Annual Report 2009 

EPA Regional Laboratories 

Advancing the Agency’s Science Agenda 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Regional Laboratory System 
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 i

Preface: List of US EPA Regional Laboratories ........................................................... ii

Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... iv

Section I – Overview ........................................................................................................ 1

Mission Statement ............................................................................................................................ 3

Section II – Support for EPA’s Strategic Goals ............................................................. 5

Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 6

Clean Air ........................................................................................................................................... 8

Clean and Safe Water ...................................................................................................................... 10

Land Preservation and Restoration .................................................................................................. 15

Healthy Communities and Ecosystems ............................................................................................ 18

Compliance and Environmental Stewardship ................................................................................... 20

Cross­Goal Strategies ...................................................................................................................... 21

Partnerships (state, local, tribal, etc.) ...................................................................................21

Expanding Scientific Knowledge and Developing

New Analytical Capabilities .................................................................................................. 22

Homeland Security .............................................................................................................. 25

Section III – Infrastructure and Looking to the Future ................................................. 29

Quality Systems ............................................................................................................................... 30

Sustainability .................................................................................................................................... 30

Identifying and Maximizing Efficiencies ............................................................................... 30

Environmental Management ............................................................................................... 31

Health and Safety ................................................................................................................ 31

Facilities Management ........................................................................................................ 31

Future Challenges ............................................................................................................................ 32

Meeting the Challenge ..................................................................................................................... 32

Appendix A ­ Regional Laboratories Core Capabilities ............................................... A­1

Appendix B ­ Abbreviations ........................................................................................... A­7

Table of Contents
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 ii

Region 1: New England Regional Laboratory

Investigation & Analysis Branch

Ernest Waterman, Director

waterman.ernest@epa.gov

11 Technology Drive

N. Chelmsford, MA 01863­2431

Phone: 617­918­8632

FAX: 617­918­8540

Region 2: Division of Environmental Science and

Assessment Laboratory Branch

John Bourbon, Acting Director

bourbon.john@epa.gov

2890 Woodbridge Ave.

Edison, NJ 08837

Phone: 732­321­4469

Fax: 732­321­6165

Region 3: Environmental Science Center Laboratory

Branch

Cynthia Caporale, Director

caporale.cynthia@epa.gov

701 Mapes Road

Ft. Meade, MD 20755­5350

Phone: 410­305­2732

Fax: 410­305­3095

Region 4: Analytical Support Branch

Gary Bennett, Director

bennett.gary@epa.gov

980 College Station Road

Athens, GA 30605­2720

Phone: 706­355­8551

Fax: 706­355­8803

Region 5: USEPA Region 5 Lab, Chicago Regional

Lab

Dennis Wesolowski, Director

wesolowski.dennis@epa.gov

536 S. Clark Street

Chicago, IL 60605

Phone: 312­353­9084

Fax: 312­886­2591

U.S. EPA Regional Laboratories
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 iii

Region 6: Environmental Services Branch

Houston Laboratory

David Neleigh, Director

neleigh.david@epa.gov

10625 Fallstone Rd.

Houston, TX 77099

Phone: 281­983­2100

Fax: 281­983­2124

Region 7: Regional Science & Technology Center

Michael Davis, Director,

Regional Laboratory

davis.michael@epa.gov

300 Minnesota Ave.

Kansas City, KS 66101

Phone: 913­551­5042

Fax: 913­551­8752

Region 8: USEPA Region 8 Lab

Mark Burkhardt, Director

burkhardt.mark@epa.gov

16194 West 45th Dr.

Golden, CO 80403

Phone: 303­312­7799

Fax: 303­312­7800

Region 9: USEPA Region 9 Lab

Brenda Bettencourt, Director

bettencourt.brenda@epa.gov

1337 S. 46th Street, Bldg. 201

Richmond, CA 94804­4698

Phone: 510­412­2300

Fax: 510­412­2302

Region 10: Manchester Environmental Laboratory

Barry Pepich, Director

pepich.barry@epa.gov

7411 Beach Drive East

Port Orchard, WA 98366

Phone: 360­871­8701

Fax: 360­871­8747

U.S. EPA Regional Laboratories (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 iv

Executive Summary

The Regional Laboratory System is an inter­dependent

network of the ten regional laboratories of the United

States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These

laboratories provide the analytical, technical and programmatic support that is critical to accomplishing the

Agency’s mission of protecting human health and the

environment. The regional laboratories ensure that analytical and technical expertise are available at the regional level and they are well positioned to rapidly

address the ever changing needs of a variety of environmental programs.

In Fiscal Year (FY) 2009, the regional laboratories performed 126,747 analyses which covered a full range of

routine and specialized chemical and biological testing

of air, water, soil, sediment, tissue and hazardous

waste. This analytical work supported activities related

to over 1,000 sites and projects associated with a wide

range of the Agency’s major programs.

The regional laboratories are also increasingly engaged

in EPA’s Emergency Response Program. In FY 2009,

the regional laboratories provided over 10,000 time­critical analyses associated with response to environmental

disasters, hazardous materials releases, priority contaminant removals, and inland oil spills that threatened

human health and/or the environment. This represents a

25 percent increase in analyses performed compared to

FY 2008.

The regional laboratories continued to play an increasing role with regard to EPA’s Strategic Plan for Homeland Security. In FY 2009, the regional laboratories

provided significant support for a number of Homeland

Security related efforts including pilot development of

fixed laboratory capability for chemical warfare agents

(CWA), response exercises and working with states to

encourage participation in the Environmental Response

Laboratory Network (ERLN). In addition, four methods

for CWA degradation compounds and threat agents

were developed in FY 2009 by a regional laboratory and

are being adopted as standards by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM).

In FY 2009, the laboratories increased their focus on internal and external partnerships. The labs participated

in numerous projects with EPA’s Office of Research and

Development (ORD) both as a result of requests for assistance and through ORD’s Regional Methods Program

(RMP) and ORD’s Regional Applied Research Effort

(RARE) Program. The regional labs are also supporting

communities through environmental outreach, equipment loan programs and volunteer monitoring efforts.

The regional laboratories continued to provide a variety

of field analytical support ranging from analyses performed on­site in mobile laboratories to screening techniques performed directly in the field. These services

provided real time data to improve the efficiency of field

operations and speed environmental decision making.

In FY 2009, the regional laboratories performed over

5,000 field analyses in support of 37 projects and sites

located throughout the country.

This annual report is divided into

three sections.

Section I, Overview: provides general information about the regional laboratories

and outlines the mission statement of the

Regional Laboratory System.

Section II, Support for EPA’s Strategic

Goals: summarizes the analyses provided for EPA’s programs. This section

also provides examples of support provided for each of the Agency’s strategic

goals including Clean Air; Clean and Safe

Water; Land Preservation and Restoration; Healthy Communities and Ecosystems; Compliance and Environmental

Stewardship; and various Cross Goal

Strategies including Homeland Security.

Section III, Infrastructure and Looking

to the Future: describes accomplishments associated with various aspects

that are fundamental to the operation of

the regional laboratories. These include

quality systems, environmental management, health and safety, and facilities

management. Section III concludes with

the identification of future challenges facing the regional laboratories and a discussion of how the regional laboratories will

meet them.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 1

SECTION I ­ Overview
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 2

The regional laboratories were primarily

established to provide analytical services and technical support to EPA’s regional offices. EPA’s regional offices

are responsible within their states for

the execution of the Agency's programs

and require ready access to analytical

services and technical support for various media program activities and management priorities. Analytical services

provided by the regional laboratories include a full spectrum of routine and special chemical and biological testing in

support of regional and national programs including air, water, pesticides,

toxics, hazardous waste, ambient monitoring, compliance monitoring, criminal

and civil enforcement, and special projects.

The regional laboratories also perform a long list of other core functions, including:

­ technical advice and assistance to state and

local agencies concerning analytical techniques, methodology and quality control;

­ field sampling support;

­ expert witness testimony;

­ training of program staff and other organizations;

­ on­site evaluation of drinking water laboratories;

­ audits of states' drinking water certification

programs;

­ promotion of inter­laboratory communication and emergency preparedness;

­ technical support to federal, state and local

laboratories;

­ technical support to internal and external organizations;

­ applied research for regional initiatives;

­ support national laboratory program initiatives;

­ ensure the quality of laboratory data generated in support of Agency programs;

­ provide benchmarks for environmental laboratories in areas such as analysis, pollution

prevention and environmental compliance.

Overview
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 3

The regional laboratories focus on the application of science policies and methods to support

regulatory and monitoring programs and special projects. This is done through direct implementation and through partnerships with a

variety of groups including state, local and

tribal governments, private industry, the academic community, EPA’s program offices,

EPA’s Office of Research and Development

(ORD) and the public. The regional laboratories are crucial to advancing the Agency's science agenda and have embraced the following

commitments to achieve this goal:

To integrate laboratory activities with those of field and quality assurance partners into a comprehensive, holistic, multi­media approach to

solving ecosystem­based environmental problems.

To provide scientific data of known quality to support Agency decisions

through partnerships with regional and national program offices, state,

local and tribal governments, academia, the private sector and the public.

To maintain a fully equipped laboratory to produce physical, chemical

and biological data of known quality to be used for environmental decision­making at all levels of government.

To maintain and enhance a technically and scientifically skilled, dedicated and diverse staff through the excellence of our recruitment, career development, training, management and leadership.

To advance the Agency's science agenda at the point where crucial decisions are made.

Mission Statement
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 5

SECTION II ­ Support for EPA’s Strategic

Goals
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA-270-R-10-001 6

Introduction

One of the primary functions of the regional

laboratories is to supply quality analytical data

to the Agency’s programs in support of a broad

range of regional initiatives that range from

routine monitoring to criminal enforcement.

The following charts represent the analyses

performed for various EPA programs in FY

2009.

A total of 126,747 analyses were performed in

support of EPA programs in FY 2009. An

analysis is one analytical test through one instrument. The sample is run through the entire

process and results are reported to the customer. For example, an analysis of a sample

for 24 metals is counted as one analysis. An

analysis of a sample for 65 volatile organic

compounds also counts as one analysis. An

analytical technique that averages two or three

“burns” for one result is counted as one analysis. While some of these analyses may take

only a few minutes; others may take several

hours or days to complete. It should also be

noted that the numbers reflected in the charts

do not include analyses performed for quality

assurance. Analyses for quality assurance

purposes comprise an additional 30 percent of

the laboratories’ analytical effort.

The regional laboratories are also increasingly

engaged in the Emergency Response Program. In FY 2009, the regional laboratories

provided over 10,000 time-critical analyses associated with response to environmental disasters, hazardous materials releases, priority

contaminant removals, and inland oil spills that

threatened human health and/or the environment.

In addition to fixed laboratory analytical support, the regional laboratories provide significant field sampling and field analytical support.

In FY 2009, over eight percent (10,851 field

analyses) of the total number of analyses performed were field analyses in support of a variety of EPA programs. There are many benefits

to providing analyses in the field including

quicker turnaround time for sample processing, real-time interaction between the analyst

and the field staff for data interpretation, and

acceleration of environmental decisions at the

site.

