month and doesn’t have their equipment concentrated in the industrial corridor. DEQ has six sampling systems in place to test for volatiles and metals. These sample once a month and the data is stored at DEQ. Only two of the sampling systems are in the industrial corridor, one in St. Gabriel and one in Luling. Two of the sampling systems can test for semi-volatiles and pesticides, but they are not in the industrial corridor with the closest one being upstream in St. Francisville north of Baton Rouge. These two systems only test for a very limited number of currently used pesticides. DEQ officials stated that these two sites never find pesticides in the river. This is very curious given that the Riverkeeper Project consistently finds pesticides in the river and Jefferson Parish consistently finds pesticides in their treated drinking water.
Jefferson Parish has a good lab which takes 1 milliliter samples every minute. These are collected, mixed together and tested once a week for volatiles, metals and some pesticides. Unfortunately, the lab is at the downstream end of the industrial corridor and is of little help to the water works upstream.
The results of the survey were disappointing and showed the inadequacies of current sampling and reporting practices. It was found that significant progress should be made to ensure safe drinking water for those affected communities.
Results.
The following tests were performed on the samples taken from the six monitoring sites following sample collection and preservation:
(1) Test for pH levels of collected samples
(2) Test for turbidity of collected samples
(3) Test for measuring temporary water hardness of collected samples
(4) Test for the presence of the following metals in parts per billion:
(a) Lead and its metabolites
(b) Mercury and its metabolites
(5) Test for the presence of heavy metals in units of parts per million
(6) Test for the presence of Organic Chemicals which includes the following:
(a) Volatile Organic Chemical Contaminants
(b) Semi-volatile organic chemical contaminants
(c) Organic Pesticides
(7) Test for Biochemical Oxidation Demand levels
(8) Test for Dissolved Oxygen Concentrations
(9) Ammonia Test for each sampling station
Analysis for volatile organics were done using a Hewlett-Packard Gas Chromatograph. A Hewlett-Packard Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometer was used to analyze for semi-volatiles and pesticides. An ICP-(Inductively Coupled Plasma)/ MS-(Mass Spectrometry) instrument was used to analyze for metals.
Graphical results will be presented for the nine contaminants found to be most prevalent in the Mississippi River samples. These include four volatile organics, benzene, carbon tetrachloride, chlorotoluenes and styrene; two heavy metals, arsenic and chromium; the pesticides atrazine and cyanazine; and the semi-volatile compound nitrobenzne. The levels of contamination were found to peak in the summer months with virtually no measurable contamination in the colder months of November through February. As would be expected, the pesticides appeared in the early spring and persisted throughout the summer, coinciding with the southern and midwestern growing seasons.
Figures 1a and 1b. Figure 1a shows the amounts of benzene found in the river samples. Figure 1b shows the amounts of carbon tetrachloride.
Figure 1a shows the amount of benzene found in the riverwater samples. The graph shows that large amounts of benzene were found in the spring and summer months with no detectable amounts found in the winter. This pattern is typical of the all the chemicals and metals tested for. The maximum amount of benzene was found at testing station 4, south of Taft, and was 500 parts per billion. Benzene is a known carcinogen. The following excerpts from the New Jersey Health Fact Sheets indicate the extremely toxic nature of benzene. All chemical hazard information in this report was taken from New Jersey Health Fact Sheets.
Benzene CAS Number: 71-43-2
Cancer Hazard
* Benzene is a CARCINOGEN in humans. It has been shown to cause leukemia.
* Many scientists believe there is no safe level of exposure to a carcinogen.
Reproductive Hazard
* There is limited evidence that Benzene is a teratogen in animals. Until further testing has been done, it should be treated as a possible teratogen in humans.
Other Long Term Effects
* Repeated exposure can damage the blood forming organs causing a condition called aplastic anemia. This can cause death.
* Long term exposure may cause drying and scaling of the skin.
Figure 1b shows the amounts of carbon tetrachloride found in the samples. The maximum amount was found at station 6 in New Orleans, and was 700 parts per billion. Carbon tetrachloride is a probable carcinogen and a suspected reproductive toxin.
Carbon Tetrachloride CAS Number: 56-23-5
Cancer Hazard
* Carbon Tetrachloride is a PROBABLE CARCINOGEN in humans. There is some evidence that it causes liver cancer in humans and it has been shown to cause liver cancer in animals.
* Many scientists believe there is no safe level of exposure to a carcinogen. Such substances may also have the potential for causing reproductive damage in humans.
Reproductive Hazard
* There is limited evidence that Carbon Tetrachloride may damage the developing fetus.
Other Long Term Effects
* Repeated exposure can cause severe chronic liver and kidney damage.
* Repeated contact can cause thickening and cracking of the skin.
Figure 2a and 2b. Figure 2a shows the amounts of chlorotoluenes found in the samples. Figure 2b shows the amounts of styrene.
