v/EPA
    United States
    Environmental Protection
    Agency
Water Security Initiative:  Guidance for Building
Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking
Water Contamination
  Office of Water (MC 140)   EPA 817-R-13-001  March 2013   www.epa.gov/watersecurity

-------
Office of Water (MC 140)
EPA817-R-13-001
March 2013
www.epa.gov/watersecurity

-------
                                        Disclaimer

The Water Security Division of the Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water has reviewed and
approved this document for publication. Neither the United States Government nor any of its employees,
contractors, or their employees make any warranty, expressed or implied, or assume  any legal liability or
responsibility for any third party's use of or the results of such use of any information, apparatus, product,
or process described in this report, or represents that its use by such party would not  infringe on privately
owned rights. This document is not a substitute for applicable legal requirements, nor is it a regulation
itself.

Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for
use.

Questions concerning this document should be addressed to:

Elizabeth Hedrick
U.S. EPA Water Security Division
26 West Martin Luther King Drive
Mail Code 140
Cincinnati, OH 45268
(513)569-7296
Hedrick.elizabeth@epa.gov

-------
                                Acknowledgements

EPA's Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water would like to recognize the following individuals for
their contributions and review throughout development of this document.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - National Homeland Security Research Center
    •   Kathy Hall
    •   Romy Lee
    •   Matthew Magnuson

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Office of Emergency Management
    •   Schatzi Fitz-James

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - National Exposure Research Laboratory
    •   Ann Grimm
    •   Eunice Varughese

Water Security Initiative Pilot Utilities
    •   Gary A. Burlingame, Philadelphia Water Department
    •   Aspa Capetanakis, New York City Department of Environmental Protection
    •   Bill Fromme, Greater Cincinnati Water Works

-------
                                   Table of Contents
SECTION 1.0: INTRODUCTION	1

SECTION 2.0: SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS IN A CONTAMINATION WARNING SYSTEM	3

SECTION 3.0: BUILDING LABORATORY RESPONSE CAPABILITIES	5

SECTION 4.0: ANALYTICAL APPROACH	7

  4.1    CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN TO DRINKING WATER SECURITY	7
  4.2    ADDITIONAL RESEARCH FOR CONTAMINANTS OF CONCERN TO DRINKING WATER SECURITY	9

SECTION 5.0: SELECTING METHODS TO BUILD A SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROGRAM FOR DRINKING WATER
SECURITY	10

  5.1    METHOD RESOURCES	10
  5.2    METHOD DEFINITIONS	11
  5.3    CHEMICAL CONTAMINANTS AND ANALYTICAL METHODS	13
  5.4    RADIOCHEMICAL CONTAMINANTS AND ANALYTICAL METHODS	19
  5.5    PATHOGEN CONTAMINANTS AND ANALYTICAL METHODS	22
  5.6    BIOTOXIN CONTAMINANTS AND ANALYTICAL METHODS	29

SECTION 6.0: BUILDING LABORATORY SUPPORT NETWORKS	31

  6.1    DEVELOPING EXTERNAL LABORATORY SUPPORT	31
    6.1.1   Overview of the Environmental Response Laboratory Network	32
    6.1.2   Overview of the WLA	33
    6.1.3   Benefits of the ERLN/WLA to Utilities	33
    6.1.4   Coordinating External Laboratory Support.	34
    6.1.5   Example Utility Laboratory Networks	36

SECTION 7.0: REIMBURSEMENT OF ANALYTICAL COSTS INCURRED DURING EMERGENCY RESPONSE	41

SECTION 8.0: REFERENCES	43

SECTION 9.0: SUMMARY OF RESOURCES	48

  9.1    CONTAMINANT RESOURCES	48
  9.2    METHODS RESOURCES	48
    9.2.1  General Method Resources	48
    9.2.2  Biological and Chemical Method Resources	50
    9.2.3  Radiological Method Resources	50
    9.2.4  Field Screening Resources	51
  9.3    LABORATORY NETWORKS	51
  9.4    LABORATORY GUIDANCE	53