Counting analyses is one way to measure the

support that regional laboratories provide to

EPA’s various programs. Another way to look

at the contributions of regional laboratories to

1,539 627 427586 3,117 2,728

8,507 10,637

29,094

69,485

80000

70000

60000

50000

40000

30000

20000

10000

0 Superfund

Water

Emergency Response

Other

RCRA

Air

LUSTBrown eldsTSCA

Pesticides

FY 2009 US EPA Regional Laboratories

Analyses Provided by Program (126,747 Total Analyses)

Superfund

55%

Water

23%

Emergency

Response

8%

Other

7%

RCRA

2%

Air

2%

LUST

1%

Brown elds

1% TSCA

1%

Pesticides

1%

Analytical Support to EPA Programs - FY 2009
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

Introduction (cont.)

the work of the Agency is to look at the number

of projects and/or site evaluations that laboratory data supports. The number of projects

and sites supported by analytical data from the

regional laboratories are listed in the table

below by EPA program element. Multiple

rounds of analytical work for the same site represent just one site supported. More than one

round of work at the same site for a different

purpose or client may be counted as two sites

supported. Multiple sample site monitoring

projects like Regional Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program (REMAP) are

counted by water body. For example, all the

sampling locations in a single lake or stream

count as one site, but different lakes or

streams count as different sites even though it

may support only one project.

Projects and Sites Supported by EPA Regional Laboratories by Program Element

FY 2009

EPA PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER OF PROJECTS/SITES

(% OF TOTAL)

Air ­ Program Implementation (air monitoring, permits, etc.) 32 (3%)

Air – Enforcement 4 (<1%)

Water ­ Program Implementation (REMAP, TMDL studies, TOXNET, etc) 116 (10%)

Water – Enforcement 145 (13%)

Water ­ Drinking Water Compliance and Emergencies 115 (10%)

Superfund ­ Pre­remedial/Remedial 255 (23%)

Superfund – Removal 139 (13%)

Superfund ­ Emergency Response 61 (6%)

RCRA ­ Corrective Action 38 (3%)

RCRA ­ Enforcement 53 (5%)

Brownfields 10 (1%)

LUST 32 (3%)

Pesticides 20 (2%)

TSCA­ Remedial 6 (<1%)

TSCA – Enforcement 12 (1%)

Criminal Investigation 24 (2%)

Field Sampling (field sampling audits and events, etc,) 37 (3%)

Other 10 (1%)

TOTAL 1109

EPA­270­R­10­001 7
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 8

Through­the­Probe (TTP) Audit System:

The Through­The­Probe audit system provides performance audits at state and local ambient air monitoring

stations. In FY 2009, the regional laboratories supported

the completion of nearly 250 through­the­probe audits.

These performance audits ensure the validity of the ambient air quality monitoring data.

Standard Reference Photometer (SRP) Program:

Standard reference photometers (SRPs) are used to ensure that the national network of ozone ambient monitors is accurately measuring ozone concentrations.

Eight regional laboratories maintain SRPs and provide

verification or certification of primary and transfer ozone

standards from state, local and tribal organizations.

Goal 1: Clean Air

The regional laboratories actively support the objectives

of the Agency’s air goals through a variety of activities.

These activities include technical support and training,

support for air monitoring and air monitoring quality assurance, laboratory support for various air toxics assessments, laboratory support for numerous other local

projects that address specific community risks, and

method development.

Support for Ambient Air Monitoring Quality

Assurance

EPA has a number of programs in place to ensure that

ambient air monitoring data are of a quality that meets

the requirements for informed decision making. The regional labs support the following air monitoring quality

assurance programs by providing management and

technical oversight of contractors, lab space for equipment storage and calibration, field and laboratory work

and audits, and logistical support.

PM 2.5 Performance Evaluation Program (PEP):

The goal of the PEP is to evaluate total measurement

system bias of the PM 2.5 monitoring network. The laboratory component of the program includes particulate

matter (PM) filter handling, inspection, equilibration, and

weighing; data entry, validation, management and distribution to client Regions; as well as filter archival and

data submittal to the Air Quality System (AQS). The PM

filter weighing lab is located at the regional lab in Region

4. In FY 2009, the laboratory processed and weighed

1,199 filters from three state agencies, one tribal nation

and all ten EPA Regions. The lab also reviewed the data

for 842 PM2.5 PEP audits and evaluated 829 individual

audits for submittal to EPA’s national ambient air database. The other regional laboratories also provided

support for PEP through performance evaluation audits,

quality assurance collocations and PEP audits. In FY

2009, the regional laboratories supported the completion of nearly 400 PM2.5 PEP audits. Regional laboratory staff also served as trainers at the national training

class for the PM2.5 PEP program.

Protect and improve the air so it is healthy to breathe and

risks to human health and the environment are reduced.

Reduce greenhouse gas intensity by enhancing partnerships with businesses and other sectors.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 9

Other Air Projects

Emissions Testing:

As Clean Air Act (CAA) hazardous air pollutant standards are implemented over time and new source types

become subject to regulation, new sampling and analytical challenges arise. In 2009 one regional lab worked

with their regional enforcement program to determine

how to representatively sample industrial laundry facilities and foam product manufacturers. The lab identified

an appropriate analytical method for foam product sampling to determine source potential. Sampling and analysis of foam products is a significant challenge as the

emissions from the formed foam product are shape dependent and change as the product cures. As a result,

efforts to define source potential require repeated sampling over time for a representative variety of products at

any given facility.

Analysis of Air Filters for Metals:

Development of the capability to analyze air filters for

metal by Inductively Coupled Plasma/Mass Spectrometry (ICP/MS) was completed in order to meet an InterTribal Council's data quality objectives. Since holding

times were not an issue, the entire three year backlog of

samples was prepared and analyzed during FY 2009.

Two chemists, including one Federal Career Intern and

one mass spectroscopy expert were hired and trained to

use this instrument. They were able to receive training

from the instrument vendor and clear the backlog in less

than three months.

Air Response Team:

In FY 2009, staff from one regional laboratory joined regional staff from the Air Program and the Emergency

Response Program to create an Air Response Team.

This team will provide air expertise and support to OnScene Coordinators or incident command during a large

air release incident. The initial goal of the newly formed

team is to develop response coordination protocols and

determine the equipment and personnel available in the

Region to respond to various kinds of air emergencies.

The team will also identify its current strengths and gaps

by conducting table­top exercises using different air incident scenarios.

Goal 1: Clean Air (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 10

EPA’s goals for water comprise a variety of strategic targets that include: increasing compliance with drinking

water standards, reducing pollution in waters with fish

advisories, restoring polluted waters to allow for safe

swimming, improving the quality of rivers, lakes, and

streams on a watershed basis, improving coastal and

ocean water quality and strengthening water quality

monitoring and assessment.

The regional laboratories play an important part in protecting and restoring the nation’s water resources by

providing key data so that the regions and their partners

have the information they need to target actions to protect human health and aquatic ecosystems more efficiently. In addition, the regional laboratories support

the Agency’s water goals by providing technical and regulatory support to drinking water laboratories, by providing training and support for water quality monitoring

efforts, and by providing analytical support for various

projects across the country. Some of the areas where

the regional laboratories provide support for the

Agency’s water goals are described below.

Drinking Water Laboratory Certification

Laboratories that analyze drinking water samples are required by EPA to be certified by an approved certifying

authority. EPA regional laboratory personnel who are

trained as laboratory certification officers conduct onsite evaluations of drinking water laboratories operated

by states and tribal communities. The regional laboratory certification officers also perform audits of states'

certification programs to ensure that all laboratories analyzing drinking water samples are following approved

methods as mandated by EPA's National Primary Drinking Water Regulations. Ultimately, the effort of the laboratory certification officers ensures that public drinking

water is free from harmful contaminants.

In FY 2009, the regional laboratories performed 43 evaluations and audits related to drinking water laboratory

certification. These included both on­site evaluations of

drinking water laboratories operated by state and tribal

communities and on­site audits of states’ drinking water

certification program.

Ensure drinking water is safe. Restore and maintain

oceans, watersheds, and their aquatic ecosystems to protect human health, support economic and recreational activities, and provide healthy habitat for fish, plants, and

wildlife.

Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water

Water Quality Assessment and Total

Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Program

Support

Water quality monitoring and assessment provides information that is crucial for management of our water resources. Water quality data are used to characterize

waters, identify trends over time, identify emerging problems, determine whether pollution control programs are

working, and to help direct pollution control efforts to

where they are most needed.

Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) is a tool for implementing water quality standards and is based on the relationship between pollution sources and in­stream

water quality conditions. Water quality standards are set

by States, Territories, and Tribes. They identify the uses

for each body of water, for example, drinking water supply, contact recreation (swimming), and aquatic life support (fishing), and the scientific criteria to support that

use. The TMDL establishes the allowable loadings or

other quantifiable parameters for a body of water and
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 11

thereby provides the basis to establish water qualitybased controls.

Regional laboratories provide substantial analytical support for water quality assessments of and TMDL development for water bodies throughout the country.

Remote Sensing Survey of Lakes:

Fifty­five lakes were overflown by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) remote sensing

aircraft in a collaborative effort between NASA and scientists from an EPA regional laboratory and ORD. The

flyover was part of a larger effort looking into the effects

of nitrogen and phosphorus nutrient loading to aquatic

systems across large geographic areas. Monitoring of

these nutrients is critical for tracking and managing suspect accelerated eutrophication, potentially toxic harmful

algal blooms (HABs), decreasing biodiversity, and overall waterbody condition. Overflights were simultaneously ground­truthed by state and citizen volunteers with

the collection of water samples for comparing hyperspectral signatures to levels of chlorophyll­a, current

lake trophic status, presence of microcystin (potentially

toxic algae), water transparency, and nutrient loading.

These efforts are helping to establish aircraft and sitebased remote sensing technology as efficient and costeffective water quality monitoring tools that are useful

over broad geographic areas.

Lake Attitash Case Study:

As part of a regionwide lakes and ponds project, this

unique lake was selected as a testing ground for the development of new field monitoring methods. This project is also an example of how collaborative networking

can succeed, and a showcase for the importance of understanding ecosystem services and how they affect

the well­being of a community. A holistic approach was

undertaken by laboratory staff to collaborate with all

stakeholders to address the many issues associated

with this lake. Scientists from the regional laboratory

conducted fish population and planktonic surveys to determine trophic balance and ecosystem health. The

lake has been recognized within the region as a hotspot

for mercury deposition and bioaccumulation in fish tissue. The lake is a secondary public water supply and in

2009 suffered its first harmful algal bloom of toxic

cyanobacteria at levels almost four times the state

health advisory threshold. Lakeshore development and

agricultural sources appeared to be likely sources of

contamination. Laboratory field staff worked with homeowners and farmers to mitigate discharges into the waterbody through best management practices and new

technologies. The lake suffers from excessive aquatic

plant growth and encroaching invasive plants, with

water transparency being less than half a meter.

Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water (cont.)

Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site (ODMDS)

Survey:

Significant analytical support was provided for the

Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site (ODMDS) Survey including analyses for polychlorinated biphenyls

(PCBs), pesticides, semi­volatile organics, and metals

for both sediment and water samples. This project was

conducted off the Florida coast in order to characterize

the chemical, physical, and biological status of sediment

and the water column within, and surrounding the

ODMDS. Most of the dredged material is deposited at

sites EPA specifically designates under Section 102 of

the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act

(MPRSA). All ocean dumping sites are required to have

a site management and monitoring plan (SMMP). Appropriate monitoring of ocean dumping sites is aimed at

assuring that disposal activities will not unreasonably

degrade or endanger human health, welfare, or the marine environment. The data from this survey will be

used to evaluate changes in environmental conditions

Lab scientists employed low frequency sonar technology to map bottom plant species distributions and

depths of nutrient enriched sediments. This new technological information will be used to determine treatment feasibility options for the lake. Public outreach

efforts through town meetings and lake association presentations have motivated people to take a more active

role in protecting and enhancing the aquatic resources

in their communities.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 12

Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water (cont.)