Figure 2a shows that large amounts of chlorotoluenes were found in the Mississippi River. The maximum amount was found at station 3 in St. Gabriel and was 710 parts per billion.
Figure 2b shows the amounts of styrene in the samples. The maximum amount was found at station 6 in New Orleans and was 400 parts per billion. Data from the New Jersey Health Fact Sheet for styrene shows that styrene is a suspected carcinogen and a probable reproductive toxin.
Styrene CAS Number: 100-42-5
Cancer Hazard
* Styrene Monomer causes MUTATIONS (genetic changes). Such chemicals may have a cancer risk, and in fact, there is limited evidence that it causes cancer of the lung in animals.
* Many scientists believe there is no safe level of exposure to a cancer causing agent. Such substances may also have the potential for causing reproductive damage in humans.
Reproductive Hazard
* Styrene Monomer may damage the developing fetus.
* There is limited evidence that it may decrease fertility in females.
Other Long Term Effects
* Repeated exposure can cause memory and concentration problems, difficulty in learning, slowed reflexes, and trouble with balancing.
* Styrene Monomer can cause headaches, drowsiness, numbness and stomach upset.
Figure 3a and 3b. Figure 3a shows the amounts of arsenic found in the samples, while Figure 3b shows the amounts of chromium found.
Figure 3 shows the amounts of arsenic and chromium found in the samples. Other metals found over 100 parts per billion were cadmium, nickel and mercury.
The largest amount of arsenic was found at Baton Rouge, station 1, and was 550 parts per billion. Arsenic is a know carcinogen and a probable reproductive toxin.
Arsenic CAS Number: 7440-38-2
Cancer Hazard
* Arsenic is a CARCINOGEN in humans. It has been shown to cause skin and lung cancer.
* Many scientists believe there is no safe level of exposure to a CARCINOGEN. Such substances may also have the potential for causing reproductive damage in humans.
Reproductive Hazard
* Arsenic may damage the developing fetus
* Arsenic should be handled as a potential teratogenic agent since some Arsenic compounds are known teratogens.
Other Long-Term Effects
* Long-term exposure can cause an ulcer or hole in the “bone” dividing the inner nose. Hoarseness and sore eyes also occur.
* High or repeated exposure can cause nerve damage, with “pins and needles,” burning, numbness, and later weakness of arms and legs.
* Repeated skin contact can cause thickened skin and/or patchy areas of darkening and loss of pigment. Some persons develop white lines on the nails.
* Repeated exposure can also damage the liver, cause narrowing of the blood vessels, or interfere with the bone marrow’s ability to make red blood cells.
Figure 3b shows the amounts of chromium found in samples. The maximum amount of chromium was found in New Orleans, station 6, and was 520 parts per billion. Chromium is a known carcinogen.
Chromium CAS Number: 7440-47-3
Cancer Hazard
* Chromium is a CANCER CAUSING AGENT in humans. It has been shown to cause lung and throat cancer.
* Many scientists believe there is no safe level of exposure to a cancer causing agent. Such substances may also have the potential for causing reproductive damage in humans.
Reproductive Hazard
* There is no evidence that Chromium adversely affects reproduction. This is based on test results presently available to the New Jersey Department of Health from published studies.
Other Long Term Effects
* Chromium ore has been reported to cause lung allergy. Once allergy develops, even small future exposures may cause cough, wheezing, or shortness of breath.
Figures 4a and 4b. Figure 4a shows the amounts of atrazine found in the samples, and Figure 4b the amounts of cyanazine.
Figure 4 shows the amounts of the pesticides atrazine and cyanazine found in the samples. Toxaphine was also found. The maximum amount of atrazine was found at Destrahan, station 5, and was 780 parts per billion. The maximum amount of cyanazine was found in New Orleans and was 620 parts per billion.
Figure 5 shows the amounts of nitrobenzene found. The semi-volatile compound carbazole was also found. The maximum amount of nitrobenzene was found at Plaquemine, station 2, and was 260 parts per billion. Nitrobenzene is a suspected reproductive toxin.
Figure 5. This shows the amounts of nitrobenzene found in the riverwater samples.
Nitrobenzene CAS Number: 98-95-3
Cancer Hazard
* According to the information presently available to the New Jersey Department of Health, Nitrobenzene has not been tested for its ability to cause cancer in animals.
Reproductive Hazard
* There is limited evidence that Nitrobenzene may damage the developing fetus and may damage the testes (male reproductive glands).
Other Long Term Effects
* Methemoglobinemia can occur gradually over weeks instead of all at once.
* Repeated exposure can cause liver damage.
* Exposure may affect your vision (acuity and contraction of fields).
* Nitrobenzene can damage the blood forming organs leading to abnormal blood cell count.
* Nitrobenzene may cause a skin allergy. If allergy develops, very low future exposures can cause itching and a skin rash.