-------
                                      List of Tables

Table 4-1. Representative Contaminants for Building a Sampling and Analysis Program for Drinking
Water Security	8
Table 5-1. Representative Chemicals and Methods	14
Table 5-2. Representative Radiochemicals and Methods	21
Table 5-3. Representative Pathogens and Methods	25
Table 5-4. Representative Biotoxins and Methods	30
Table 6-1. Typical Support Laboratories for Chemicals, Radiochemicals, Pathogens, and Biotoxins	35
Table 6-2. Example Utility Capabilities and Laboratory Network (Utility 1)	37
Table 6-3. Example Utility Capabilities and Laboratory Network (Utility 2)	38
Table 6-4. Example Utility Capabilities and Laboratory Network (Utility 3)	39
                                                                                            IV

-------
                                     List of Figures
Figure 2-1. WS Initiative CWS System Architecture	3
Figure 3-1. Process Flow for Building Laboratory Response Capabilities	5
Figure 6-1. Integrated Consortium of Laboratory Networks	32

-------
                                  List of Acronyms
AA           Atomic Adsorption
AOAC        AOAC International (formerly the Association of Official Analytical Chemists)
APHL        Association of Public Health Laboratories
ASM          American Society for Microbiology
ASTM        ASTM International (formerly the American Society for Testing and Materials)
BMBL        Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories
BOA          Basic Ordering Agreement
BSL          Biosafety Level
BT           Bioterrorism
CDC          Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
CETL         Compendium of Environmental Testing Laboratories
CFR          Code of Federal Regulations
CWA         Chemical Warfare Agent
CWS          Contamination Warning System
DHS          Department of Homeland Security
DOD          Department of Defense
ECD          Electron Capture  Detector
ELISA        Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay
EMSL        Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
EPA          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ERLN        Environmental Response Laboratory Network
ETV          Environmental Technology Verification
EU           Environmental Unit
FDA          U.S. Food and Drug Administration
FERN        Food Emergency Response Network
GA           Tabun
GB           Sarin
GC           Gas Chromatograph or Gas Chromatography
GC-ECD      Gas Chromatography - Electron Capture Detector
GC-FID       Gas Chromatography - Flame lonization Detector
GC-MS       Gas Chromatography - Mass Spectrometry
GD           Soman
GM           Geiger-Mueller
HHS          U.S. Department  of Health and Human Services
HPGe         High-Purity Germanium
HPLC        High Performance Liquid Chromatography
Hach HST     Hach Homeland Security Technologies
ICLN         Integrated Consortium of Laboratory Networks
ICP-AES      Inductively Coupled Plasma - Atomic Emission Spectrometry
ICP-MS       Inductively Coupled Plasma - Mass Spectrometry
ICS           Incident Command  System
IMS          Immunomagnetic Separation
LC           Liquid Chromatography
LC-MS-MS    Liquid Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry
LRN          Laboratory Response Network
LSE          Liquid-solid Extraction
MARLAP     Multi-Agency Radiological Laboratory Analytical Protocols
MCEARD     Microbiological and Chemical Exposure Assessment Research Division
MS           Mass Spectrometry
NAHLN       National Animal Health Laboratory Network
                                                                                       VI