Water by analyzing samples from these vessels. Because of their unique diverse capability and depth of capacity the regional laboratories were well positioned to

accommodate the significant analytical demand of this

project. In addition to analytical support, the regional

laboratories provided critical technical guidance with regards to sample volume, method selection and reporting

limits. A total of 15 analytical parameters were measured to characterize the vessel discharge. These included microbiological contaminants, volatile and

semi­volatile organics, endocrine disrupting alkylphenols, metals, nutrients, and other physicochemical parameters. Target contaminants varied based on the

vessel class and the type of discharge within that class.

Over 1500 analyses were required to meet the objectives of this project.

Advanced Integrated Wastewater Pond System

Study:

Regional laboratory staff provided sampling and analytical support for the evaluation of an Advanced Integrated

Wastewater Pond System. Advanced Integrated Wastewater Pond Systems (AIWPS) use a series of ponds for

domestic wastewater treatment. AIWPS have numerous benefits including design and operational simplicity,

low energy use and low maintenance because of limited

mechanical equipment and minimal sludge production.

Over a three week period, the regional lab collected and

analyzed samples for organics: biological oxygen demand (BOD), total dissolved solids/total suspended

solids, nutrients, chlorophyll, coliform bacteria (total & E.

coli), and other physical/water quality measurements.

The study was conducted in order to provide up­to­date

performance data for this method for treating domestic

wastewater.

and will allow evaluation of specific pollutant concentrations at the site.

TMDL Support:

Support for the development of mercury, pesticide and

nutrient TMDLs was provided at ten water bodies within

a single water basin. Lab staff collected sediment and

water samples at multiple locations to provide data to

support TMDL listings and modeling. Lab staff also

trained representatives from the Regional Water Division and the Regional Water Quality Control Board on a

variety of sampling procedures.

Special Water Projects in FY 2009

Examples of some activities and projects supporting a

variety of water related strategic goals in FY 2009 are

listed here.

River Dye Studies:

The regional lab conducts several dye tracer studies annually to support the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program, as well as the states’

shellfish management programs. Four major dye studies were conducted in 2009. In April, regional lab staff

joined representatives from the state and the U.S. Food

and Drug Administration to conduct a dye study at a

wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). The purpose of

the study was to determine how the effluent from the

wastewater treatment plant flows into a nearby water

body. Crews were able to obtain data for NPDES permitting as well as shellfish waters closures. Another

study was conducted in May for the beaches and shellfish programs in a second state in the region to determine the extent and effect of flows on a nearby state

park. Additional dye studies were conducted to provide

data for NPDES permitting and shellfish water classification. Some of this data will be used to determine if

moving the outfall associated with a WWTP is practical.

EPA Study of Discharges from Commercial Fishing

Vessels and Other Non­recreational Vessels:

The EPA was mandated by Congress to conduct a study

of discharges of effluent from marine engines, discharges of laundry, shower, and galley sink wastes, and

other discharges incidental to the normal operation of

vessels, to evaluate the potential effects of the discharges, including whether the discharges posed a risk

to human health, welfare, or the environment, and the

nature of those risks and the benefits of reducing those

discharges. The vessels, located throughout the United

States, included commercial fishing vessels and other

non­recreational vessels less than 79 feet in length.

Three regional laboratories assisted EPA’s Office of
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 13

Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water (cont.)

Additionally, the data will be used to evaluate the feasibility of using the AIWPS to treat wastewater in treatment plants along the U.S.­Mexico border.

Adverse Health Effects Associated With River Use:

For well over a decade, windsurfers on one major river

in the Pacific Northwest have noted adverse health effects after river exposure, including congested sinuses

and chronic runny nose, ear and eye infections, sore

throats, skin rashes, prolonged healing of wounds, burning, red, and itchy eyes, diarrhea, and fever. The riverkeeper organization collaborated with EPA to test water

quality for potential causes of these symptoms. These

tests provided a baseline of biological and chemical

contaminants present in the river gorge. In conjunction

with this effort, the regional laboratory analyzed over

400 samples from 29 recreational sites for microbiological and organic contaminants. Results indicate that

some of the contaminants detected in the river may

cause one or more of the symptoms described as “river

nose”; however, more tests are needed to define their

distribution and their relationships to the health of river

users.

for metals, mercury, organo­chloride pesticides, polyaromatic hydrocarbons, and PCB Aroclors. A second regional laboratory provided analysis for total organic

carbon.

Algal Nutrient Utilization Study:

The regional lab analyzed over 500 river water samples

during the summer for microcystin, a blue­green algae

toxin. Summertime blooms of the toxin­producing blue

green algae Microcystis can produce toxin levels over

1,000 times the World Health Organization (WHO)­

based health recommendation for human contact. Results from the analyses are being used by decision

makers to support public health postings along the river.

In addition to analyzing river samples for the toxin, microcystin, the lab is supporting research efforts to define

the limiting nutrients critical to algae growth in the system.

Monitoring at a National Marine Sanctuary:

Laboratory staff provided support to the Wetlands Program by collecting and analyzing sediment samples at a

national marine sanctuary. The project provided monitoring of the marine benthic biological community and

sediment chemistry in areas of grey whale feeding

grounds. The laboratory prepared all marine macroinvertebrate specimens for taxonomic analysis. The primary regional laboratory provided analysis of sediments

Concentrated Animal Feedlot Operations (CAFO)

Enforcement:

In support of the Water Program, the regional lab deployed and maintained a remote communication­capable water quality data system downstream of

concentrated animal feedlot operations. The water

quality monitoring system measures pH, nitrate, ammonia, chloride, turbidity, temperature, oxidation­reduction

potential, specific conductance, and depth on an hourly

basis. The system provides water quality data via a cell

phone modem that was available on the internet to

CAFO enforcement personnel. f the system detects

changes in water quality parameters, consistent with an

unauthorized discharge, personnel are deployed to establish the source of the discharge and to collect addi­
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 14

Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water (cont.)

tional confirmatory samples. Since the system monitors

continuously, this deployment is designed as a proof of

concept for enhancing EPA’s ability to detect and act

upon such discharge events. In fact, less than 24 hours

after the system was deployed, a discharge was detected and lab staff informed the appropriate enforcement agency who confirmed that an illegal discharge

was in progress.

Study of Mercury and PCBs in Seafood:

The Office of Research and Development joined a regional laboratory to sponsor a study to assess mercury

and PCB congener levels in composite samples from

seafood species most commonly consumed by residents. The fish market that was selected for sample collection receives fish from all over the world and is the

largest seafood distributor to retailers in the United

States. The regional laboratory processed nearly 300

samples for mercury and nearly 50 samples for PCB

congeners. The laboratory tested and incorporated

changes to their sample preparation procedures in order

to enhance accuracy for both the required analytes in

fish tissue. Traditional environmental methods for fish

tissue typically yield accuracy levels of 50 to 75 percent.

The modifications resulted in accuracy levels of approximately 90 percent for both mercury and PCB congeners.

Ocean Survey Support on the West Coast:

EPA’s Ocean Survey Vessel BOLD spent most of the

year 2008 monitoring and assessing the health of our

oceans and West Coast waters. The work on the BOLD

focused on performing the required periodic assessment

of open­water dredged material disposal sites to ensure

their consistency with regulatory requirements. The

crew supported by regional laboratory staff, conducted

sonar surveys and took numerous samples of water and

mud from the bottom of disposal sites. In addition, the

crew investigated low levels of dissolved oxygen that

have been reported in waters on the West Coast. In

2009, two regional laboratories conducted several hundred sample analyses of the samples collected during

the voyage. Samples were analyzed for mercury, trace

metal contaminants, semi­volatile organics, butyl tins,

pesticides, and total organic carbon. In addition, marine

organisms were identified and counted to see if their

numbers and diversity indicate a healthy bottom habitat.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 15

Preserve and restore the land by using innovative waste

management practices and cleaning up contaminated properties to reduce risks posed by releases of harmful

substances.

Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund) and

the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)

provide the legal basis for EPA’s efforts to preserve and

restore land using the most effective waste management and cleanup methods available.

In FY 2009, over 55 percent of the analyses performed

by the regional laboratories supported the cleanup of

uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous waste sites associated with the Superfund program. While EPA’s Contract Laboratory Program performs many of the routine

analyses associated with the Superfund program, the

regional laboratories focus on more specialized analyses and provide a variety of field support and mobile lab

support to the program.

In addition, the regional laboratories provided nearly

3,000 analyses to address hazardous and non­hazardous waste issues associated with the RCRA program

and over 1,500 analyses to address risks associated

with leaking underground storage tanks.

Applied Research and Method

Development

The regional laboratories are in a unique position to

meet the ever changing analytical needs of the Superfund and RCRA programs. Oftentimes, the regional laboratories are called upon to develop or refine methods

to meet project specific data quality objectives. Methods are often refined or enhanced to include new pollutants of concern. In addition, analytical procedures are

often revised to achieve lower detection limits or to accommodate different and challenging matrices. An example is described below:

Passive Diffusion Sampling of Volatiles in

Groundwater:

Regional labs help spread the use of new methods and

technologies ­ bridging the gap between research and

commercial availability. One region provides unique expertise in passive diffusion sampling of volatiles in

groundwater. A passive diffusion sampler consists of a

volume of de­ionized (DI) water sealed in a permeable

membrane that is deployed in a well for at least two

weeks to equilibrate with ambient water quality by diffusion of contaminants across the membrane. After retrieval the sampler is cut open and the sample is

carefully decanted into normal volatile organic analytes

(VOA) vials and analyzed by EPA method 8260. This

technique is an alternative to the traditional method that

requires purging water from a well prior to sampling.

This sample technique allows the deployment of multiple samplers in a single well to provide a vertical profile

of the groundwater. In 2009, regional laboratory staff

provided support to allow for the use of this technique at

two Superfund sites. Use of this technique assisted with

defining the complicated groundwater flow regimes at

the two sites.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 16

Superfund and RCRA Projects

Examples of some activities and projects supporting a

variety of Superfund and RCRA projects in FY 2009 are:

Superfund Sites Targeted for Federal Stimulus

Funds:

In 2009, EPA announced that $528 million in federal

economic stimulus funding would be used to help clean

up the sites in 28 states. In association with the cleanup of these sites, the regional laboratories have conducted numerous organic and inorganic analyses of soil

and groundwater to provide crucial data to site program

officers. One example is a 15 acre site in a rural area

where the primary sources of drinking water are private

and community wells. From 1970 to 1995, the owner of

the site pumped residential, commercial and industrial

septic wastes and sludges; installed and repaired septic

tanks; and provided a variety of industrial waste removal

services. Eight to ten unlined lagoons were used to

hold the septic wastes. The lagoon sludges were excavated and piled adjacent to the lagoon area. The site’s

affected media are soil and ground water. Vanadium is

the most significant soil contaminant. Ground water

contaminants above the maximum contaminant level in

the monitoring wells are arsenic, manganese, iron,

vanadium and 1,4 dichlorobenzene.

