EPA Regional Laboratories...

Advancing the Agency’s Science Agenda

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Regional Laboratory System

FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001

US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 i

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

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

Section I – Overview ........................................................................................................ 2

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 .................................................................................................. 13

Healthy Communities and Ecosystems ............................................................................................ 17

Compliance and Environmental Stewardship ................................................................................... 19

Cross-Goal Strategies ...................................................................................................................... 20

Partnerships(state, local, tribal, etc.) ................................................................................... 20

Expanding Scientific Knowledge and Developing

New Analytical Capabilities ..................................................................................................20

Homeland Security .............................................................................................................. 23

Section III – Progress and Looking to the Future ........................................................ 27

Quality Systems ............................................................................................................................... 28

Sustainability .................................................................................................................................... 28

Identifying and Maximizing Efficiencies ............................................................................... 29

Environmental Management ............................................................................................... 29

Health and Safety ................................................................................................................ 30

Facilities Management ........................................................................................................ 30

Future Challenges ............................................................................................................................ 30

Meeting the Challenge ..................................................................................................................... 31

Appendix A - Regional Laboratories Core Capabilities ............................................... A-1

Appendix B- Abbreviations ............................................................................................ A-7

Table of Contents
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 ii

Region 1: New England Regional Laboratory

Ernest Waterman, Director

waterman.ernest@epa.gov

11 Technology Drive

N. Chelmsford, MA 01863-2431

Phone: 671-918-8632

FAX: 617-918-8540

Region2: Division of Environmental Science and

Assessment Laboratory Branch

John Bourbon, Acting Director

bourbon.john@epa.gov

2890 Woodbridge Ave.

Edison, NJ 08837

Phone: 732-321-4469

Fax: 732-321-6165

Region 3: Environmental Science Center Laboratory

Branch

Cynthia Caporale, Director

caporale.cynthia@epa.gov

701 Mapes Road

Ft. Meade, MD 20755 5350

Phone: 410-305-2732

Fax: 410-305-3095

Region 4: Analytical Support Branch

Gary Bennett, Director

bennett.gary@epa.gov

980 College Station Road

Athens, GA 30605-2720

Phone: 706-355-8551

Fax: 706-355-8803

Region 5: USEPA Region 5 Lab, Central Regional Lab

Dennis Wesolowski, Director

wesolowski.dennis@epa.gov

536 S. Clark Street

Chicago, IL 60605

Phone: 312-353-9084

Fax: 312-886-2591

U.S. EPA Regional Laboratories
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 iii

Region 6: Environmental Services Branch

Houston Laboratory

David Neleigh, Director

neleigh.david@epa.gov

10625 Fallstone Rd.

Houston, TX 77099

Phone: 281-983-2100

Fax: 281-983-2124

Region 7: Regional Science & Technology Center

Michael Davis, Director,

Regional Laboratory

davis.michael@epa.gov

300 Minnesota Ave.

Kansas City, KS 66101

Phone: 913-551 5042

Fax: 913-551-8752

Region 8: USEPA Region 8 Lab

Mark Burkhardt, Director

burkhardt.mark@epa.gov

16194 West 45th Dr.

Golden, CO 80403

Phone: 303-312-7799

Fax: 303-312-7800

Region 9: USEPA Region 9 Lab

Brenda Bettencourt, Director

bettencourt.brenda@epa.gov

1337 S. 46th Street, Bldg. 201

Richmond, CA 94804-4698

Phone: 510-412-2300

Fax: 510-412-2302

Region 10: Manchester Environmental Laboratory

Barry Pepich, Director

pepich.barry@epa.gov

7411 Beach Drive East

Port Orchard, WA 98366

Phone: 360-871-8701

Fax: 360-871-8747

U.S. EPA Regional Laboratories (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 iv

The Regional Laboratory System is an inter-dependent

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 are well positioned to rapidly address

the ever changing needs of a variety of environmental

programs.

In FY 2008, the regional laboratories continued to provide a full range of routine and specialized chemical and

biological testing of air, water, soil, sediment, tissue and

hazardous waste for ambient and compliance monitoring as well as criminal and civil enforcement activities.

The regional laboratories performed over 128,311 analyses in FY 2008, a 27 percent increase over the number

of analyses performed in FY 2007.

In addition to increased analytical output, the regional

laboratories continued to play an increasing role with regard to EPA’s Strategic Plan for Homeland Security. In

FY 2008, the Regional Laboratory System expended

significant effort to enhance regional response capability

in order to respond to emergencies. With support from

the Water Security Division, the ten regional laboratories

continued the national effort to improve drinking water

laboratory preparedness. The regional laboratories provided significant support for a number of other Homeland Security related efforts including pilot development

of fixed laboratory capability for chemical warfare agents

(CWA); development of an All Hazards Receipt Facility;

and validation of methods contained in EPA’s “Standardized Analytical Methods for Use during Homeland Security Events.”

The regional laboratories also provided 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

2008, the regional laboratories performed nearly 11,000

field analyses in support of a variety of regional programs.

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, Progress 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.

Executive Summary
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 1

Section I - Overview
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 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;

- on-site evaluation of drinking water laboratories;

- audits of states' drinking water certification

programs;

- promotion of inter-laboratory 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 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 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, multi-media approach to

solving ecosystem-based 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 decision-making 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 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 5

Section II - Support for EPA’s Strategic Goals
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 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 regional initiatives that range from routine monitoring to criminal enforcement. The following

charts represent the analyses performed for

various EPA programs in FY 2008.

Over 125,000 analyses were performed in

support of EPA programs in FY 2008. However, counting analyses does not completely

capture the level of effort necessary to provide

the wide range of analytical capability represented by the regional laboratories. While

some analyses may take only a few minutes;

others may take several hours or days to complete. Also, the charts do not include analyses

performed for quality assurance, which comprise an additional 30% of the laboratories’ analytical effort.

Demand for analytical support from EPA’s regional laboratories continued to increase in FY

2008 with a 27% increase in analyses performed compared to FY 2007. Over the past

five years, the number of analyses performed

by the regional laboratories has increased by

52%. As represented in the chart below, this

increase is largely due to increased analytical

support for the Superfund program. .
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 7

The regional laboratories are also increasingly

engaged in the Emergency Response Program. In FY 2008, the regional laboratories

provided nearly 8,000 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.

Introduction - (cont.)

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

In FY 2008, over 8% (10,851 field analyses) of

the total number of analyses performed were

field analyses. There are many benefits to providing analyses in the field including quicker

turnaround time for sample processing, realtime interaction between the analyst and the

field staff for data interpretation, and acceleration of environmental decisions at the site.

Introduction - (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 8

Through-the-Probe Audit System:

The through-the-probe audit system provides performance audits at state and local ambient air monitoring

stations. In FY 2008, the regional laboratories supported

the completion of over 200 through-the-probe audits.

These performance audits ensure the validity of the ambient air quality monitoring data. In addition, as part of

an international agreement to provide technical support

to Mexico as they build their national air monitoring program, performance audits were completed in various

cities in Mexico near the U.S. border.