-------
NAREL       National Air and Radiation Environmental Laboratory
NEMI         National Environmental Methods Index
NEMI-CBR    National Environmental Methods Index for Chemical, Biological, and Radiological
              Methods
NERL         National Exposure Research Laboratory
NHSRC       National Homeland Security Research Center
NIMS         National Incident Management System
NPDN        National Plant Diagnostic Network
OEM         Office of Emergency Management
OGWDW     Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water
ORCR        Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery
ORD         Office of Research and Development
OSC          On-Scene Coordinator
OW          Office of Water
PCB          Polychlorinated biphenyls
PCR          Polymerase Chain Reaction
PDA          Photodiode Array
RFQ          Request for Quote
RT-PCR      Reverse Transcription - Polymerase Chain Reaction
RT-qPCR     Real Time -quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction
QA           Quality Assurance
QC           Quality Control
SAM         Standardized Analytical Methods for Environmental Restoration Following Homeland
              Security Events or Selected Analytical Methods for Environmental Remediation and
              Recovery (for revisions after 2011)
SDWA        Safe Drinking Water Act
SM           Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater
TETS         Tetramethylenedisulfotetramine
TTEP         Technology Testing and Evaluation Program
USDA        U.S. Department of Agriculture
UV           Ultraviolet
WARN        Water/Wastewater Agency Response Networks
WaterlSAC    Water Information Sharing and Analysis Center
WCIT         Water Contaminant Information Tool
WLA         Water Laboratory Alliance
WLA-RP      Water Laboratory Alliance - Response Plan
WS           Water Security (initiative)
                                                                                         VII

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination


                            Section 1.0:  Introduction

The Water Security (WS) initiative was developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
in close partnership with drinking water utilities and other key stakeholders in response to Homeland
Security Presidential Directive 9. The WS initiative provides the design basis of a multi-component
contamination warning system (CWS) intended to provide timely detection and response to drinking
water contamination incidents.  More information about the WS initiative, including guidance based on
lessons learned from pilot programs, is available on the following Web site:
http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/lawsregs/initiative.cfm.

The primary goal of a utility's sampling and analysis program within a CWS is to ensure that analytical
capabilities are ready and accessible for determination  of abroad range of chemicals, radiochemicals,
pathogens, and biotoxins in possible, credible, and confirmed contamination incidents.  By identifying
contaminants of concern, analytical methods, and laboratories in advance of a contamination incident, the
utility will be able to: 1) practice methods and exercise laboratory partnerships, 2) establish baseline
contaminant occurrence and method performance for water samples from the utility's distribution system,
and 3) improve the efficiency of utility-led sampling and analysis by developing and practicing
procedures specifically for response to possible water contamination.

This document is written for utilities developing a sampling and analysis program as part of a CWS, but
may also be useful to utility partners such as public health, state, EPA regional, and commercial
laboratories.  Guidance is provided regarding identification of representative contaminants from
contaminant classes of concern to drinking water security, analytical methods, and potential support
laboratories for responding to water contamination.  It is not the intention of this document to present
information on methods typically performed in the field; however, some methods presented in this
document may be field-deployable.

This document provides an overview of the role of sampling and analysis in a CWS, provides a
framework for building laboratory capabilities for response to water contamination, presents
contaminant classes of concern to water security, lists methods for a representative number of
contaminants from those classes and provides information on the role of national laboratory networks in
responding to drinking water contamination events.  These topics are described in the following sections:

    •  Section 2.0: Sampling and Analysis in a Contamination Warning System. This section
       describes the role of sampling and analysis in a CWS with emphasis on the role of sampling and
       analysis in consequence management and planning.
    •  Section 3.0: Building Laboratory Response Capabilities. This section describes the process
       that a utility follows to build laboratory capabilities for incident response sampling and analysis.
    •  Section 4.0: Analytical Approach. This section describes contaminant classes of concern to
       water security around which utilities should build their capabilities and discusses various
       organizations' efforts to identify representative contaminants of concern to water security to
       promote the development of response capabilities.
    •  Section 5.0: Methods for Contaminants of Concern to Water Security.  This section contains
       examples of representative contaminants from  the contaminant classes of concern to water
       security and corresponding methods for detection and, in most cases, confirmation. The objective
       of this section is to be informational and to illustrate the use of available resources for
       identification of analytical methods.
    •  Section 6.0: Building Laboratory Support Networks.  This section describes federal level
       emergency response laboratory networks and explains their role in responding to water system
       contamination incidents.  This section also discusses important considerations for utilities when
       selecting laboratory partners and presents three examples of utility laboratory networks as
       designed for a CWS.