Analysis for PCBs Associated with Electrical

Transformer Manufacturing:

Unusually quick turn­around was provided for a large

number of samples from a Superfund site associated

with an abandoned electrical transformer manufacturing, recycling and repair facility. It was determined that

soils to a depth of 15 feet were contaminated with PCBs

at levels potentially harmful to human health. Over a two

month period, approximately 2000 soil samples were

analyzed with preliminary results available in 24 hours

and final, reviewed results available in seven days. The

rapid turnaround was critical for verifying that residential

areas had been cleaned up to appropriate safe levels

while the remediation contractor was still on site. The

ability to get quick confirmation that the clean up goals

had been met resulted in significant savings to the Superfund program.

Post­Remedial Monitoring of Marine Sediment

Associated with a Superfund Site:

Support was provided for post­remedial monitoring at a

Superfund site. The site was previously used to

process and package pesticides with Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) accounting for the majority of its

operations. These activities resulted in the contamination of upland soils and marine sediment in the

adjacent waterways. Water samples were collected

using the regional lab's pontoon boat and samples were

sent to researchers at The Massachusetts Institute of

Technology for DDT analysis. In addition, transplanted

mussels and semi­permeable membrane samplers were

deployed at nine stations throughout the adjacent harbor to characterize pollutant flux and provide composite

modeling of water column pollutant loads.

Emergency Response

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency plays a leadership role in the national system to respond to environmental disasters, hazardous materials releases,

time­critical removals, and inland oil spills that threaten

human health and/or the environment. The regional laboratories have provided valuable analytical support to a

variety of emergency response projects including:

Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration (cont.)

Drinking Water Contamination Associated with

Electroplating Facility:

For multiple sampling events, a regional laboratory provided 72 hour turnaround for volatile compound analyses in private drinking water well samples. The wells are

near a former electroplating facility which operated from

the late 1950s to the mid 1980s. The chemical compound trichloroethene (TCE) was used at the facility to

clean and/or degrease metal objects prior to electroplating. The analyses showed TCE levels in some wells

were above the Safe Drinking Water Act maximum contaminant level for TCE and triggered EPA’s Emergency

Response Program to provide bottled water to affected

residents.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 17

Elevated Arsenic and Lead in Drinking Water:

As part of an investigation of soil and water contamination associated with a former fruit orchard, EPA conducted extensive sampling and analysis of soil and

groundwater around the site. Elevated levels of arsenic

and lead in soil and drinking water had been observed.

The regional laboratory provided analyses of 410 samples to support the removal action at this site. The lab

provided data that was crucial to this effort within a short

turnaround time of 96 hours.

Liquid Fertilizer Spill:

Analytical support was provided in the aftermath of the

collapse of a storage tank at a petroleum and petroleum

products facility. The storage tank collapse resulted in a

two million gallon spill of liquid fertilizer some of which

made its way to a nearby river and a nearby bay. Preliminary analytical results were provided within three to

48 hours of sample receipt. The rapid turnaround allowed on­scene coordinators to clear residences

quickly, allowing displaced homeowners to return to

their homes.

Coal Ash Spill:

The regional laboratory provided 48 hour turnaround for

metals analyses of public and private drinking water

samples from a location near the site of a massive coal

ash spill from a surface water impoundment at a coal

fired power plant. Officials estimated that about 5.4 million cubic yards of ash escaped from the site. This ash

and water spread over a half square mile area adjacent

to the plant. Some flowed into a nearby river associated

with a water reservoir. Ash also covered portions of

nearby roads and the railroad tracks which supplied coal

to the plant. Laboratory testing indicated that the regulated metals were not above the maximum contaminant

levels for drinking water specified in the Safe Drinking

Water Act.

Emergency Response Exercise:

An emergency response exercise was conducted by a

regional office and included participation by state and

local agencies along with EPA staff from the regional lab

and the Superfund and Drinking Water programs. The

regional mobile laboratory was deployed for this exercise and performed field testing on samples collected for

total coliforms (by Colilert), volatile organic compounds

(by Gas Chromatography­Mass Spectrometry), metals

(by x­ray fluorescence), and pH. A new field­portable

Laboratory Information Management System (LIMS)

database was tested to provide electronic as well as

hardcopy reports to the Environmental Unit (EU) Coordinator and other field staff. The field portable LIMS database was also instrumental in porting the data back to

the primary LIMS database at the fixed laboratory.

Coordination of various units in the Incident Command

System (ICS) was tested as well as various forms of

communication (cell, satellite, and email).

RadNet Deployment Training and Exercise:

RadNet is a national network of both fixed and deployable monitors for the collection of air, precipitation,

drinking water, and milk samples for analysis of radioactivity. In FY 2009, refresher training for Regional OnScene Coordinators and Regional Support Corps

members was hosted by a regional laboratory. The

focus of the training was deployment of portable radiation sensors provided by EPA’s Office of Radiation and

Indoor Air. Participants practiced assembly of the

portable devices and participated in an exercise in

which the campus around the regional lab was used to

practice the application of deployment protocols for the

evaluation of potential sites. This training provided essential practice to the Regional Support Corps who

would be responsible for deploying these monitors in

case of a radiological release.

Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

To protect, sustain, and restore communities and

ecosystems, EPA focuses on the management of environmental risks. Environmental risks include those presented by pesticides and chemicals, threats to the

nation’s watersheds, and hazards posed by pollutants

entering homes, schools, workplaces and neighborhoods.

Communities

EPA estimates that there are more than 450,000 Brownfields in the United States. Brownfields include abandoned industrial and commercial properties, former

mining sites and sites contaminated with a hazardous

substance or pollutant of concern. EPA's Brownfields

Program is designed to empower states, communities,

and other stakeholders to inventory, assess, clean up,

and redevelop potentially contaminated lands in order to

recreate these lands into vital, functioning parts of their

communities. In FY 2009, the regional laboratories performed over 900 analyses in support of the EPA’s

Brownfields Program.

The regional laboratories also support Agency efforts to

address community­based environmental and public

health issues including:

Testing of Soils for Lead and Arsenic in

Communities:

Surface soil contamination around older homes, caused

by the historical use of lead based paints and arsenic

based pesticides, is a common problem, but is not a

well characterized problem in any given neighborhood.

One region has put their fixed lab and field x­ray fluorescence (XRF) capability at the disposal of a number of

community groups and a program run by a state university to test soil for planned and existing community and

residential gardens. In 2009 the region tested over 400

soil samples for this purpose.

Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems

Protect, sustain, or restore the health of people, communities and ecosystems using integrated and comprehensive

approaches and partnerships.

Key components of this goal include:

Directing risk management effort towards the

greatest threats to communities and the most sensitive populations, including children, the elderly,

Native Americans, and residents of areas that may

be disproportionately exposed to environmental

hazards;

Protecting critical ecosystems such as wetlands

and estuaries;

Collaborating with states and others on efforts to

protect resources such as the Great Lakes,

Chesapeake Bay and the Gulf of Mexico.

Water Quality Monitoring Equipment Loan Program:

Two regional laboratories currently operate water quality

equipment loan programs for citizen volunteer organizations in their Regions. The equipment loaned to community groups is used to measure water flow, dissolved

oxygen, pH, temperature, salinity, macro invertebrate

communities, and positioning data for map­making. The

loans empower citizen monitoring organizations to collect defensible data for monitoring water quality using

high quality equipment.

EPA­930­R­09­001 18
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 19

Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems (cont.)

Volunteer water monitors use the data to help government agencies identify and restore water quality and become advocates for their watersheds.

Volunteer and Citizen Monitoring Support:

Regional laboratories often provide analytical support to

volunteer and citizen monitoring groups. For example,

support was provided to citizen monitoring groups for

the analysis of water samples for total coliforms, E. coli,

and Enterococcus. During dry and rainy seasons, volunteers collect weekly samples for five weeks from up to

ten sites per creek or watershed. The regional lab provides data to the citizen monitoring groups who compare results to state or federal water quality standards

for bacteria. The results have shown that sewage leaks

or spills are readily apparent from E. coli analyses. Absence of bacteria has also led to detection of residual

chlorine from drinking water leaks. Bacterial data have

allowed volunteers in several communities to work

closely with local governments to mitigate sewer leaks

or inform the public about bacterial contamination in

their watersheds.

Ecosystems

EPA’s strategies to protect, sustain, and restore the

health of natural habitats and ecosystems include identifying and evaluating problem areas and developing

tools to address these problems. One example of an

ecosystem related project is described below.

PCB Congener Monitoring of the Lake Ontario

Watershed:

Analytical support for regular monitoring of tributaries of

the Lake Ontario Watershed was provided. The purpose

of this program is to develop reliable estimates of loadings of critical pollutants to the Lake in order to provide

accurate information for updates of the Lake­wide Management Plan. Data from the program are also shared

with modelers for use with the Lake Ontario Mass Balance Model, and with the State, who can use it to supplement their ambient data for 303(d) reporting. The

regional laboratory provides analysis of all 209 PCB

Congeners at the part per quadrillion (ppq) level. The

laboratory uses a modified version of EPA Method

1668A, published by the Office of Water in December,

1999. This method uses a high resolution gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer and identifies pollutants

at the trace levels required by the Lake Ontario Watershed Monitoring Program.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 20

Compliance with and enforcement of environmental

laws are key elements of EPA’s goal to improve environmental performance. The regional laboratories provide

significant technical and analytical support to both regional and national civil enforcement cases including the

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

(NPDES) Permit Program. In addition, regional labs

support RCRA site investigations for both corrective action and enforcement programs. In 2009, the regional

laboratories provided analyses of over 1,200 samples to

support a variety of criminal enforcement actions. Some

of the highlights of regional laboratory support for compliance assistance, civil enforcement and criminal enforcement are listed below.

RCRA Enforcement Support:

Verifying compliance at a commercial hazardous waste

treatment, storage, and disposal facility requires representative sampling of widely varied waste streams for a

broad spectrum of target analytes, often contained in

difficult matrices. During 2009 two regional labs and

EPA’s National Enforcement Investigations Center

(NEIC) teamed together to develop a sampling and

analysis plan and assemble a field sampling team to

collect and analyze samples from just such a facility. In

order to protect the health and safety of the field team

and in order to pick the right sample locations out of the

array of waste tanks and containers, field air monitoring

was conducted to target potential leaks. Potential for

unknowns meant that a significant fraction of sampling

had to be conducted with level B personal protective

equipment (PPE) and all sampling activities were in at

least level C PPE. Ten tanks, two roll­off containers, 40

containers and a storm water discharge were sampled

at the site and analyses for toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP), volatile organics, metals, pesticides, pH and flashpoint were provided by the regional

lab. Sample matrices included soils, aqueous mixtures,

oil based mixtures, and paints.

Criminal Investigation Support:

Regional laboratories often work closely with Criminal

Investigation Division (CID) agents to coordinate and facilitate sample collection, sample arrival, sample analysis, and sample reporting. In FY 2009, a regional

laboratory analyzed 161 samples in support of criminal

investigations with preliminary results often reported in a

matter of days. In another region, a regional laboratory

microbiologist provided testimony in a criminal case

against a business owner that had been injecting surface water suspected of containing microbiological contaminants into a ground water aquifer. The business

owner conducted activity during the rainy season in

order to recharge the aquifer and thereby potentially

contaminated the groundwater source.

Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship

Improve environmental performance through compliance

with environmental requirements, preventing pollution, and

promoting environmental stewardship. Protect human

health and the environment by encouraging innovation and

providing incentives for governments, businesses, and the

public that promote environmental stewardship.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 21

Cross Goal Strategies

Many of EPA’s efforts contribute to progress toward all

five of the aforementioned goals. These efforts include

strengthening partnerships with states and tribes, expanding scientific knowledge and supporting homeland

security activities. Some examples of how the regional

laboratories have contributed to these cross­agency and

cross­media efforts are discussed in the following examples.

Partnerships (state, local, tribal, etc.)

EPA is committed to strengthening its partnerships with

state, tribal, and local governments in order to make

progress towards the Agency’s five strategic goals.

Some examples of regional laboratory partnership efforts include:

Sharing Analytical Capabilities and Capacity:

One of the most important partnerships amongst regional and state labs is sharing unique expertise where

and when needed. In 2009, regional labs continued to

turn to each other when capability limitations or lack of

sample capacity became an obstacle to providing support for a variety of projects. One regional lab shared

their capability to analyze for perchlorate by liquid chromotography/dual mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) for

samples from a former Air Force base in another region.

PCB congener analysis not available in one region was

provided by another region with the relevant capability.

In other cases, regional laboratories regularly provide

analytical assistance to each other when an instrument

breakdown at one lab prevents completion of a scheduled analysis.

Outreach to Youth and Schools:

Regional laboratories are often the destination for field

trips from a variety of schools in communities near the

lab facilities. Laboratory staff provide lab tours, lab

demonstrations and career advice for numerous students. The students get the opportunity to explore how

the labs support the Agency's mission through demonstrations, by EPA lab staff, in microbiology, marine invertebrate toxicity, and chemical analysis.

Support to Tribes:

The regional laboratory provided a number of analyses

for nutrients, total organic carbon (TOC), total phosphorus, dissolved ortho­phosphorous, chlorophyll a, and

algal growth potential for a project with the Eastern

Band of Cherokee Indians (EBCI). Regional personnel

conducted field sampling and measurement activities on

EBCI tribal lands. The sampling and analyses were associated with a baseline water quality study to assess

the viability of the fishery on tribal lands. This study included field measurement of temperature, pH, dissolved

oxygen (DO), and Secchi depth along with the chemical

and biological analyses.

World Water Monitoring Day:

Each year, several regions and regional labs join

citizen volunteers, students and teachers from around

the world to celebrate citizen monitoring and collect

water quality data on International Water Monitoring

Day. EPA lab scientists conduct training exercises with

the public and students to teach them about water quality parameters. Actual samples are collected and in

many cases analyzed by the regional lab for bacteria,

nutrients, and pesticides. In one instance, the laboratory

results were used to help isolate various land uses and

help a small city better target its efforts to clean up

creeks that had consistent toxicity.

Collaboration with EPA’s Office of Pesticides

Program:

Regional lab staff worked with the Office of Pesticides’

Analytical Chemistry Branch to develop a more cost effective method for the detection of nanosilver in water.

Currently, the methods available worldwide to characterize the size of silver nano particles require the use of an

electron microscope which is very costly. The project is

focusing on the use of inductively coupled plasma/mass

spectrometer (ICP/MS) for this determination.

2009 Laboratory Technical Information Group (LTIG)

Conference:

The Region 10 laboratory hosted the 2009 Laboratory

Technical Information Group (LTIG) Conference. There

were about 30 attendees, including laboratory scientists

from the Regions, Program Offices, Headquarters,

NEIC, and the US Fish and Wildlife Service. The LTIG

was formed in 1998 to create and sustain working relationships among USEPA regional laboratories and other

EPA entities (ORD, NERL, NEIC) to promote a free exchange of technical knowledge and ideas. The LTIG
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 22

Cross Goal Strategies (cont.)

goal is to create a forum for technical discussion where

chemists and biologists from all ten regional laboratories

and other EPA labs and offices can easily communicate

and exchange ideas on analytical methods, instrumentation and common problems. The group has subgroups for a variety of analytical disciplines including

organic chemistry, inorganic chemistry, metals and microbiology. Agenda items at the 2009 conference included presentations of analytical data use at the

Bunker Hill Superfund site, asbestos analyses, description of ordnance pollution and data needs for a former

military site, laboratory information management systems, application of newer organic methods that result

in solvent reduction use, waste characterization leaching methods, arsenic speciation method validation, and

liquid chromatograph/tandem mass spectrometry methods, among others.

Partnership with Hospitals:

Heavy metals can be common ingredients in many traditional medicines, toys and household items. As a follow

on to participation in a major study of ayurvedic medicines, one regional laboratory continues to partner with

regional hospitals on an as needed basis to conduct

XRF analysis of traditional medicines, toys, and other

items to support forensic investigations into the source

of heavy metal poisonings. In 2009, at the request of

local hospitals, the lab analyzed samples for two different poisoning cases. One case traced back to ingestion

of lead paint and the other case was traced back to the

use of a folk remedy for the treatment of alcoholism

which contained antimony.

Invited Speaker at Ireland Conference:

A regional laboratory chemist was invited to the International Ion Chromatography Symposium in Dublin, Ireland to speak on recent achievements in IC/MS/MS

methodology. The papers presented were "Trace Analysis of Amines by IC/MS/MS" and "Green Analysis ­

Bridging the Gap for Environmental Samples using

IC/MS/MS and LC/MS/MS”. The first paper highlighted

innovative ways to test for CWA degradation products,

specifically amine compounds, using new state of the

art equipment. The second focused on innovative ideas

for reducing chemical waste in the laboratory.

Regional Methods Program:

The Regional Methods Program (RMP) is a mechanism

used by of the Office of Research and Development

(ORD) to respond to high­priority, near­term methods

development needs of EPA’s regional offices. The program also serves to enhance interactions between regional staff and ORD scientists; and to improve ORD’s

capacity to bring science to bear on practical environmental issues such as those faced by Regions.

Expanding Scientific Knowledge and

Developing New Analytical Capabilities

Scientific knowledge and technical information are critical elements in the process of understanding and addressing complex environmental problems.

Furthermore, better analytical capabilities are fundamental to meeting the Agency’s goals. Better scientific

knowledge and analytical capabilities mean improved

assessment, better identification of data and research

Developing a method using hydrogen carrier gas

in GC/MS organic semi­ volatile analysis.

Developing methods for dynamic headspace and

pulsed vacuum extraction to measure polar

volatile organic compounds.

Verification of commercially available, cost­effective, enzyme­linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)

test kits for the quantitative determination of endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) associated

with waterways impacted by poultry, swine, and

dairy animal feeding operations.

Testing of a Lake Macroinvertebrate Integrity Index

(LMII) for Mid­Atlantic lakes and reservoirs.

Developing a standardized testing procedure for

the identification and quantification of Cryptosporidium parvum and Cryptosporidium hominis

Oocysts using real­time polymerase chain reaction

assay.

There were several ongoing RMP projects in 2009 involving work by the regional labs. These include:
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 23

needs, greater ability to track implementation of specific

solutions and more meaningful evaluation of implementation results. Regional laboratories play a unique and

critical role in enhancing EPA’s ability to respond to varied and technical challenges such as those presented

by emerging pollutants, complex environmental matrices, and the demands for lower detection. Some examples of these efforts are described in the following

paragraphs.

Asbestos Analysis and The NELAC Institute (TNI)

Certification:

In 2009, a regional laboratory became National Environmental Lab Accreditation Conference (NELAC) accredited for the analysis of bulk asbestos containing building

materials and is also capable of conducting analysis of

other matrices, including bulk soil, sediment, and vermiculite products. The lab supports asbestos analysis

for EPA’s Enforcement and Superfund Programs, and

also serves as a quality assurance (QA) reference lab

for asbestos work. Qualitative analysis is conducted

using a polarized light microscope (PLM) to observe

characteristic optical properties to identify different types

of asbestos, and is complemented by other analytical

techniques, including x­ray diffraction (XRD), and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) equipped with energy

dispersive spectroscopy (EDS). These methods provide

verification of asbestos mineral type based on crystal

structure by XRD and element composition by EDS. In

addition, the SEM enables the analyst to document the

morphology of fine fibrils that are too thin to be resolved

by PLM. Quantitative analysis is typically conducted

using a combination of gravimetric matrix reduction and

asbestos point counting by PLM. During the year, the

regional lab was given lead responsibility for working

with the Idaho National Laboratory to develop a technique that uses a fluidized bed to segregate low concentrations of asbestos from samples of soil and sediment. Currently, this project is evaluating the precision

and sensitivity of the fluidized bed asbestos segregator.

Metals Speciation:

Metals chemists at a regional laboratory are working on

expanding their analytical capabilities to include speciation. Speciation analysis is the separation and quantification of chemical forms of a particular element. In the

past, the determination of total element concentrations

was considered to be sufficient for environmental considerations. Although it is still useful to know the total

concentration of an element and it is essential in many

areas, the determination of each species is more relevant in determining toxicity levels. A new inductively

coupled plasma­mass spectrometer (ICP­MS) with a

high­performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) separation system has become an essential analytical tool

for determinations of trace levels of speciated elements

such as arsenic, selenium, and chromium. The lab plans

to expand their capabilities to include analysis of speciated metals in water, soil and tissues.

American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM)

Standards:

Regional lab staff completed the process for getting two

additional endocrine disruptor methods accepted as

ASTM standards. Both a low level liquid chromatography – mass spectrometry method for nonylphenols and

their ethoxylates and a separate method for low level

bisphenol A were accepted as ASTM standards in 2009.

In addition, the same regional laboratory has completed

four chemical warfare agent degradation product identification methods in drinking/surface water using

LC/MS/MS. All four methods were submitted to ASTM

for consideration as standard test methods.

Multi­Increment Sampling:

For a site investigation of a former Navy firing range

site, a new sample compositing technique called “multiincrement sampling” (MIS) was applied. This site was

known to be polluted with bullets or ammunition fragments over many years. No removal of these materials

had occurred at the site, and there had been no estimates made for the amount of lead present. Surface

soil samples were collected to characterize potential

surface contamination using MIS which is an advanced

technique for collecting samples that represent a specific area or population (decision unit). Many increments of soil were systematically collected in each

decision unit to form composites that represented the

compositional and distributional heterogeneity. The

samples, which were submitted for lead and ordnance

compounds (nitroaromatics, nitroamines, and nitrate

Cross Goal Strategies (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 24

Trace Analysis of Pesticides and Pesticide

Degradates:

Regional laboratory chemists have recently developed a

method for trace (10 to 50 parts per trillion) analysis of

pesticides and pesticide degradates in water. The

analysis employs liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry techniques. The method has several advantages over conventional extraction & analysis methods

including: no need for field preservation; small field sample size; minimal sample preparation before analysis;

and, increased sample throughput. For emergency response situations, preliminary analysis results can be

available within 24 hours of receipt. In 2009, this

method was used to analyze over 280 water samples.

