Table 1.Characterization of arsenic hazard & exposure data in Louisiana ENVIRONMENTAL ARSENIC DATA DOMESTIC WELL AND WATER USE DATA BIOMONITORING DATA Data NAWQA SDWIS STORET NGS SONRIS Water Use Data Heavy Metal Surveillance Data Reference USGS, 201320 LDHH, 201221 EPA, 201222 USGS, 200423 LDNR, 201224 USGS, 200925 LDHH, 201326 Owner USGS (Federal) LA DHH- SDWP (State) EPA (Federal) USGS (Federal) LA DNR (State) USGS (Federal) LA DHH- SEET (State) Source Obtained through Data Sharing Agreement (Data available upon request) Internally housed in LDHH Sample Count 299 (LA groundwater samples) 6728 (raw source well samples) 166 (LA groundwater samples) 351 (LA soil/stream sediment samples) 77,036 (domestic private wells) 64 (parishes) 6629 (tested individuals) Purpose of System To evaluate the quality of potable groundwater throughout the US. To ensure that public water systems throughout the US are meeting To monitor the quality of groundwater across US. To monitor the quality of soil/sediment throughout the US. For general informational purposes only. To appraise effects of water use and plan for future use. To identify at-risk individuals and populations, monitor exposures over time and
monitoring, analytical, and treatment technique requirements. space and evaluate public health actions designed to reduce exposure. Temporal Coverage 1979-1997 1999-2009 1993-2005 1967-2007 (1978, 2000 and 2007 for LA data) 2012 1950-2010 2007-2012 Spatial Resolution Latitude / longitude Latitude / longitude Latitude / longitude Latitude / longitude Latitude / longitude Parish Patient Address Useful Data Elements Well depth; Station ID; Sample analyte, date, time, result, units; Reporting limit Sample analyte, date, result, units; Detection limit; System number; Source water type Sample analyte, date, time, result, units, media, and category (replicate or routine sample); Sample analyte, date, result, units, depth, media (soil, sediment); Hydrologic unit; Sample date; Owners name; Well use (domestic, commercial, Water type (domestic, industrial, agricultural, etc.); Domestic population; Sample analyte, date, result, units and media (blood, urine); Patient name, address,
(groundwater (GW), surface water (SW), etc.); Sample type (raw, treated) limit; Hydrologic unit; Monitoring purpose; Submitting organization; Sampling and analytical methods; Lab name; Personnel name Site description (meadow, woods, suburban, marsh, farm, etc.); Sample grain size ; Lab ID; Possible contamination source (farm, suburban, industry, sewage, mine, etc.), and potential (possible, definite, probable, etc.) public, livestock, etc.); Well status (active, abandoned, inactive, etc.); Well descriptors (depth; water level; casing material, aquifer) Domestic withdrawals (Mgal/day) by county age, sex, race Geographic Coverage 14% 83% 1.5% 25% ~ 50% 100% Testing varies by parish & test type
(% of parishes with n≥10) (% of parishes with n≥10) (% of parishes with n≥10) (% of parishes with n≥10) (estimate of the % of privately owned domestic wells registered with LDNR based on internal communications with LDNR) (% of parishes with water use measures) (blood vs. urine) 0.14% of 2012 LA population (4,602,134) were tested Target Population NA NA NA NA All well owners were required to register their wells after 1985. well owners, or well owners unaware of the law, may NA Tested population is not representative of the state population. Individuals may have been tested as part of routine
not be captured here. occupational health surveillance or due to a suspected exposure. Timeliness No updates Updated annually Updated approximately every three years Updates unknown Frequency of updates sporadic Updated every 5 years Real-time Other chemical data Volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nutrients, pesticides, trace elements Inorganic constituents, radionuclides, organic contaminants, disinfection byproducts, total Multiple chemicals and biological organisms Selenium, mercury, calcium, iron, sodium, potassium, manganese, gold, antimony, tellurium, thallium, tungsten Lead, cadmium, mercury
coliform, Domestic wells sampled were located primarily in rural areas. Data can be compared because of the consistency of the sampling design, sampling protocols, and water-quality analyses. Data evaluated here were drawn only from raw (untreated) source supply well water samples. There are no federal or state requirements for monitoring arsenic in source water. Data evaluated here included wells of various use: public supply, domestic, irrigation, industrial, observation, and monitor. Goal is to analyze at least one sample in every 289 km2 area by a single set of analytical methods. Covers 89% of US land area. Data evaluated here include only registered active domestic wells. Covers public supply, rural domestic home use), irrigation, livestock, aquaculture, industrial, mining, and thermoelectric power wells. No consumptive use data were collected for any of the categories. Data were obtained from multiple state, federal and local sources, and quality or accuracy of these data are Reporting began in 2006 after LA”s heavy metal rule required all arsenic laboratory tests results be reported to LDHH