                                                                                              1

-------
Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

 Section 7.0: Reimbursement of Analytical Costs Incurred During Emergency Response.
 This section describes the conditions that are necessary to receive federal reimbursement for costs
 associated with analysis of water samples in a water contamination emergency.
 Section 8.0: References. This section lists references cited in the document Water Security
 Initiative: Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water
 Contamination.
 Section 9.0: Summary of Resources. This section lists resources for laboratory methods, field
 screening methods, and general laboratory guidance.

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination


     Section  2.0:  Sampling and Analysis in a  Contamination
                                   Warning  System

Sampling and analysis in a CWS is not performed at a frequency to provide early detection of
contamination.  The purpose of routine sampling and analysis is to establish baseline contaminant
occurrence and method performance for water throughout the distribution system, and to maintain analyst
proficiency and instrument capabilities for incident response.  The most important role of sampling and
analysis in a CWS is in consequence management where it is among the first utility-led responses to
possible contamination.  Sample collection and analysis in response to validated CWS component alerts is
part of the credibility determination process in the consequence management process, and may involve
specific analyses, based on information available from other CWS components or simultaneous analyses
for a broad range of contaminants and contaminant classes to rule-out, or confirm, as many contaminants
as possible in a short period of time.

By understanding the role of sampling and analysis throughout consequence management, utilities can
better plan what analytical capabilities they will use, and when. For example, a utility may elect to use an
in-house suite of methods providing broad contaminant coverage in the early phases of investigation
when contamination has not been confirmed, but choose to use partner laboratories during the
remediation and recovery phases of confirmed contamination when the sample load might exceed in-
house capacity.  Or a utility may choose to utilize a specific laboratory partner and method for
confirmation of a suspected contaminant or for highly specialized analyses  such as for chemical warfare
agents (CWAs)  or select pathogens. The remainder of this section briefly describes the role of sampling
and analysis in consequence management during possible, credible, and confirmed contamination
incidents.
                                            Credibility Determination Actions confirm or rule
                                                           t contamination
Online Water
  Quality
                                           Sampling and Analysis
                                            Site Characterization
                                            Laboratory Confirmatio
                                                             Other Investigative Actions
                                                             • Check alerts from CWS
                                                             components
                                                             • Assess outside data sources
  Event
Detection
                     Initial
                    Trigger
                   Validation
 Enhanced
  Security
                        Response Actions protect
                        public health during the
                        investigation process and
                        may include:
                        • Isolation
                        • Flushing
                         Public alerts/notifications
Remediation and Recovery
restores a system to normal
operations and may include:
• System Characterization
• Remedial Action
• Post-remediation activities
       Customer
      Complaints
Figure 2-1.  WS Initiative CWS System Architecture

Based on EPA's WS initiative CWS system architecture (Figure 2-1), water contamination is
characterized as, possible if the cause of routine monitoring and surveillance component alert cannot be
identified  and/or determined to be benign.  For example, if multiple customer complaints regarding illness
and off-tasting, discolored water are verified to be real, but no known cause has yet to be found, then a
possible contamination incident is in progress.  Once a possible contamination incident has been
identified, a utility's consequence management plan is activated, which defines a process for establishing
the credibility of the suspected incident, the response actions that the utility will take to minimize public

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

health and economic consequences, and a strategy to ultimately restore the system to normal operations.
Utilities need to consider in advance their desired response capabilities when a possible contamination
incident has been identified since, at this stage of the investigation, the identity of the contaminant will
likely be unknown.