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 2008, the laboratory processed and weighed

986 filters from around the country and validated 931 individual PM2.5 PEP audits for submittal to the 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 2008, the regional laboratories supported the completion of over 300 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 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 9

Other Air Projects

Mercury Emissions from a Cement Plant:

At the request of a local air quality management district

and one of EPA’s regional Air Divisions, the regional laboratory deployed its mercury air monitoring trailer adjacent to an elementary school to monitor levels of

airborne mercury. The school is located downwind of a

cement plant. The trailer has equipment to collect elemental, reactive and particulate mercury data, as well as

concurrent ozone, SO2, and NOx and meteorological

data. The dataset ultimately includes over 8,000 mercury analyses collected at five minute intervals. The

data was used to determine whether airborne mercury

levels were approaching the state’s safety threshold.

Support to Inter-Tribal Council:

At the request of the regional Air Division, support was

provided for an Inter-Tribal Council’s air monitoring program. Support included metals analysis on particulate

(PM2.5 and PM10) filters, and volatile air toxic samples

collected in stainless steel air canisters.

Development of NCore Multi-pollutant Monitoring

Network:

A regional laboratory worked with EPA’s Office of Air

Quality Planning & Standards to assist with a National

Performance Audit Program (NPAP) pilot program for

“through-the-probe” audits of new trace level monitors

that are required at NCore monitoring sites. NCore is a

multi-pollutant network that integrates several advanced

measurement systems for particles, pollutant gases and

meteorology. The NCore Network will address several

objectives, including support for long-term health assessments that contribute to ongoing reviews of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards and support to

scientific studies ranging across technological, health,

and atmospheric process disciplines.

Goal 1: Clean Air (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 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. The regional laboratories support the Agency’s

water goals by providing technical support 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 2008, the

regional laboratories performed 41 evaluations and audits related to drinking water laboratory certification.

These included both on-site evaluations of drinking

water laboratories operated by state and tribal communities and on-site audits of states’ drinking water certification program.

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.

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
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 11

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

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

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.

Yazoo River Basin Study- Phase 3:

The Yazoo River Basin Study was designed to provide

water quality chemistry and other data needed for the

development of TMDLs on ten priority water bodies impacted by nutrients from a variety of sources including

agriculture, point source discharge, and catfish farming.

In FY 2008, the regional laboratory continued to provide

support to this multi-year project with over 400 analyses

of water column samples for long-term biological oxygen

demand (BOD) and with numerous nutrient analyses including total Kjeldahl nitrogen, ammonia, nitrate/nitrite,

total/dissolved phosphorus, and total/dissolved organic

carbon.

Support for National Water Quality Assessments:

Bacterial analyses of nearly 1,500 samples using Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) methods were performed

as part of the Office of Water’s National Lakes Assessment (NLA). Similarly, analyses using PCR methods

were performed on 950 samples for the two year Office

of Water’s National Rivers and Streams Assessment

(NRSA). These assessments will provide statistically

valid regional and national estimates of the condition of

the nation’s water resources. The assessments will

also help build state and tribal capacity for monitoring

and assessment and promote collaboration across jurisdictional boundaries in the assessment of water quality.

In addition to analytical support, another regional laboratory provided training and auditor support for the

NRSA. Laboratory staff received training on NRSA protocols and then subsequently provided training to samplers affiliated with tribal, federal, and other agencies.

Laboratory staff also audited field teams that performed

the NRSA protocols.

Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water (cont.)

Cryptosporidium and Giardia Monitoring:

Both the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and the

Clean Water Act (CWA) address microbial contamination of the Nation’s water. The SDWA authorizes EPA to

regulate contamination in drinking water and allows for

protection of source waters. In accordance with this authority, the EPA released a Filtration Avoidance Determination (FAD) to New York City for the water supplies that

form a significant component of the New York City Watershed. The Region conducts an oversight monitoring

Special Water Projects in FY 2008

Examples of some activities and projects supporting a

variety of water related strategic goals in FY 2008 are

listed here.

Urban Stormwater Monitoring:

An urban stormwater monitoring project was conducted

to support EPA’s water enforcement program. Samples

were primarily collected from rivers flowing through a

major metropolitan area and analyzed for indicators of

sewage contamination. Primary indicators included E.

coli, ammonia, surfactants, and optical brighteners. Selected sites were also monitored for BOD, total suspended solids, chlorine, total phosphorus, and

Pharmaceutical and Personal Care Products (PPCP).

Field test kits were used to evaluate their efficiency at

measuring selected pollutants. Sample results were

used to track down illegal sewage discharges using a

weight of evidence approach, and enforcement actions

were taken when warranted. In the course of 14 weeks,

EPA collected 700 samples from over 150 locations.

This project involved staff from the EPA lab and water

enforcement office. In addition to EPA’s sample collection, over 500 samples were collected by area urban

watershed associations under EPA approved Quality Assurance Project Plans (QAPP).
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 12

program for a variety of contaminants including protozoan pathogens Cryptosporidium and Giardia in the watershed. The monitoring includes the reservoir system

and the streams and tributaries which flow into the

reservoir. The regional laboratory provides the specialized analytical support to the monitoring effort of the watershed and the contributing streams.

Southeastern Periphyton Nutrient Response Project:

A regional laboratory provided nutrient analyses for the

Southeastern Periphyton Nutrient Response Project.

This study is designed to investigate the relationship of

biological response signals to aquatic nutrient concentrations along a stream network. The project will evaluate the ability of selected field methods, data analyses

and monitoring techniques to characterize biological responses to nutrient conditions. Information gained from

this effort will assist EPA and state agencies in establishing protective water quality standards for flowing waters.

Water Quality and Stormwater Run-off Management

Practices:

Analytical assistance was provided to EPA’s Office of

Research and Development for an evaluation of

stormwater run-off management practices within a midwestern watershed. The regional laboratory provided

monthly analysis of creek samples for nitrogen, phosphorus and metals. The water quality data supplied by

the laboratory provides important information about the

effectiveness of the various stormwater management

practices that were under evaluation.

Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment

Rule (LT2):

In collaboration with its Drinking Water Program, the regional laboratory provided support for the LT2 rule by

assisting with oversight and evaluation of monitoring results from approximately 50 public water systems and

laboratories. The purpose of the LT2 rule is to reduce

disease incidence associated with Cryptosporidium and

other disease-causing microorganisms in drinking water.

The rule will supplement existing regulations by targeting additional Cryptosporidium treatment requirements

to higher risk systems. The rule contains provisions to

reduce risks from uncovered finished water storage facilities and to ensure that systems maintain microbial

protection as they take steps to reduce the formation of

disinfection byproducts. The rule will apply to all systems that use surface water or ground water under the

direct influence of surface water. The Schedule 4 portion of the rule involves the monitoring of E. coli data in

smaller water systems.

Goal 2: Clean and Safe Water (cont.)

Colorado Lakes Project:

Over 900 field analyses and over 350 laboratory analyses were provided for the Colorado Lakes Project. The

data provided by the laboratory will provide assistance

for the development of nutrient criteria for lakes in the

eastern part of the state.

Application of Microbial Source Tracking:

Microbial source tracking, which was developed by

EPA’s Office of Research and Development and mobilized by the laboratory two years ago, is now provided

as a routine service to regional clients. The technique

uses PCR technology to differentiate between human,

ruminant and other types of fecal contamination. During

the year it was applied to five watershed projects in the

analysis of over 200 samples to help investigators fingerprint the origin of fecal contaminants that were exceeding regulatory standards.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 13

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 2008, over 60 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.