Trace Metals Analysis in Field Mice that Potentially

Contain Hantavirus:

After receiving a request to analyze for trace metals in

field mice collected from a legacy mining site, the regional lab’s health and safety officer determined that as

many as 25 percent of the mice collected during the

summer months might contain Hantavirus. This mining

site has been responsible for contaminating over 20

square miles of land from their smelter and mine tailings. Because of the potential for personnel exposure

during the grinding of these tissues, EPA contacted the

Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to

identify a suitable means to inactivate the virus without

jeopardizing analyte recoveries. The final method,

which required oven heating the rodents for a period of

four hours at 60 degrees celsius, was confirmed to have

acceptable recoveries for lead on virus­free mice, and

then applied the preparation technique to over 110 samples that were subsequently analyzed using ICP/MS.

Analysis of Toxaphene Congeners:

Regional scientists are working with the Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery on the Phase II validation of the draft SW­846 method 8276 for the analysis

of toxaphene congeners and break down products.

Toxaphene is an agricultural pesticide that was one of

the most heavily used insecticides in the United States

until it was banned by EPA in 1990. As a result of its

wide spread application, the mixture and its breakdown

products remain pollutants of concern at many locations

in the U.S.

Toxaphene is not a single compound but a mixture of

more than 670 closely related compounds, known as

congeners. In the environment, the mixture breaks

down as a result of weathering processes. These

breakdown products form a mixture different from the

original toxaphene, resulting in an altered chemical

residue. As a result, measuring toxaphene accurately

and at low levels has been a challenge using traditional

gas chromatography (GC) techniques such as Method

8081. Method 8276 is a gas chromatography/negative

ion mass spectrometry (GC/NIMS) method which employs mass spectral identification of toxaphene constituents. The Phase II method validation will evaluate

the method for reproducibility, linearity, accuracy and

precision across a variety of real world test matrices (i.e.

soil, sludge, and fish tissue). Following Phase II validation testing, a statistical evaluation of the data will be

performed in order to establish method precision and

bias. The final version of Method 8276 will be modified

based on the results of the Phase II validation study.

Cross Goal Strategies (cont.)

esters) analyses, were homogenized at the regional laboratory per EPA Method 8330B by using a ring mill (or

puck grinder) to reduce the particle size. The ground

material was then sub­sampled applying the MIS technique prior to analyses for lead, other metals, and the

ordnance compounds. This sample compositing technique is much more effective at characterizing decision

unit contamination, while significantly reducing the number of required analyses.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 25

Homeland Security

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 caused EPA

to reevaluate the types of events which might result in

environmental emergencies and require laboratory support. The ability to analyze samples for chemicals that

might be used in terrorist incidents is an important aspect of the EPA’s emergency response responsibilities.

The ten regional laboratories have consequently made it

a high priority to provide accurate environmental data to

emergency responders and to participate in the Office of

Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER)­Office of Emergency Management’s (OEM) Environmental

Response Laboratory Network (ERLN) a high priority.

In order to enhance regional capability to respond to

emergencies, whether from natural causes or terrorist

activity, the regional laboratories are working on several

significant development projects:

Chemical Warfare Agent Method Validation

Study

In the wake of 9/11, the federal government initiated

several high level studies to investigate vulnerabilities to

recover from credible weapons of mass destruction

(WMD) attack scenarios. The study revealed that EPA

and its federal and state partners had the capability to

address the release of toxic industrial chemicals but that

little capability was available at any level of government

to address the release of the most toxic chemical warfare agents. To address this issue the Science and

Technology Directorate of the newly formed Department

of Homeland Security (DHS) partnered with EPA’s Office of Emergency Management to address this national

vulnerability and develop the laboratory capability and

capacity to support decontamination and recovery from

a terrorist event using chemical warfare agents (CWA).

Many different efforts are underway that contribute to

Cross Goal Strategies (cont.)

Developing capability to analyze environmental

samples for chemical warfare agents and their

environmental degradation products.

Developing and testing response plans with

state and other stakeholders to enable a coordinated multi­laboratory response to a major contamination event.

Expanding membership in the ERLN.

this goal, but a primary scientific task is the development and demonstration of analytical methods to detect

chemical warfare agents in environmental media.

The initial method development was performed by contractors managed out of ORD’s National Homeland Security Research Center with input from supporting

regional labs. This produced a modified version of EPA

method 8270 believed capable of supporting the analysis of four nerve agents and one blister agent in environmental samples. Validation of the method, teasing out

operational issues, providing performance data, and ensuring that the method could reliably detect the target

agents in environmental samples with the throughput required to sustain the anticipated workload fell to a small

team of chemists at two regional laboratories.

In 2009 this team achieved several very substantial

milestones in the development of CWA methods. At the

start of the year a Phase 1 Method Validation Study was

conducted in both regions. Both Regions ran the same

protocol. They each encountered problems with running

the method, some the same and some different. During

the validation study they each independently developed

solutions to these problems. For example, Phase 1 had

to solve a number of basic procedural issues key to

maintaining health and safety requirements and the

strict accountability for use of CWA agents. Tracking

systems were developed that accounted for material

usage down to microliter quantities; a screening procedure was developed using the AP2Ce detector to

screen shipping containers and verify shipment was not

compromised before opening was developed; and ergonomically efficient procedures were developed for

making analysis standards under 100 percent engineering control.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 26

The outcome of this work was brought back to the larger

workgroup involved with the overall project. Method

modifications were discussed and deliberated and by

mid­year a proficiency test was being run that tested the

comparability of the labs. In early September the labs

began Phase 2 of the Method Validation Study. Phase 1

and 2 provided several substantive findings including:

Full Scale Exercise

Several regional labs participated in a multi­region fullscale exercise (FSE) that was designed to exercise and

evaluate the Water Laboratory Alliance Response Plan

(WLA­RP) and other Environmental Response Laboratory Network (ERLN) and Laboratory Response Network

(LRN) emergency response procedures, and identify opportunities for enhancement and improvement of collaboration, communication and coordination. The full­scale

exercise assessed the effectiveness of response to a

combined chemical and biological warfare agent attack.

The FSE was divided into the following three major

components:

Cross Goal Strategies (cont.)

Shaking rather than vortexing water samples provides better recovery of target analytes.

Selected Ion Mode (SIM) calibration standards

are not stable for an extended period and a new

aliquot has to be used for each 24 hour analytical

period.

The SIM technique for wipes and the analysis of

VX (chemical warfare nerve agent) will require

further refinement to correct persistent problems.

Material used in analysis and CWA decontamination requirements trigger additional operation &

maintenance requirements (e.g. glassware has to

be scrupulously cleaned after decontamination by

bleaching to remove all traces of bleach, and, to

prevent standard degradation, the GC injector

port must be maintained at the beginning of every

analytical run).

As a result of the milestones reached:

The EPA Regional laboratories have demonstrated, for the first time ever, a civilian capability

to test for CWA residuals in environmental media.

The multi­lab studies conducted to validate the

CWA test method demonstrated the feasibility of

the pilot project initiated by DHS and EPA.

The work completed leads the way to further advances in CWA method development and the

eventual technical transfer of capability to other

ERLN laboratories.

Chemical Warfare Agent (CWA) and Toxic Industrial Chemical (TIC) Environmental – A light aircraft, operated by a terrorist, sprays a large,

fully­occupied sports arena with the chemical

warfare agent mustard­lewisite. Shortly after the

attack, the airplane collides with an industrial

building in which toxic industrial chemicals (TICs)

are stored, resulting in a fire and explosion.

CWA Clinical – As a result of the chemical warfare agent attack, many people are exposed to

chemical warfare agents and are seeking care in

their local hospitals. Patient specimens are sent

to state public health laboratories for analyses.

Select Biological Agent Environmental – A bacterial select agent is introduced directly into a metropolitan drinking water distribution system by the

same terrorist cell responsible for the CWA attack

on the stadium.

The exercise design for each component consisted of

an Exercise Design Team, Participant Team, and Evaluator Team, who were supported and guided by EPA and

contractor staff to develop and implement the exercise.

The CWA and TIC Environmental Scenario was conducted by EPA. The CWA Clinical and Select Biological

Agent Environmental Scenarios were run by state public

health labs in partnership with CDC.

The FSE involved participants from EPA Regions, EPA

headquarters (HQ), CDC, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), state public health and state environmental

laboratories, drinking water utilities, and federal, state,
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 27

and local first responders and law enforcement. This

multi­region exercise provided a venue for participants

to practice procedures related to providing support to an

environmental and public health incident that included

actual sample analyses, communication, coordination,

and data reporting. Many of the steps and issues covered in the scenario were taken from lessons learned

and corrections to plans and procedures derived from

functional exercises held in each EPA Region during

2008 and from the findings of the May 13­14, 2008 EPA

New England Homeland Security Environmental Summit.

Cross Goal Strategies (cont.)

gional Laboratory. The exercise Field Team developed

the sample documentation and packed and shipped the

samples to the various participating laboratories during

the week of the exercise. This allowed testing of coordination of analytical services, sample packing, shipping,

and sample receipt, sample analysis, quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC), generation of electronic

data deliverables, and data management.

Participants in the FSE rated the exercise as successful

and stated that they enjoyed the interaction between the

laboratories and with an Incident Command, implementation of the draft response plans, and the opportunity to

work with real samples. The exercise identified necessary improvements to existing and draft plans and to coordination and communication across regions and

agencies. Needed refinements to sample management,

QA/QC, data reporting and data management expectations and plans were also identified. In addition to identifying improvements to plans and procedures across

organizations, each participating organization leveraged

the exercise to practice and enhance their own internal

operating procedures.

The FSE took place over an eight­day period starting on

a Friday (Day 1) and ending on the following Friday

(Day 8). As each participating group completed their exercise activities, they were given the opportunity to meet

and discuss their exercise activities through a half­hour

debriefing. Following the exercise hot washes were

conducted for each scenario to allow the participants to

discuss and share their findings with the other participants in their group.

For the CWA and TICs Environmental Scenario, the incident command (IC), Regional environmental unit (EU),

and field team were located at one Regional Laboratory.

EPA Headquarters Emergency Operations Center

(EOC) and the EPA Water Desk participated in the exercise and tested components of the ICLN Network Coordinating Group (NCG) standard operating procedure.

State laboratory participants in the CWA and TIC Environmental portion of the exercise were primarily from

one region, while state laboratories from a second Region provided overflow capacity. Additional laboratories

from other Regions also participated. All samples for

the exercise were shipped in advance to the lead ReFood 

Emergency 

Response 

Network 

(FERN) 

National Plant 

Diagnostic 

Network 

(NPDN) 

Environmental 

Response 

Laboratory 

Network (ERLN) 

Laboratory 

Response 

Network 

(LRN) 

National 

Animal Health 

Laboratory 

Network 

(NAHLN) 

WLA Response Plan (WLA-RP) 

Water Laboratory Alliance (WLA) 

Integrated Consortium of Laboratory Networks (ICLN) 

ERLN

In 2008 the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER) launched the Environmental Response Laboratory Network (ERLN). The initial launch

of the ERLN included the ten regional laboratories and

two state laboratories with unique testing capabilities. In

2009, the regional laboratories worked with OSWER to

expand the network to include additional state and commercial laboratories. OSWER established the ERLN as

an Agency asset to ensure sufficient analytical capability

and capacity to respond to routine accidents as well as

nationally significant incidents, such as terrorist attacks

involving weapons of mass destruction and for other

purposes such as surveillance and monitoring.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 28

The ERLN is an Agency­wide, integrated network requiring coordination across offices to cover chemical (including toxic industrial chemicals and chemical warfare

agents), biological, and radiological/nuclear agents in

drinking water and all other environmental media. It is a

scalable network which expands and/or leverages existing laboratory infrastructure and networks, and is designed to implement responsibilities under Homeland

Security Presidential Directives 7, 9, 10 and 22. As a

charter member of the Integrated Consortium of Laboratory Networks (ICLN), EPA also coordinates externally

with other federal laboratory networks to produce timely,

high quality, interpretable data.