In the context of the credibility determination process, water contamination is characterized as credible if
information collected during the investigation of possible contamination corroborates information from
the validated  CWS alert even though the exact contaminant may not have been identified and/or
quantified.  Information collected from initial response actions (such as site characterization and
laboratory analysis and/or additional information from monitoring and surveillance) will be considered
before additional response actions are implemented. Information provided by other CWS components or
evidence discovered during the investigation may help focus the analytical investigation to confirm a
specific suspected contaminant. Water contamination is characterized as analytically confirmed when the
analysis of water samples has provided conclusive evidence of the presence of a specific contaminant at a
level that could cause public health risk.

Upon confirmation of water contamination, the utility will shift to remediation and recovery activities.
The goal of this process is to return the water supply system to service as quickly as possible. During
remediation, a utility's sampling and analysis program will likely provide support to determine the extent
of contamination. This process would involve analysis of water samples for a known contaminant using
select methods as recommended by EPA and multiple laboratories to meet the required analytical
capacity. It will be critical in this stage to demonstrate that the contamination has been remediated and
that the water is safe for essential services and consumption.  Furthermore, analytical support may be
needed during decontamination of utility infrastructure to confirm contaminant removal. Overall,
sampling and analysis plays an instrumental role throughout the investigation of a possible contamination
incident (i.e., the credibility determination process), and during remediation and recovery once water
contamination has been confirmed.

Additional  information on the possible, credible, and confirmed stages of a contamination incident can be
found in EPA's Water Security Initiative: Interim Guidance on Developing Consequence Management
Plans for Drinking Water Utilities (USEPA, 2008a).

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination


    Section  3.0:  Building Laboratory Response  Capabilities

A laboratory support network is the foundation of an effective and sustainable sampling and analysis
program for utilities with CWSs. The contaminants for which a utility builds capabilities, either in-house
or through partnerships, for responding to possible contamination should represent a broad range of
chemicals, radiochemicals, pathogens, and biotoxins; however, it is not expected that a utility's laboratory
or traditional laboratory partners will be able to perform analyses for all contaminants under all threat
scenarios. To the extent possible, utilities should identify contaminants  and scenarios for which they
know they will require analytical support and identify appropriate laboratories and emergency response
partners. For example, chemical warfare and bioterrorism agents require specialized methods and
laboratories. Knowing this in advance provides the utility with the opportunity to identify those partner
laboratories and determine how they would most efficiently access those laboratories in an emergency.
Identifying these partners in advance also enables the utility to learn of any special sample collection,
packaging and/or shipping requirements.  There also may be scenarios under which the utility cannot
provide analytical coverage (i.e., after normal business hours, vacations, holidays), or provide rapid turn-
around of analytical results, or the utility laboratory may not be able to handle a large number of samples.
Planning for a wide range of such scenarios is the key to building successful emergency response
capabilities. Figure 3-1 illustrates  a general approach utilities can follow to build laboratory capabilities
for response to contaminants of concern to water security.
                                       Review contaminants of concern to water
                                      	security.
                                     Select subset representing broad contaminant
                                                  coverage.
                                               Identify methods.
                                               Is method available
                                                  in-house?
                          Y s
     here a dual-use
 benefit to acquiring in-
   house capability?
                                                    Yes
                                    Establish in-house capability for routine sampling
                                                 and analysis.
                                                                               N
                               No
 under which the routine
in-house capability would
    not be used in
 emergency response?
                                                                        Yes
                   Establish in-house
                     capability for
                  emergency response.
                             Identify a partner
                             emergency response
                                 support.
for
nse
Figure 3-1.  Process Flow for Building Laboratory Response Capabilities

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

The first steps involve the identification of representative contaminants from a wide range of contaminant
classes of concern to water security and corresponding analytical methods. Analytical method
capabilities can then be built in-house or through partnerships. A utility would first assess their existing
in-house and traditional drinking water partner capabilities to determine if they could be used to detect
representative contaminants of concern during incident response sampling and analysis. If the utility does
not have an existing capability, then adoption of new methods can be considered. If there are dual-use
benefits to the utility in implementing new laboratory methods, then it may be advantageous to build that
capability in-house for emergency response analysis. In other cases it may be preferable to identify an
emergency response laboratory partner.