The regional laboratories provided nearly 3,000 analyses to address hazardous and non-hazardous waste issues associated with the RCRA program and over 1,900

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. Analytical procedures are often

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

described below:

Tissue Analyses for Metals at Trace Levels:

At the request of their Superfund Division, the regional

laboratory took on several challenging matrices from

two Superfund sites. One Superfund project required

sample preparation and digestion for metals analysis of

geoduck clam samples in the vicinity. Breakdown of the

stringy tissue matrix was particularly challenging, requiring extreme pulverization, followed by freeze-drying,

then microwave digestion in mixed acids.

Another Superfund project involved refinement of

ICP/MS method 200.8 to analyze for lead in songbird

blood. The project was particularly challenging due to

the low volumes of blood samples that were available,

and the extreme levels of cleanliness needed to analyze

for lead at part per trillion (ppt) levels in the blood. After

satisfactory results were obtained on reference samples, songbird blood samples from the site were successfully analyzed for lead as part of the five year

sampling cycle. Another project at the same site involved analysis of large mammal and waterfowl fecal

samples. The samples have characteristics of both tissue and soil samples. The samples needed to be pulverized, freeze-dried, and microwave digested.

Because of potential coliform contamination, extra precautions needed to be taken to avoid dust from the fecal

samples.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 14

Superfund and RCRA Projects

Examples of some activities and projects supporting a

variety of Superfund and RCRA projects in FY 2008 are

listed here.

Supporting Site Decisions:

With the combined effort of its field sampling team, its

mobile lab, and its fixed lab, a regional laboratory provided time critical assistance to an EPA Remedial Project Manager and to the state that ultimately led to a

more cost effective site remediation strategy. Soil gas

sampling followed by Geoprobe® soil borings supported

by immediate field analyses lead to the discovery and

characterization of a shallow leach field source of chlorinated solvent contamination. Ultimately this portion of

the site was remediated by excavation as opposed to

soil vapor extraction. Groundwater contamination at the

same site is being treated by sodium permanganate injection. The lab’s Quality Assurance Unit furnished extensive technical support for designing a monitoring

system before the injection of the permanganate and

after injection to determine how the in-situ treatment

system was working. The lab’s field sampling team had

a limited amount of time between injection well completion and permanganate injections for collection of samples. Rapid analysis by the fixed laboratory allowed the

sodium permanganate injection plan to be modified to

place oxidant in locations that had the highest concentrations of contamination. The data generated by the regional lab resulted in decisions to reduce injection

volumes at several points and increase injection volumes at the high contaminant locations 70 feet below

ground surface. The cost of the sodium permanganate

was over $250,000 and thus the better placement of the

oxidant meant more cost effective and efficient remediation of the site.

Field Methods and Mobile Laboratory Support:

One region’s field screening methods performed by their

mobile laboratory have become so important to decision

making at removal sites that several times during the

year the mobile lab has been stationed at one site while

receiving samples from another relatively nearby site.

The mobile lab support shortened sample transport

times and sped up turnaround times on analytical results allowing real-time guidance on the limits of investigations and excavations. In addition to confirmatory

analyses in support of the mobile lab field methods, the

same region’s fixed laboratory now performs the mobile

lab field screening methods in-house to support one day

turn around analyses and near real time decision making for sites that the mobile laboratory cannot support.

Monitoring Acid Mine Drainage:

Three water quality monitors (or sondes) have been deployed and are being maintained by the regional laboratory at a Superfund site associated with an abandoned

open-pit sulfur mine. The mine is located in the Sierra

Nevada Mountains at an elevation of approximately

7,000 feet. Acid drainage from the mine has had negative impacts on valuable nearby water sources.

Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 15

The sondes are placed in creeks emanating from the

site and they monitor pH, temperature, oxidation-reduction potential, specific conductance, and depth on an

hourly basis. The sondes transmit data hourly via satellite modem to a database accessible to EPA staff and

the public. This information is used to investigate how

and where mine drainage is generated and ultimately to

provide information on options for controlling and treating the problem.

Characterization of Mine Drainage:

At the request of the regional Superfund Federal Facilities Program, the regional laboratory completed two

mine dump sampling events and a mine tracer study

near an abandoned base and precious metals mine.

The project provided information to further characterize

how drainage from the mine site impacts water quality in

nearby water bodies. Ultimately, the data will be used to

determine whether or not to list the abandoned mine as

a Superfund site.

Indoor Air and Soil Vapor Intrusion Investigations:

Vapor intrusion is the migration of vapors containing

volatile chemicals from buried waste and/or contaminated groundwater through the subsurface soils and

into indoor air spaces of overlying buildings. The vapors

may accumulate in dwellings or occupied buildings and

pose an unacceptable risk of chronic or acute health effects. To address this concern, a regional laboratory’s

Air Monitoring Team and Chemistry Lab provided support to the Superfund Removal and Remedial Program

by performing indoor air and soil vapor intrusion investigations at six sites during FY 2008. The number of

buildings/homes selected for a given project was determined based on the contaminated source potential to

impact the occupied buildings’ indoor air quality. At

each building, indoor air samples were collected over a

24-hour period in the basement area and then analyzed

by the chemistry lab using a GC/MS. In addition, subslab soil gas grab samples were collected and analyzed

immediately on-site by the regional mobile laboratory

using GC/ECD/PID instrumentation. The combination of

field sampling and on- and off-site analysis provided risk

assessors with quality-assured data in a timely fashion

thus enabling them to effectively evaluate the risk to

building occupants and take quick action to remediate

risk.

Migration of Groundwater Contaminants to Soil and

Air:

Analyses were performed to measure volatile organic

compounds (VOCs) in air samples collected at a site

contaminated with 1,1-dichloroethene (DCE.) The project was implemented to determine if VOCs in contaminated groundwater were migrating through the soil and

posing a health threat to residents living above the

contaminated groundwater plume. In addition, the

County Health Department and the State Department of

Public Health conducted an investigation to evaluate potential petroleum contamination of the drinking water following complaints from residents of gasoline-like odors

emanating from their faucets. Initial analytical results indicated high levels of petroleum and solvent contamination. Subsequently, EPA received an emergency

request from the State Department of Natural Resources to provide bottled water to 14 residential properties located near the site. Based on concentrations of

contaminants in their water supply, residents were immediately notified not to cook with their well water and

to limit bathing times.

Scrap Metal Superfund Site:

At the request of the Emergency and Remedial Response Division, Removal Action Branch, analytical

services were provided to a Superfund site associated

with an inactive car and scrap metal junk yard. Over

200 soil samples were analyzed for the determination of

eight toxicity characteristic metals using the Toxicity

Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP). The data

provided by the lab was used to delineate soil contamination at the site and to assess the volume of contaminated soil for removal and disposal. The analytical

support provided by the regional laboratory represented

a significant saving to the site’s budget. The potential

cost for analytical services for this project from a subcontract laboratory would have been over $200,000.

Abandoned Pesticide Manufacturing Facility:

Over 300 routine and non-routine organic and metals

Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 16

analyses were performed at a 15-acre abandoned pesticide manufacturing facility. The bulk of the contaminants of concern are pesticide-related compounds

(DDT, chlorobenzilate, and their partial-breakdown compounds.) Contaminants identified in the soil and

groundwater originated from production activities at the

site.