Cross Goal Strategies (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 29

SECTION III ­ Infrastructure and Looking to the

Future
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 30

While supporting the EPA goals is the primary mission

of the regional laboratories, they also strive to be good

environmental stewards and to provide a healthy and

safe working environment for their employees. The reputation of the regional laboratory is judged by the quality

of science it offers to regional and national programs.

Far less visible, but no less important, is the diligence

and commitment of laboratory management and staff to

supporting the infrastructure required to deliver the science.

Quality Systems

The policy of the regional laboratories is to conduct all

business with integrity and in an ethical manner. It is the

basic and expected responsibility of each staff member

and each manager to adhere to EPA’s Principles of Scientific Integrity, dated November 24, 1999. This policy

statement has been incorporated into the quality management plans of all the regional laboratories. It provides the foundation for the inclusion of ethics and

ethics training into the quality systems to insure the production of data that is scientifically sound and defensible.

Evaluation and accreditation of the regional laboratories

is crucial to ensuring the quality of environmental data.

In part, as a response to EPA’s January 6, 2004 policy

directive "Ensuring the Competency of Environmental

Protection Laboratories," EPA’s regional laboratories are

committed to accreditation through the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP).

NELAP is the program that implements the quality system standards adopted by the National Environmental

Laboratory Accreditation Conference (NELAC). Both

the NELAC standards and the NELAP program fall

under the NELAC Institute (TNI). TNI is a non­profit organization whose mission it is to foster the generation of

environmental data of known and documented quality

through an open, inclusive, and transparent process that

is responsive to the needs of the community.

Nine out of ten EPA regional laboratories have received

and are currently maintaining accreditation through

NELAP for the analysis of samples in one or more of the

following matrices: drinking water, non­potable water,

solid and chemical materials, and air and emissions. In

FY 2009, all regional laboratories that had re­assessments scheduled were successfully re­accredited by

NELAP.

Sustainability

Sustainability covers a variety of elements that are essential to effective laboratory operation. These include

environmental management, health and safety, and

facilities management. In recent years, identifying and

implementing long­term efficiencies and cost saving opportunities within the regional laboratory network has

become another key sustainability issue.

i. Identifying and Maximizing Efficiencies

In FY 2009, the ten regional laboratories continued their

efforts to identify and implement long­term efficiencies

and cost saving opportunities within the regional laboratory network. These efforts included investigating opportunities to reduce individual laboratory costs, improve

energy and water conservation, and evaluate strategic

sourcing options. For example:

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design:

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design

(LEED) is an internationally recognized green building

certification system for high­performance, low impact

buildings. LEED provides third­party verification that a

building is designed, built and operated using strategies

aimed at improving performance related to energy savings, water efficiency, CO2 emissions reduction, improved indoor environmental quality, stewardship of

resources and sensitivity to their impacts. Currently, two

regional laboratory facilities have achieved Gold Certified LEED status. A third regional laboratory facility has

now registered to gain LEED certification by 2011. The

regional laboratory has assembled a cross­divisional

team that includes lab staff. In 2009, work began on

gathering data related to energy use, site management,

water use efficiency, indoor air quality, green purchasing, solid waste management and green cleaning that

will be needed for LEED certification.

Section III
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 31

ii. Environmental Management

EPA continues to move forward to integrate and utilize

environmental management systems (EMS) as the

framework for enhancing its environmental performance, reducing its environmental footprint, and demonstrating its leadership in environmental stewardship.

Likewise, the regional laboratories are committed to employing EMS in order to prevent and reduce environmental impacts and in order to comply with legal and

applicable requirements. Notable environmental management measures implemented in 2009 include:

Strive for 45 Recycling Rally:

The Strive for 45 Recycling Rally was a six month recycling competition among EPA offices and laboratories

that ran from January to June of 2009. The goal of the

Rally was to infuse a spirit of friendly competition into

EPA waste reduction initiatives including a goal to

achieve a 45 percent Agency­wide waste diversion rate.

Eighteen EPA facilities participated in the Rally including

four regional laboratories. Office and labs quickly

demonstrated considerable waste diversion prowess. In

the end, the participating facilities diverted more than

918 tons of materials from EPA’s waste stream in only

six months.

Solvent Reduction:

Solvent reduction under the EMS program at one regional laboratory allowed the laboratory to be reclassified as a Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity

Generator (less than 220 pounds of hazardous waste

per month) for the first time in the lab’s history.

Analytical Procedural Change:

A regional laboratory changed its analytical techniques

for the automated analysis of inorganic constituents to a

technique that uses discrete analyzer (DA) technology.

This technology uses 100 times less sample, generates

at least 10 times less waste and can run up to seven

tests in one run compared to the previous technique

which ran one at a time.

iii. Health and Safety

The health and safety of laboratory personnel is the

most important laboratory management imperative. The

usage of glassware, fire and heat, high­pressure compressed gases or liquefied gases, solvents and contaminated samples combine to increase the probability for

accidents and creates safety concerns that make laboratories inherently more risky than office environments.

All of the EPA’s laboratories have invested heavily in

their health and safety programs and have an excellent

iv. Facilities Management

EPA regional laboratories are housed in various types of

facilities, from converted World War I buildings to the latest architectural designs which incorporate energy efficiency and make use of alternative fuel sources. While

some facilities are U.S. Government owned, most are

operated under lease agreements through the General

Services Administration. The regional laboratories are

home to fixed laboratory functions, field investigation

functions, and mobile laboratories. Facilities management involves not only day­to­day oversight activities for

proper maintenance, but the planning, budgeting, and

construction of needed modifications such as building

expansions and upgrades of servicing equipment.

Section III (cont.)

Medical monitoring programs to evaluate and

track the health of those employees with a significant possibility of workplace exposure to hazardous compounds.

Periodic, comprehensive audit of safety, health,

environmental compliance and internal controls

by the EPA Headquarters.

Health and safety committees with representation from laboratory employees to provide a

forum for discussing safety and health issues,

and assist the safety officer in planning training

activities and organizing safety inspections.

Annual refresher health and safety training.

safety record as proof of their efforts. Efforts related to

health and safety include:
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 32

Future Challenges

Each regional laboratory is a center of applied scientific

support that meets the unique needs of its geographical

region, states and tribes. As environmental analytical

laboratories, all ten organizations share many long­term

and short­term challenges to meeting their goals. The

following challenges represent a summary of those

needs identified by the regional laboratories.

Meeting the Challenge

The regional laboratories play a key role in supporting

the Agency’s strategic goals and provide significant scientific foundations to meet these goals. In addition to

supporting national laboratory program initiatives, the

laboratories provide strong science and laboratory capabilities for the regions. The laboratories are a crucial

part of the integrated analytical capacity needed to meet

specific environmental objectives on a global, national,

regional and local basis. As EPA moves into the future,

the regional laboratories will take on a variety of challenges in order to continue their support for the mission

of the Agency. The regional laboratories intend to meet

these challenges by, among other activities:

Section III (cont.)

Ability to meet customer needs as the demand

for quicker turnaround times for analytical results

continue to be the trend in Superfund removal

actions and emergency response.

Ability to balance increasing demands for scientific support with static or decreasing staffing levels and loss of expertise due to retirement of

senior scientists.

Ability to maintain and expand capacity to provide analytical services in a cost­effective and

efficient manner.

Ability to remain flexible and cultivate the necessary foresight to meet changing analytical needs

and to address emerging pollutants and contaminants of concern.

Maintenance of accreditation under the National

Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference (NELAC) or similar programs.

Expansion of collaborative efforts with the scientific community in order to advance the science

of environmental monitoring and analysis.

Involvement in a variety of efforts to support

Homeland Security including establishment of

the Environmental Response Laboratory Network (ERLN), development of analytical capabilities to give appropriate analytical support in

emergency situations, and acquisition of necessary training for the identification and measurement of unknown threat agents.

Conducting business as usual while some regional laboratories undergo renovation.

Identifying and addressing priorities.

Identifying and implementing additional longterm efficiencies and cost saving opportunities.

Maintaining highly skilled laboratory staff through

training, employee development, scientific collaborations, and technology and information

transfer.

Updating laboratory equipment in order to increase analytical capabilities.

Identifying opportunities for regional laboratories

to pool their efforts in order to address high priority projects.

Staying current with technology and science issues relating to analytical methodology, instrumentation and emerging pollutants of concern.

Exploring opportunities for alternative/additional

mechanisms for financial support.

Improved marketing of services and capabilities.

Enhancing communication and coordination with

programs.

Intra­regional networking with other governmental and private sector laboratories to improve

communications, coordinate development efforts

and provide mutual support.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 A­1

APPENDIX A ­ Regional Laboratories Core Capabilities
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA Regional Laboratories Core Capabilities ­ FY 2009

I. Chemistry

ANALYTE / GROUP

NAME SAMPLE MEDIA

ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUE REGIONAL CAPABILITY

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

INORGANIC CHEMISTRY:

Acidity Water Titrimetric X X X X X

Alkalinity Water Titrimetric X X X X X X X X X X

Asbestos

Solids/Bulk material PLM X X X X X

Soil/Sediment PLM X X X

Chloride

Water Colorimetric X

Water IC X X X X X X X X X X

Water Titrimetric X X

Chromium,

Hexavalent (Cr+6)

Water Colorimetric X X X X X

Soil/Sediment Colorimetric X X X

Water IC X X X

Soil/Sediment IC X X

Cyanide, Amenable

Water Colorimetric X X X X X X X X X

Soil/Sediment Colorimetric X X X X X X X

Cyanide, Total

Water Colorimetric X X X X X X X X X X

Soil/Sediment Colorimetric X X X X X X X X X

Waste Colorimetric X X X X X X X X

Fluoride

Water ISE X X X X X

Water IC X X X X X X X X X

Hardness

Water Colorimetric X

Water Titrimetric X X X X

Water ICP/Calculation X X X X X X X X X X

Mercury, Total

Water CVAA X X X X X X X X X

Soil/Sediment CVAA X X X X X X X X X

Mercury, Total

Tissue (fish &/or plant) CVAA X X X X X X X

Waste (oil, drum, etc..) CVAA X X X X X X X X X

Mercury (TCLP) Soil/Waste (oil, drum, etc..) CVAA X X X X X X X X X

Metals, Total

Water ICP /AES X X X X X X X X X X

Soil /Sediment ICP /AES X X X X X X X X X X

Tissue (fish &/or plant) ICP /AES X X X X X X X X

Waste (oil, drum, etc..) ICP /AES X X X X X X X X X X

Metals (TCLP) Soil/Waste (oil, drum, etc..) ICP /AES X X X X X X X X X X

Metals, Total

Water GFAA X X X X

Soil/Sediment GFAA X X X X

Tissue (Fish &/or plant) GFAA X X

Waste (oil, drum, etc..) GFAA X X X X

Metals (TCLP) Soil/Waste (oil, drum, etc.) GFAA X X X X

Metals, Total

Water ICP/MS X X X X X X X X X X

Soil/Sediment ICP/MS X X X X X X X X

Tissue (Fish &/or plant) ICP/MS X X X X X X X

Waste (oil, drum, etc..) ICP/MS X X X X X

Metals (TCLP) Soil/Waste (oil, drum, etc..) ICP/MS X X X X

EPA­270­R­10­001 A­2
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA Regional Laboratories Core Capabilities ­ FY 2009