The remainder of this document expands on the topics of 1) selection of representative contaminants from
contaminant classes of concern to water security, 2) selection of methods, and 3) building laboratory
partnerships. The internal process of self-assessment of the utility's existing sampling and analysis
program is not discussed in detail in this document although considerations for developing emergency
response laboratory capabilities are discussed in Section 6.

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination


                      Section 4.0: Analytical Approach


4.1    Contaminants of Concern to Drinking Water Security

There are a large number of contaminants that could cause serious harm if introduced into a drinking
water distribution system, whether intentionally or accidentally.  In most instances, utilities are prepared
to respond to regulated contaminants and may have  even adopted more esoteric capabilities to address
contaminants of local or regional concern.  However, utilities may be less cognizant of, or prepared to
respond to, contaminants of concern from a terrorist threat perspective.

Utilities designing a CWS or desiring to enhance their water security practices should consider non-
traditional as well as traditional contaminants as the starting point for development of a sampling and
analysis program for water security.  Utilities should identify the in-house resources they currently have
to respond to a broad range of contaminants, identify gaps and, either enhance their own in-house
capabilities, or identify partner laboratories that can analyze samples in an emergency.  This advance
planning will enable utilities to practice emergency response procedures internally and with partners as
well as help in the establishment of baseline contaminant occurrence and method performance for more
meaningful interpretation of results during incident response sampling and analysis.

Table 4-1 contains a representative number of contaminants from contaminant classes of concern that can
serve  as a basis for development of a sampling and analysis program for water security.  The
representative contaminants contained in Table 4-1 illustrate the full range of contaminant classes of
concern.  Representative contaminants within each contaminant class can be considered for building
laboratory capabilities in-house or through laboratory partnerships.  In Section 5 of this document,
methods have been identified for a sub-set of the contaminants in Table 4-1 to illustrate how available
resources can be used to identify methods for contaminants of concern to water security.  Note that other
sets of representative contaminants could form the basis for the design of a sampling and analysis
program for water security, as long as it includes representative contaminants from all the contaminant
classes of concern.

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Table 4-1.  Representative Contaminants for Building a Sampling and Analysis Program for
Drinking Water Security
PATHOGENS
Bacteria
Bacillus anthracis Escherichia co//O157:H7 Shigella spp.
Brucella spp. Francisella tularensis Staphylococcus aureus
Burkholderia spp. Leptospira interrogans Vibrio cholerae O1
Clostridium perfringens Listeria monocytogenes Yersinia pestis
Salmonella Typhi
Viruses
Caliciviruses Enteroviruses
Rickettsia
Coxiella burnetii
Chlamydophila psittaci
Protozoa
Cryptosporidium parvum
BIOTOXINS
Plant Toxins
Abrin
Alpha amanitin
Picrotoxin
Ricin
Bacterial Toxins
Botulinum toxins
Algal Toxins
Brevetoxins
Microcystins
Saxitoxin
Fungal Toxins
Aflatoxin
T2 mycotoxin
Animal Toxins
Tetrodotoxin
CHEMICALS
Carbamate Pesticides
Aldicarb
Carbofuran
Methomyl
Oxamyl
Organophosphate Pesticides
Dichlorvos
Dicrotophos
Fenamiphos
Mevinphos
Phorate
Tetraethyl pyrophosphate (TEPP)
Rodenticides
Bromadiolone
Crimidine
Strychnine
Tetramethylenedisulfotetramine
(TETS)
Herbicides
Paraquat
Fluorinated Organic Compounds
Sodium fluoroacetate
Chemical Warfare Agents
Sarin (GB)
Soman (GD)
Tabun (GA)
VX
Pharmaceuticals
Colchicine
Digoxin
Nicotine sulfate
Cyanide Compounds
Cyanide salts (sodium & potassium)
Cyanogen chloride
Mercury Compounds
Mercuric chloride
Methoxyethylmercuric acetate
Arsenic (III) Compounds
Sodium arsenite
Heavy Metal Compounds
Lead
Thallium
Persistent Chlorinated Organics
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs)
Petroleum Products
Gasoline range organics
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
Diesel range organics
RADIONUCLIDES
Alpha Emitters
Americium-241
Uranium-238
Beta Emitters
Strontium-90
Technetium-99
Beta + Gamma Emitters
Cesium-137
Cobalt-60
lridium-192
EPA continues to identify, develop, and validate screening and confirmatory methods for non-traditional
contaminants that are of concern to drinking water security. As these methods become available they will
be posted by EPA in the latest revision of Standardized Analytical Methods for Environmental
Restoration Following Homeland Security Events (SAM):.  Analytical methods which can be used to
detect representative contaminants from the contaminant classes in Table 4-1  are discussed in Sections
5.3 through 5.6, although utilities may select different contaminants from the  broad contaminant classes
in Table 4.1 when designing their own sampling and analysis program.
 Beginning with SAM 2012, the title will be revised to Selected Analytical Methods (SAM) for Environmental
Remediation and Recovery.  Current and archived versions of SAM can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/sam/