The contamination has primarily impacted the shallow

groundwater aquifer on-site. A relict sinkhole has allowed some impact to the deeper aquifer. The site is located in an area of mixed agricultural, residential and

commercial/industrial uses. Areas surrounding the site

are experiencing significant development pressure.

This site is being addressed through both federal and

state actions.

Superfund Site Well Installation and Sampling:

The regional laboratory Environmental Services Assistance Team mobilized the EPA owned 6600 Geoprobe®

and a pressure washer/decontamination trailer to a Superfund site to collect core samples and install monitoring wells. During the eight week project a total of 333

soil samples were collected for laboratory analyses. Additionally, 33 “stick-up” and 24 “flush mount” monitoring

wells were installed. The project assisted with the evaluation of potential and follow-up remediation actions.

Emergency Response

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

time-critical 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:

Coal Spill:

Analytical and technical support was provided in association with the 2007 incident in which six CSX railcars,

containing an estimated 600 tons of coal, fell into the

Anacostia River. DDOE participated in split sampling

events with CSX and sent 3 rounds of samples to the

regional laboratory for analysis. Because of the unusual

circumstances, the samples arrived with minimal notification. The first round consisted of two deliveries of

sediment samples, and rounds two and three were

water samples. The regional laboratory provided numerous analyses of these samples including: volatile and

semi-volatile organic compounds, metals, mercury,

cyanide, sulfate, pH, pesticides and PCBs, total organic

carbon, total suspended solids, total dissolved solids

and hardness. Having independent analytical data to

refer to greatly benefited DDOE in their negotiations

with CSX.

Mississippi Oil Spill:

Quick turnaround analysis of water associated with the

Mississippi Oil Spill was provided in 2008. The spill involved more than 400,000 gallons of fuel oil and required the temporary closure of 98 miles of the

Mississippi River. The laboratory provided analytical results within 24 hours after sample receipt which aided

responders with the evaluation of the extent of the oil

spill.

Hurricane Response:

Despite the fact that they had already lost power and

water as a result of Hurricane Ike, a regional laboratory

was able to deploy their mobile laboratory to Louisiana

to provide analytical assistance in the wake of Hurricane

Gustav which hit shortly before Hurricane Ike. The mobile lab provided microbiological analyses of well water

samples. The data was used to determine whether to

reduce or eliminate the need for a boil-water notice.

Goal 3: Land Preservation and Restoration (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 17

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

approaches and partnerships.

Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems

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.

The regional laboratories also support Agency efforts to

address community-based environmental and public

health issues including:

Critical Support at High Profile Site:

The Fort Reno Park Site received significant attention

from the District of Columbia government, the NationalPark Service, and the US Geological Survey, as well as

the local DC media and citizenry. EPA played a critical

part in determining that there was not a threat due to arsenic in the park. The quick processing and turnaround

of the laboratory requests, analysis and data validation

for the samples from Fort Reno Park and the two adjacent schools was a major factor in our being able to

quickly resolve this situation and assure the public, the

DC government, and the National Park Service that

there was not a threat to public health due to arsenic in

the park.

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.

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 2008, the regional laboratories performed over 900 analyses in support of the EPA’s

Brownfields Program.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 18

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. Examples of ecosystem related projects supported by the regional laboratories include:

Elizabeth River Project:

The goal of the Elizabeth River Project is to restore the

environmental quality of the Elizabeth River, a tributary

of the Chesapeake Bay. The EPA regional laboratory

provided support for this project by providing analysis of

river sediments for grain size and total organic carbon.

This analytical work supports the third edition of the Elizabeth River Watershed Action Plan. The ultimate goal

of the plan, which was prepared by numerous stakeholders including EPA, is to make the river safe for

swimming, fishing and shellfishing by 2020.

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 Lake-wide 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.

Delaware Estuary Benthic Survey Initiated:

In FY 2008, the most comprehensive benthic survey

ever performed on the Delaware estuary was launched.

The Partnership for the Delaware Estuary is the lead organization on this project which involves sampling up to

250 stations at the mouth of the estuary (brackish to

fresh waters.) The study involves probabilistic sampling

across strata defined by salinity and sediment-type.

The regional laboratory provided analysis of 200+ sediment samples for metals, total organic carbon, and grain

size.

Anticipated outcomes of the project include:

1) a comprehensive inventory of benthic species, knowledge essential for resource protection and restoration;

2) an assessment of the health of the estuary’s benthic

communities, providing a baseline for future monitoring

and assessment;

3) spatial integration of biological information with bathymetric and sediment distribution mapping.

Goal 4: Healthy Communities and Ecosystems (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 19

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.

Goal 5: Compliance and Environmental Stewardship

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 2008, the regional laboratories provided analyses of over 900 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.

Investigation of Potential RCRA Violations:

Analytical support was provided for a criminal investigation of a manufacturer suspected of illegally disposing of

spent solvents used in its painting operation. The spent

solvents were allegedly mixed with sawdust and disposed of as solid rather than hazardous waste. The laboratory provided analysis of samples for volatile organic

compounds, metals, Toxicity Characteristic Leaching

Procedure (TCLP), and flashpoint. Results from the

analyses were used by investigators to determine if the

facility had violated RCRA regulations for hazardous

waste disposal.

RCRA Enforcement:

In association with a RCRA enforcement investigation at

a major steel manufacturing facility, the regional laboratory completed TCLP extractions for metals, mercury,

volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds on two

dozen waste determination samples.

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act

(FIFRA) Enforcement:

The regional laboratory provided analytical support for

the investigation of a new commercial pesticide/bactericide with improper labeling of chlorine components. A

chlorine concentration study was conducted to determine if a human health hazard existed that needed to

be added to a lawsuit against the manufacturers of the

product. The chlorine comparison study encompassed

more than 130 analyses.

Regional Laboratory Criminal Support Program:

After receiving National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference (NELAC) accreditation and receiving the approval of the local Criminal Investigations

Division (CID) and the EPA’s National Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC), a regional laboratory re-established its criminal investigation support program.

The lab established an SOP for criminal samples and

began accepting samples, supporting two CID investigations in FY2008.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 20

Cross Goal Strategies

Many of EPA’s efforts contribute to the 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

cross-agency and cross-media efforts are discussed

below.

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 efforts in this regard include:

Microbial Water Quality Test Using Quantitative

Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR):

In a collaborative partnership with the local New Jersey

county health departments and the state of New Jersey,

the regional laboratory conducted the first large-scale

study using the rapid qPCR method to assess Enterococcus data from marine recreational waters over a

wide geographic range. The study involved sampling 20

bathing beaches and bays along the New Jersey coast.

The study design allowed for assessment of spatial,

temporal, and chemical variability associated with the

sampling locations. The purpose of this study was to

evaluate the use of qPCR technology as a more rapid

recreational water test method for Enterococcus measurements, and to perform a method comparison with existing microbial methods, e.g. Membrane Filtration and

Enterolert. It is likely that the results of this study will be

used as the basis for initiating routine use of the rapid,

real-time qPCR method to monitor Enterococcus in New

Jersey marine recreational waters within the next two

years. The study results have national application in

EPA’s establishment of rapid test methods for real-time

bacterial water quality assessment of recreational waters, including development of qPCR- based water quality criteria.