I. Chemistry (continued)

ANALYTE / GROUP

NAME SAMPLE MEDIA

ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUE REGIONAL CAPABILITY

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Nitrogen (Ammonia)

Water Colorimetric X X X X X X X X X

Soil/Sediment Colorimetric X X X X

Water Electrode X

Nitrogen

(NO3 &/or NO2)

Water Colorimetric X X X X X X X X X

Soil Colorimetric X X X X

Water IC X X X X X X X X X

Soil IC X X X X X X

Nitrogen,

Total Kjeldahl

Water Colorimetric X X X X X X X X

Soil Colorimetric X X X X X X

Perchlorate

Water IC X X X

Soil IC X X

Water IC with LC/MS confirmation X X X X

Water, Soil/Sediment LC/MS X X

Water LC/MS/MS X X X

Phosphorus, Ortho

Water Colorimetric X X X X X X X

Water IC X X X X X X X X X

Phosphorus, Total

Water Colorimetric X X X X X X X X X X

Soil Colorimetric X X X X X

Sulfate

Water IC X X X X X X

Soil IC X X X X X

Water Turbidimetric X X X X X X X

Soil Turbidimetric X X X X

Sulfide

Water Colorimetric X X X X X

Soil Colorimetric X X

Water IC, Turbidimetric X

Water Titrimetric X X X X

ORGANIC CHEMISTRY:

BNA

Water GC/MS X X X X X X X X X X

Soil/Sediment GC/MS X X X X X X X X X X

Waste (oil, drum, etc..) GC/MS X X X X X X X X X

Tissue (fish &/or plant) GC/MS X X

BNA (TCLP) Solid/Waste GC/MS X X X X X X X X X X

BNA (TPH)

Water GC/MS or GC X X X X X X X

Soil/Sediment GC/MS or GC X X X X X X X

BOD Water Membrane Electrode X X X X X X X X X

COD

Water Photometric X

Water Colorimetric X X X X X

EDB & DBCP Water GC/ECD X X X X X X X X

Herbicides

Water GC/ECD; GC/NPD X X X X X

Soil/Sediment GC/ECD; GC/NPD X X X X

Waste (oil, drum, etc..) GC/ECD; GC/NPD X X X

Tissue (fish &/or plant) GC/ECD; GC/NPD X

EPA­270­R­10­001 A­3
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA Regional Laboratories Core Capabilities ­ FY 2009

I. Chemistry (continued)

ANALYTE / GROUP

NAME SAMPLE MEDIA

ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUE REGIONAL CAPABILITY

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Herbicides (TCLP)

Solid/Waste GC/ECD X X X X X

Solid/Waste HPLC/UV Detection X

Oil & Grease

Water Gravimetric X X X X X X X

Soil/Sediment Gravimetric X X X X

Pesticides / PCBs

Water GC/ECD X X X X X X X X X X

Soil/Sediment GC/ECD X X X X X X X X X X

Waste (oil, drum, etc..) GC/ECD X X X X X X X X X X

Tissue (fish &/or plant) GC/ECD X X X X X X

Pesticides (TCLP) Solid/Waste GC/ECD X X X X X X X X X X

Phenolics

Water Colorimetric X X X X X X

Soil/Sediment Colorimetric X X X

PAHs

Water GC/MS X X X X X X X X X X

Soil/Sediment GC/MS X X X X X X X X X X

Air GC/MS X X X X

Tissue (fish &/or plant) GC/MS X X X X

Waste (oil, drum, etc..) GC/MS X X X X X X X X

TOC

Water Combustion / IR X X X X X X X X

Soil Combustion / IR X X X X X X X X

Water Combustion/Oxidation X

Water UV/Persulfate X X X X X X

VOA

Water GC/MS X X X X X X X X X X

Soil/Sediment GC/MS X X X X X X X X

Air GC/MS X X X X X X X X X X

Waste (oil, drum, etc..) GC/MS X X X X X X X X

Water GC X X

Soil/Sediment GC X X

Waste (oil, drum, etc..) GC X X X X X

VOA (TCLP) Solid/Waste GC/MS X X X X X

VOA (TPH)

Water GC/MS or GC X X X X X X

Soil/Sediment GC/MS or GC X X X X X X

II. Physical & Other Determinations

ANALYTE / GROUP

NAME SAMPLE MEDIA

ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUE REGIONAL CAPABILITY

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Conductivity Water Specific

Conductance X X X X X X X X X X

Flash Point Aqueous/Liquid

Waste (oil, drum, etc.)

Pensky­Marten or

Seta X X X X X X X X

Ignitability

Soil/Sediment Pensky­Marten or Seta

Closed Cup X X X X X X X

Waste (oil, drum, etc..) Pensky­Marten or Seta

Closed Cup X X X X X X X X X X

EPA­270­R­10­001 A­4
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA Regional Laboratories Core Capabilities ­ FY 2009

II. Physical & Other Determinations (continued)

ANALYTE / GROUP

NAME SAMPLE MEDIA

ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUE REGIONAL CAPABILITY

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

pH

Water Electrometric X X X X X X X X X X

Soil/Sediment Electrometric X X X X X X X X X X

Waste (oil, drum, etc..) Electrometric X X X X X X X X X X

Solids,

Non­Filterable Water Gravimetric X X X X X X X X X X

Solids, Percent Soil/Sediment Gravimetric X X X X X X X X X X

Solids, Total Water Gravimetric X X X X X X X X X X

Solids,

Total Dissolved Water Gravimetric X X X X X X X X X X

Solids,

Total Volatile Water Gravimetric X X X X X X X X X

Turbidity Water Nephelometric X X X X X X X X X

III. Biology

ANALYTE / GROUP

NAME SAMPLE MEDIA

ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUE REGIONAL CAPABILITY

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Coliform, Total Water, Soil &/or Sludge Various X X X X X X X X X

Coliform, Fecal Water, Soil &/or Sludge Various X X X X X X X X X

E. coli Water, Soil &/or Sludge Various X X X X X X X X X

Toxicity

(Acute & Chronic) Water Fathead,Ceriodaphnia X X X X X X X

EPA­270­R­10­001 A­5
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

EPA­270­R­10­001 A­7

APPENDIX B ­ Abbreviations
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

Abbreviations

AIWPS Advanced Integrated Wastewater Pond System

APEs Alkylphenol Ethoxylates

AQS Air Quality System

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials

BNA Base/Neutrals and Acids Extractable Organics

BOD Biological Oxygen Demand

CAFOs Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations

CDC Centers for Disease Control & Prevention

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

CID Criminal Investigation Division

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

COD Chemical Oxygen Demand

CVAA Cold Vapor Atomic Absorption Spectrometry

CWA Chemical Warfare Agent

CWA Clean Water Act

DA Discrete Analyzer

DBCP Dibromochloroproprane

DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane

DHS Department of Homeland Security

DI De­ionized

DO Dissolved Oxygen

EBCI Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians

EDB Ethylene Dibromide

EDCs Endocrine Disrupting Compounds

EDS Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy

ELISA Enzyme­Linked Immunosorbent Assay

EMS Environmental Management Systems

EOC Emergency Operations Center

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

ERLN Environmental Response Laboratory Network

EU Environmental Unit

FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation

FERN Food Emergency Response Network

FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act

FSE Full Scale Exercise

FY Fiscal Year

GC Gas Chromatography

GC/ECD/PID Gas Chromatograph/Electron Capture Detector/Photo­Ionization Detector

GC/MS Gas Chromatography­Mass Spectrometry

GC/NIMS Gas Chromatography/Negative Ion Mass Spectrometry

GC/NPD Gas Chromatography/Nitrogen­Phosphorous Detector

GFAA Graphic Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrometry

HABs Harmful Algal Blooms

HPLC High Performance Liquid Chromatography

HQ EPA Headquarters

IC Ion Chromatography

ICLN Integrated Consortium of Laboratory Networks

ICP Inductively Coupled (Argon) Plasma

ICP/AES Inductively Coupled Plasma/Atomic Emission Spectrometry

ICPMS Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry

EPA­270­R­10­001 A­8
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

Abbreviations

ICS Incident Command System

IR Infrared

ISE Ion Selective Electrode

LC­MS Liquid Chromatography­Mass Spectrometry

LC/MS/MS Liquid Chromatography/Dual Mass Spectrometry

LEED Leadership in Energy and Environment Design

LIMS Laboratory Information Management System

LMII Lake Macroinvertebrate Integrity Index

LRN Laboratory Response Network

LTIG Laboratory Technical Information Group

LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank

MIS Multi­Increment Sampling

mg/L Milligrams/liter

MPRSA Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act

MS­MS Mass Spectrometer­Mass Spectrometer

NAHLN National Animal Health Laboratory Network

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NCG Network Coordinating Group (ICLN)

NDMA N­Nitrosodimethylamine

NEIC National Enforcement Investigations Center

NELAC National Environmental Lab Accreditation Conference

NELAP National Environmental Lab Accreditation Program

NERL National Exposure Research Laboratory

NO3 Nitrate

NO2 Nitrite

NOx Nitrogen Oxide

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NPDN National Plant Diagnostic Network

ODMDS Ocean Dredged Material Disposal Site

OEM Office of Emergency Management

ORD Office of Research & Development

OSWER Office of Solid Waste & Emergency Response

PAHs Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons

PCBs Polychlorinated Biphenyls

PCR Polymerase Chain Reaction

PEP Performance Evaluation Program

PLM Polarized Light Microscopy

PM Particulate Matter

PPE Personal Protective Equipment

ppq part per quadrillion

QA Quality Assurance

QC Quality Control

RARE Regional Applied Research Effort

REMAP Regional Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program

RMP Regional Methods Program

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act

SEM Scanning Electron Microscopy

SIM Selected Ion Mode

EPA­270­R­10­001 A­9
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2009 Annual Report

Abbreviations

SMMP Site Management and Monitoring Plan

SRP Standard Reference Photometer

SO2 Sulfur Dioxide

TCE Trichloroethene

TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure

TIC Toxic Industrial Chemical

TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load

TNI The NELAC Institute

TOC Total Organic Carbon

TOXNET Toxicology and Environmental Information

TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act

TTP Through­The­Probe

ug/L Micrograms/liter

VD/GC/MS Vacuum Distillation in Combination with Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry

VOA Volatile Organic Analytes/Analyses

VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds

VX Chemical Warfare Agent (nerve agent)

WHO World Health Organization

WLA Water Laboratory Alliance

WLA­RP Water Laboratory Alliance Response Plan

WMD Weapons of Mass Destruction

WSC Water Security Division

WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant

XRD X­ray Diffraction

XRF X­ray Flourescence

303(d) Clean Water Act Section/ Total Maximum Daily Loads

EPA­270­R­10­001 A­10