2008 Laboratory Technical Information Group (LTIG)

Conference:

The Region 8 laboratory hosted the 2008 Laboratory

Technical Information Group (LTIG) Conference. There

were over 50 attendees, including laboratory scientists

from the Regions, Program Offices and the Office of Research and Development. The LTIG was formed in

1998 to create and sustain working relationships among

USEPA regional laboratories and other USEPA entities

(ORD, NERL, NEIC) to promote a free exchange of

technical knowledge and ideas. The LTIG 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 2008 conference included Application of Lab Data to Mining Remediation, Reducing Solvent Use during Sample Extraction, Criminal

Investigations, Validation Study of CWA Analysis by

ICP, Food Emergency Response Network, World Trade

Center Dust, RCRA Methods, and Pesticide Screening

Methods among others.

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

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 below.

Evaluation of Immunoassay Techniques:

A Regional Methods Initiative project to evaluate immunoassay test kits for the quantitative determination of
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 21

Cross Goal Strategies (cont.)

endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) continued in

FY 2008. The project is a collaborative effort between

EPA Regions III and V, ORD (NRMRL and NERL),

USGS and Abraxis, LLC. The primary objective of the

project is to determine whether commercially available

immunoassays (tests that employ antibodies as analytical agents) are able to accurately and reliably analyze

common water samples for selected EDCs. Currently,

high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), gas

chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), or liquid

chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) are the

primary methods used to detect EDCs; however, immunoassay techniques, particularly enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), are becoming increasingly

popular due to their sensitivity, short analysis time, and

cost-effectiveness. Over four weeks, four different types

of water samples (DI water, surface water, WWTP influent and effluent) spiked with EDC’s were analyzed using

both immunoassay (ELISA) test kits and GC-MS, and

the results compared. If verified, the immunoassay test

kits could be used by EPA, state and local programs as

a screening tool, since they are much faster and more

cost effective than the conventional GC-MS, HPLC, or

LC-MS methods. This verification is being conducted

under the auspices of EPA’s Environmental Technology

Verification Program.

Method 8261A Vacuum Distillation:

A regional laboratory developed the capability to perform EPA SW846 Method 8261A, “Volatile Organic

Compounds by Vacuum Distillation in Combination with

Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (VD/GC/MS).”

This method is based on a vacuum distillation and cryogenic trapping procedure (Method 5032) followed by

gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS). The

method incorporates internal standard-based matrix correction, where the analysis of multiple internal standards

is used to predict matrix effects. The normalization of

matrix effects has the impact of making Method 8261

analyses matrix independent and allows multiple matrices to be analyzed within a sample batch. As a result,

the calculations involved are specific to this method, and

may not be used with data generated by another

method. This method is used to determine the concentrations of volatile organic compounds, and some lowboiling semivolatile organic compounds, in a variety of

liquid, solid, and oily waste matrices, as well as animal

tissues. This method differs from Method 5032/8260 in

the use of internal standards to measure matrix effects

and compensate for analyte responses for matrix effects. This method is applicable to nearly all types of

matrices, including water, soil, sediment, sludge, oil, and

animal tissue. This method should be considered for

samples where matrix effects are anticipated to severely

impact analytical results. The method can be used to

quantitate most volatile organic compounds that have a

boiling point below 245°C and a water-to-air partition coefficient below 15,000, which includes compounds that

are miscible with water. Note that this range includes

compounds not normally considered to be volatile analytes (e.g., nitrosamines, aniline, and pyridine). This

capability has been applied toward Superfund projects.

Transferability of Drinking Water Liquid Chromatography Mass Spectrometer (LC/MS) Libraries:

The Waters Corporation/EPA LC/MS library protocol

was verified through an inter-laboratory study that involved federal, state, and private laboratories. The results demonstrated that the libraries are transferable

between the same manufacturer’s product lines, and

have applicability between manufacturers. The ion ratios within a mass spectrum were different between two
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 22

manufacturers’ instruments, but the same product ions

were usually observed. Despite the ion ratio differences, the NIST search engine’s match probability was

96 percent or greater for 64 out of 67 of the compounds.

Through a cooperative research and development

agreement (CRADA) between Waters Corporation and

the regional laboratory, the libraries and protocol are

available free of charge. This allows environmental laboratories to search the LC/MS library to tentatively identify a substance of concern which can be further

confirmed using the library protocol to identify product

ion spectra (LC/MS/MS). This is a fast screening technique that aids in the identification of substances of concern in drinking water threat situations.

Laboratory Validation of EPA Methods:

Analytical support was provided to the Office of Ground

Water and Drinking Water for the second laboratory validation of EPA Method 523, Rev. 2, "Determination of Triazine Pesticides and Their Degradates in Drinking

Water by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry

(GC/MS)." Method 523 is an improvement to existing

methods for herbicides in drinking water because it includes degradation products. The study included determination of Lowest Concentration Minimum Reporting

Level (LCMRL). The LCMRL is defined as the lowest

spiking concentration such that the probability of spike

recovery in the 50% to 150% range is at least 99%. This

determination was accomplished by doing sample

preparation and analysis of four replicates each of

seven different concentrations in reagent water. This

was followed by an assessment of precision and accuracy in real water matrices including three sets of replicates of unfortified and fortified tap water.

Low Level N-Nitrosodimethylamine and 1,4-Dioxane

Analyses:

In response to a request from the regional Superfund

Division, the regional laboratory developed the capability to analyze for n-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) and

1,4-dioxane in groundwater samples down to reporting

limit levels of 10 and 80 ng/L, respectively. A modified

version of EPA Method 521 was used for NDMA with

solid phase extraction, capillary GC, and chemical ionization mass spectrometer-mass spectrometer (MSMS). EPA Method 522 was used for the 1,4-dioxane

analyses using GC/MS. These capabilities were developed in order to support evaluation of several former

Nike missile sites.

Tire Crumb Components in Playgrounds and Synthetic Turf Fields:

In the spring of 2008, national attention was raised concerning exposures to recycled tire crumbs in playgrounds and artificial turf playing fields. An ad-hoc

Agency-wide workgroup was formed to determine if

samples could be collected and analyzed to begin assessing the potential environmental risks from exposure

to these materials. The cross-Agency workgroup was

chaired by the National Exposure Research Laboratory/Office of Research and Development (NERL/ORD)

and the Office of Children's Environmental Health Protection and Environmental Education (OCHPEE) and

members included Headquarter’s program offices, Regional and Headquarter’s communications staff and scientists in several Regions.

A very limited scoping study was proposed, designed

and recommended by the science workgroup as a

means to generate consistently collected data across

the country that could be used to help determine if further research was warranted. Most of the sampling and

analyses were performed by NERL/ORD. Because

NERL/ORD did not have air analytical capabilities, a regional laboratory provide analytical support for the air

sampling. The regional laboratory had previously

Cross Goal Strategies (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 23

participated as partners in the design of the scoping

study. The analytical support included analysis of approximately forty samples collected at five locations.

Certified canisters, field blanks and National Institute of

Standards and Technology (NIST) QC samples were

prepared in the laboratory and shipped to NERL/ORD in

4 batches of 11. Samples were analyzed by GC/MS

using a TO-15 based method. Concentrations detected

were consistent with typical ambient air levels.

The challenges for conducting the study included a

short window for sampling, high public scrutiny and no

allocated funds for sampling or analysis. Basically, the

study had to be done with what ORD and the Regions

could offer for the summer/fall 2008. Capabilities of

ORD and regional labs were leveraged to produce preliminary data that will guide next steps in investigating

an emerging issue.

Achieving Lower Detection Limits:

In order to meet the state drinking water detection level

requirements for reporting, the regional laboratory developed the capability to analyze 1,2,3-trichloropropane

to 0.005 ug/L. The reduced detection limit was needed

because several Superfund sites in the state were required to monitor groundwater to this lower level.

Transmission Electron Microscopy Development:

In order to meet continued demand for asbestos analysis associated with Libby, Montana studies, the regional

laboratory began the early stages of establishing a

transmission electron microscopy laboratory. In FY

2008, the laboratory processed and analyzed 2518 asbestos samples from Libby, Montana using the polarized

light microscopy test method. This is the second year of

this environmental project with on-site quality assurance

assistance as well as laboratory analyses. The transmission electron microscopy method is a more sensitive

method for asbestos.

Analysis for Perchlorate in Milk and Watermelon:

In order to assist the regional Superfund program with

an assessment of exposure to perchlorate, the regional

laboratory developed the capability to analyze for perchlorate in milk and watermelon samples. The samples

were collected from towns where perchlorate was

known to be a contaminant based on proximity to former

military operations. The method developed was a modified version of an FDA approach with the application of

an ion chromatograph/mass spectrometer and improved

clean-up techniques. A reporting limit of 0.8 μg/L for

perchlorate in milk was achieved.

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 OSWEROEM’s 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 four

significant development projects:

Cross Goal Strategies (cont.)

Evaluating a prototype All Hazard Receipt Facility designed to screen for hazards in unknown or

suspicious samples;

Developing capability to analyze environmental

samples for chemical warfare agents and their

environmental degradation products;

Developing and testing Regional Laboratory Response Plans (RLRPs) with state and utility laboratories and other stakeholders to enable a

coordinated multi-laboratory response to a major

contamination event;

Establishment of an ERLN.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 24

All Hazard Receipt Facility (AHRF)

Following September 11, 2001 and the subsequent anthrax release, the public health and environmental laboratory community requested that the federal government

develop a standardized approach to sample receipt and

screening under conditions designed to protect laboratory facilities and staff. The federal response is the development of the prototype AHRF and the All Hazards

Screening Protocol. The AHRF and All Hazards

Screening Protocol (the Protocol) were designed to assess explosive, chemical and radiological hazards that

might be associated with an unknown or suspicious

sample, and to assist laboratory managers in making

safe and appropriate decisions about sample acceptance and further laboratory analysis.

EPA and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS),

in collaboration with the Department of Defense (DoD),

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Center for Disease Control (CDC), are evaluating the efficacy of the

AHRF and Protocol as critical steps toward building an

environmental laboratory network capable of responding

to terrorist incidents. Evaluation of the prototype AHRF

will result in a standard describing critical laboratory design and engineering criteria and a robust unknown

sample screening protocol which can be flexibly integrated into public health and environmental laboratories

requiring the capability to screen unknown samples

throughout the country.

Status: Two prototype AHRFs were delivered in late

2006, one to a Regional Laboratory and the other to a

State Public Health Laboratory. In 2007, the partner federal agencies conducted evaluations of the efficacy of

the prototype AHRFs, the testing protocol and associated laboratory equipment. The final evaluation report

was completed by ORD National Homeland Security

Research Center in early 2008. The conclusion of the

evaluation resulted in further adjustments to the screening protocol as suggested by the subject matter experts

from EPA, FBI, and DoD. The final protocol revisions

were tested with a series of surrogate samples at the

EPA test site in the spring of 2008. DHS and EPA accepted comments on the AHRF program and the evaluation of the prototypes during an open session held in

June 2008 during the APHL annual meeting. As a result

of this session the AHRF protocol was jointly published

by EPA and DHS in September 2008 and DHS initiated

a follow-on task with DoD to develop tiered guidance for

construction of AHRF facilities at fixed laboratories.

Chemical Warfare Agent (CWA) Fixed Laboratory Pilot Project

Five regional and two state laboratories are participating

in a DHS/OSWER-funded project to develop an ability to

analyze samples for specialized chemicals that might be

used in terrorist incidents. This new EPA regional laboratory capability will allow confirmation of CWAs in environmental samples, such as soil, debris, and water

samples, associated with the clean up of sites contaminated from a terrorist incident.

Cross Goal Strategies (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 25

In 2006, in response to the findings of the White House

Chemical End to End Assessment, DHS launched an effort to address a critical national vulnerability by substantially increasing the laboratory capacity for analysis

of chemical warfare agents (CWA) in environmental

samples. DHS and EPA selected two EPA regional laboratories and one state laboratory as the Phase I pilot

sites to establish CWA capability in the northeast. In

2007, DHS and EPA selected four Phase II pilot laboratories (three EPA and one state) in the west and southeast to expand national capacity.

Status: During 2008, the three Phase I pilot laboratories, trained analytical staff to handle agents, received

initial shipments of CWA calibration materials, and took

steps to complete laboratory preparation for method validation work. The four Phase II laboratories have identified gaps in their laboratories and begun necessary

infrastructure, documentation and instrumentation upgrades. Several EPA offices are providing critical technical support to the CWA pilot laboratories. In 2008,

EPA’s National Homeland Security Research Center

(NHSRC) completed a single-laboratory evaluation of

microscale extraction procedures for preparation and

analysis of aqueous and solid samples containing nerve

and blister agent (GF, GB, GD (GD1 and GD2), VX, HD)

residues. Single-laboratory evaluation of procedures for

wipes and Ottawa sand are underway and should be

completed by early 2009. A number of EPA Regional

labs are assisting ORD NHSRC with method development for CWA degradation products as a part of the

overall effort. Region 5 has developed LCMSMS methods for selected degradation products and Region 7 is

performing similar work for other products using ICPMS.

As the methods are developed other regions are participating in multi-laboratory validation studies to demonstrate method performance.

Drinking Water Regional Laboratory Response Planning

Over the past two years the EPA Water Security Division

(WSD) has sponsored a nationwide project to increase

laboratory cooperation for response to drinking water

emergencies. This effort, the Drinking Water Laboratory

Response Preparedness Project, was designed to improve intra-regional laboratory cooperation for response

to actual or suspected water contamination incidents.

The project, developed in partnership with EPA regional,

drinking water utility and state laboratories, responds to

Homeland Security Presidential Directive 9, which

charges EPA with developing a comprehensive, nationwide surveillance program for water quality and a laboratory network to support such a program.

Status: In 2007 a Regional Laboratory Response Plan

(RLRP) was developed by each regional laboratory in

partnership with state and water utility laboratories.

During 2008, Functional Exercises were conducted at

each EPA Region to test Regional Laboratory Response

Plans (RLRPs).

Eleven separate exercises (ten regions plus an independent test in Hawaii) were conducted between February and September, 2008 involving a total of sixty-four

participating laboratories. These exercises focused on

testing and evaluating the RLRP and the roles of member laboratories during a potential contamination event

impacting a drinking water system.

Cross Goal Strategies (cont.)

The goals of the functional exercise program

were to:

Reveal procedural weaknesses in each region’s

RLRP;

Practice and improve coordination between and

among RLRP member laboratories;

Identify additional systems and mechanisms

needed to provide sample transport, data transfer, and analytical support for a drinking water

contamination event;

Define factors associated with analysis including

method selection, required level of quality control

(QC), and analytical time constraints;

Fine-tune processes associated with data, including reporting, transfer, and compilation.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 26

ERLN

In 2008 the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response 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

network will be expanded 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.

The ERLN is an Agency-wide, 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 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 27

Section III - Progress and Looking to the Future
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 28

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 recently formed NELAC Institute (TNI.) The

TNI is a non-profit 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 of the 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 2008, five regional laboratories were

due for biennial on-site re-accreditation assessments.

All five laboratories completed their scheduled assessments and were successfully re-accredited by NELAP.

In order to maintain and improve the regional laboratory

quality systems, regional laboratories regularly conduct

internal audits, participate in performance evaluation

studies, and review and revise quality management

plans and standard operating procedures as necessary.

In FY 2008, four of the ten regional laboratories completed audits of their QA system either by internal quality

assurance programs or state programs.

One notable activity related to quality system improvements is described below:

Improved Management of Laboratory SOPs:

In order to make it easier to keep all SOPs current and

in order to assure that all staff members are following

only the current SOPs, a regional laboratory is using a

Lotus Notes based database as an electronic document

control system. The system includes all sampling, analytical, health & safety, quality systems, and facility operations Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). Write

access for entering, editing, and archiving the controlled

documents in the database is limited to designated Document Control Contact staff. All staff have read rights

and can access the database from anywhere they can

access the Lotus Notes system. All staff must read and

attest to all SOPs that are relevant to their functions. Attesting can be done electronically in the Lotus Notes

database. The system can generate reports showing

staff that have attested to a particular document, or

which documents have been attested to by a particular

staff member. An automated e-mail notification system

alerts staff to read and attest to new or updated SOPs

and reminds them of annual review requirements. Analytical SOPs in the database are cross-referenced with

their LIMS analysis code, and with sample collection

and preservation information.

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 long-term efficiencies and cost saving

opportunities within the regional laboratory network has

become another key sustainability issue.

Section III
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 29

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.

i. Identifying and Maximizing Efficiencies

In FY 2008, the ten regional laboratories continued their

efforts to identify and implement long-term 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 evaluating strategic

sourcing options. A few notable examples of these efforts are described here.

Equipment Replacement:

Existing autoanalyzers for mineral and nutrient colorimetric tests were replaced with a discrete analyzer. On

average, per test, the discrete analyzer uses 10 times

less reagent per sample, and generates 10 times less

waste per sample. It also reduces analyst time through

its’ multitasking capabilities, allowing up to six different

chemical tests to run on a large batch of samples. The

former system could only run one or two chemical tests

per instrument. The discrete analyzer can also analyze

one sample while mixing reagents for subsequent

chemical tests on the same sample.

Laboratory Vacuum System Upgrade:

The existing laboratory vacuum system was upgraded

and replaced in FY 2008 resulting in an annual water

usage reduction of 5,000 gallons.

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. Most laboratory EMSs were

established over three years ago. However, EPA is required to periodically declare that its EMSs conform to

the requirements expressed in Executive Order (E.O.)

13423, "Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy

and Transportation Management.” In FY 2008, all regional laboratories conducted conformance reviews of

their EMSs in preparation for the required triennial declaration of conformance. All ten regional laboratories

completed their declaration of conformance by the

deadline of December 31, 2008.

In addition, Executive Order (E.O.) 13423 requires all

Federal agencies to submit a report summarizing the

status of Environmental Management Systems (EMS)

implementation at appropriate organizations. EPA’s performance in this regard is an integral metric of OMB’s

annual Environmental Stewardship Scorecard. In FY

2008, 9 out of 10 regional laboratories were rated

“green” with regard to their EMS performance.

Other notable environmental management measures

implemented at the regional laboratories include:

Regional Office Building - Green Roof:

Rooftop gardens are now a part of the regional office

building. The green roof helps reduce stormwater runoff,

filter pollutants from stormwater, and contribute to overall sustainability by reducing building energy needs and

minimizing urban heat island effects. The regional laboratory supports green roof research and maintains a

rooftop weather station for the project.

Facility-wide Recycling:

After the existing recycling service provided by their

solid waste vendor was terminated, the regional laboratory established its own facility-wide recycling program.

In FY 2008, the new program delivered over 3600

pounds of recyclables (paper, cardboard, plastic, glass,

batteries, electronics and aluminum) to a local recycling

facility.

Section III (cont.)
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 30

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, high-pressure 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

safety record as proof of their efforts. Highlights of

health and safety activities for the past year include:

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 long-term

and short-term challenges to meeting their goals. The

following challenges represent a summary of those

needs identified by the regional laboratories.

Section III (cont.)

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 day-to-day oversight activities for

proper maintenance, but the planning, budgeting, and

construction of needed modifications such as building

expansions and upgrades of servicing equipment.

All laboratories have medical monitoring programs to evaluate and track the health of those

employees with a significant possibility of workplace exposure to hazardous compounds;

All regional laboratories undergo a periodic,

comprehensive audit of safety, health, environmental compliance and internal controls by the

Headquarter’s Safety, Health and Environmental

Management Division;

Regional laboratories have active health and

safety committees that are well represented by

laboratory employees. These committees provide a forum for discussing safety and health issues, and assist the safety officer in planning

training activities and organizing safety inspections;

All laboratories conduct annual refresher health

and safety training. New employees receive 24-

hour course training in health and safety.

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 cost-effective 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);

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

an intergovernmental 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.
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 31

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:

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;

Intra-regional networking with other governmental and private sector laboratories to improve

communications, coordinate development efforts

and provide mutual support.

Section III (cont.)

US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 A-1

APPENDIX A - Regional Laboratories Core Capabilities
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 A-2

EPA Regional Laboratories Core Capabilities - FY 2008

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 Titrametric X X X X X

Alkalinity Water Titrametric XXXXXXXXXX

Asbestos Solids/Bulk material PLM X X X X

Soil/Sediment PLM X X

Chloride Water Colorimetric X

Water IC XXXXXX XXX

Water Titrametric X X

Chromium,

Hexavalent (Cr+6) Water Colorimetric X X XX X

Soil/Sediment Colorimetric X X X

Water IC XX X

Soil/Sediment IC X X

Cyanide, Amenable Water Colorimetric XX XXXXXXX

Soil/Sediment Colorimetric X X X X X X X

Cyanide, Total Water Colorimetric XXXXXXXXXX

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

Waste Colorimetric XXXXXX X X

Fluoride Water ISE X X X X X

Water IC XXXX X XXX

Hardness Water Colorimetric X

Water Titrametric X X X X

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

Mercury, Total Water CVAA XXXXXX XXX

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

Mercury, Total Tissue (fish &/or plant) CVAA XXXX XXX

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

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

Metals, Total Water ICP /AES X X X X X X X X X X

Soil /Sediment ICP /AES XXXXXXXXXX

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

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

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 XXXXXXXXXX

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

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

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

Metals (TCLP) Soil/Waste (oil, drum, etc..) ICP/MS XXX
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 A-3

EPA Regional Laboratories Core Capabilities - FY 2008

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 XXXXXXXXX

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 XX X X

Water IC X X X X X X X X

Soil IC X XXX X

Nitrogen,

Total Kjeldahl Water Colorimetric X X X X X X X X

Soil Colorimetric XXXX X

Perchlorate

Water IC X X X

Soil IC X X

Water IC with LC/MS confirmation X X X

Water, Soil/Sediment LC/MS X X

Water LC/MS/MS X

Phosphorus, Ortho Water Colorimetric XX X XXX X

Water IC X X X X X X X X

Phosphorus, Total Water Colorimetric XXXXXXXXXX

Soil Colorimetric X X X X X

Sulfate Water IC X X X X

Soil IC X

Water Turbidimetric XX XXXX X

Soil Turbidimetric X X X

ORGANIC CHEMISTRY:

Sulfide Water Colorimetric X X X X X

Soil Colorimetric X X

Water IC, Turbidimetric X

Water Titrimetric X X XX

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

Soil/Sediment GC/MS XXXXXXXXXX

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 XX XXXXX

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

BOD Water Membrane Electrode XXXXXXXXX

COD Water Photometric X

Water Colorimetric XX X XX

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

Herbicides Water GC/ECD; GC/NPD X X XX X

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

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

Tissue (fish &/or plant) GC/ECD; GC/NPD X
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 A-4

EPA Regional Laboratories Core Capabilities - FY 2008

II. Biology

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 XX X

Solid/Waste HPLC/UV Detection X

Oil & Grease Water Gravimetric XXXXXX X

Soil/Sediment Gravimetric X X X X

Pesticides / PCBs Water GC/ECD XXXXXXXXXX

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

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

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

Pesticides (TCLP) Solid/Waste GC/ECD XXXXXXXXXX

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 XXXXXXXXXX

Air GC/MS X X X X

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

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

TOC Water Combustion / IR XXXXX X XXXX

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

Water UV/Persulfate X XX

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

Soil/Sediment GC/MS XXXXXXXXXX

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

Waste (oil, drum, etc..) GC/MS XXXX XXXXX

Water GC X X X

Soil/Sediment GC X X X

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

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

VOA (TPH) Water GC/MS or GC X X X X X

Soil/Sediment GC/MS or GC X XXXX

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 XXX X XXX

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

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

Toxicity

(Acute & Chronic) Water Fathead,Ceriodaphnia X X X X X X
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 A-5

EPA Regional Laboratories Core Capabilities - FY 2008

III. Physical & Other Determinations

ANALYTE / GROUP

NAME SAMPLE MEDIA

ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUE REGIONAL CAPABILITY

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Aqueous/Liquid Waste (oil, drum, etc.) Pensky-Marten

or Seta XXXX XX X

Conductivity Water Specific

Conductance X X X X X X X X X X

Ignitability Soil/Sediment Pensky-Marten or Seta

Closed Cup XX XXX X X

Waste (oil, drum, etc..) Pensky-Marten or Seta

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

pH Water Electrometric XXXXXXXXXX

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

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

Solids,

Non-Filterable Water Gravimetric X X X X X X X X X X

Solids, Percent Soil/Sediment Gravimetric XXXXXXXXXX

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

Solids,

Total Dissolved Water Gravimetric XXXXXXXXXX

Solids,

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

Turbidity Water Nephelometric XXXX XXXXX

US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 A-7

APPENDIX B - Abbreviations
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 A-8

Abbreviations

AHRF All Hazard Receipt Facility

APEs Alkylphenol Ethoxylates

APHL Association of Public Health Laboratories

AQS Air Quality System

BNA Base/Neutrals and Acids Extractable Organics

BOD Biological Oxygen Demand

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

CID Criminal Investigation Division

CDC Center for Disease Control

COD Chemical Oxygen Demand

CRADA Cooperative Research and Development Agreement

CSX CSX Transportation, Inc.

CVAA Cold Vapor Atomic Absorption Spectrometry

CWA Chemical Warfare Agent

CWA Clean Water Act

DBCP Dibromochloroproprane

DC District of Columbia (Washington, DC)

DCE 1-dichloroethene

DDOE District Department of the Environment

DDT Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane

DHS Department of Homeland Security

DI De-ionized

DoD Department of Defense

EDB Ethylene dibromide

EDCs Endocrine Disrupting Compounds

ELISA Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay

EMS Environmental Management Systems

EO Executive Order

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

ERLN Environmental Response Laboratory Network

eLRN Environmental Response Laboratory Network

FAD Filtration Avoidance Determination

FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation

FDA Federal Drug Administration

FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act

FY Fiscal Year

GB Chemical Warfare Agent

GC Gas Chromatography

GC/ECD GC/Electron Capture Detector

GC/MS Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry

GC/NPD GC/Nitrogen - Phosphorus Detector

GC/ECD/PID Gas Chromatograph/Electron Captured Detector/Photo-Ionization Detector

GD Chemical Warfare Agent

GF Chemical Warfare Agent

GFAA Graphic Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrometry

HD Chemical Warfare Agent

HPLC High Performance Liquid Chromatography

IC Ion Chromatography

ICLN Integrated Consortium of Laboratory Networks

ICP Inductively Coupled Plasma
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 A-9

Abbreviations

ICP/AES ICP/Atomic Emission Spectrometry

ICPMS Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry

IR Infrared

ISE Ion Selective Electrode

LCMRL Lowest Concentration Minimum Reporting Level

LC-MS Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry

LC/MS/MS Liquid Chromatography/Dual MS

LEED Leadership in Energy and Environment Design

LIMS Laboratory Information Management System

LT2 Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule

LTIG Laboratory Technical Information Group

LUST Leaking Underground Storage Tank

mg/L Milligrams/liter

MS-MS Mass Spectrometer-Mass Spectrometer

NDMA N-Nitrosodimethylamine

NEIC National Enforcement Investigations Division

NELAC National Environmental Lab Accreditation Conference

NELAP National Environmental Lab Accreditation Program

NERL National Exposure Research Laboratory

NHSRC National Homeland Security Research Center

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology

NLA National Lakes Assessment

NOx Nitrogen Oxide

NO3 Nitrate

NO2 Nitrite

NPAP National Performance Audit Program

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

NRMRL National Risk Management Research Lab

NRSA National Rivers and Streams Assessment

OCHPEE Office of Children’s Environmental health Protection and Environmental Education

OEM Office of Emergency Management

OMB Office of Management & Budget

ORD Office of Research & Development

OSWER Office of Solid Waste & Emergency Response

PAHs Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons

PCB Polychlorinated biphenyl

PCR Polymerase Chain Reaction

PEP Performance Evaluation Program

PLM Polarized Light Microscopy

PM Particulate Matter

POTW Publicly Owned Treatment Works

ppq part per quadrillion

PPCP Pharmaceutical and Personal Care Products

QA Quality Assurance

QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plans

QC Quality Control

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

RLRPs Regional Laboratory Response Plans

SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act

SOP Standard Operating Procedure
US EPA Regional Laboratory System FY 2008 Annual Report

EPA-930-R-09-001 A-10

Abbreviations

SRP Standard Reference Photometer

SO2 Sulfur Dioxide

SW Solid Waste

TCLP Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure

TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load

TNI The NELAC Institute

TOC Total Organic Carbon

TO-15 Toxic Organic 15

TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act

ug/L Micrograms/liter

USGS United States Geological Service

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)

WSC Water Security Division

WTC World Trade Center

WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant

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