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

4.2    Additional Research for Contaminants of Concern to Drinking Water Security

Other federal agencies and organizations have identified contaminants of concern to water/wastewater
security.  The Water Research Foundation (formerly AwwaRF), and the Water Environment Research
Foundation have identified chemicals, toxins, and biological contaminants that could be introduced
intentionally into a drinking water distribution system using criteria similar to the EPA's.  Many of the
lethal contaminants identified are the same as those identified by the EPA; however, low-toxicity
contaminants such as geosmin, ammonia, dimethylsulfide, napthalene, and trimethylamine are also
included (AwwaRF and Kiwa, N.V., 2006).  The Water Environment Research Foundation supported a
research effort to develop a prioritization framework for contaminants that may be intentionally or
accidentally introduced into a wastewater collection and treatment system (WERF, 2010). The list of
contaminants developed as a part of their research project included a total of 147 chemical,
radiochemical, and biological threat agents, which were ranked in four categories including: 1)
worker/public health exposure, 2) process upset to a wastewater system, 3) physical damage and
destruction, and 4) how quickly they would be expected to pass through a wastewater system.  Many of
the contaminants are included in EPA's Water Contaminant Information Tool (WCIT).

And finally, commercial vendors of online water quality monitors have developed contaminant lists based
on contaminant profiles generated by different contaminant classes (Kroll, 2008). Such contaminant lists
may be useful to review when building laboratory capabilities to complement on-line water quality
monitoring.

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination


    Section 5.0:   Selecting  Methods to Build a Sampling  and
            Analysis Program for Drinking Water Security


5.1    Method Resources

This section provides information on analytical methods for a representative sub-set of contaminants of
concern to water security as described in Section 4.  While any comprehensive or partial listing of
potential threat agents provides a useful and informative reference, it is not feasible for a utility to build
analytical capabilities for all potential threat agents, either in-house or through laboratory partnerships.
Instead, utilities should identify a sub-set of contaminants from the contaminant classes of concern to
water security from Table 4.1 and/or other contaminants of concern to water security that represent broad
contaminant coverage and build analytical capabilities for those contaminants either in-house or through
laboratory partnerships.  Although not discussed in this document, field deployable methods can also be
considered.

There are a number of resources that have been developed under homeland security directives to help
utilities plan for and respond to water contamination incidents. A brief description of those resources
applicable to identifying analytical methods is provided below:

    •   Water Contaminant Information  Tool (WCIT). WCIT is a password-protected on-line
       database with information for 805 contaminants of concern that could pose a serious threat if
       introduced into drinking water and/or wastewater. More than 100 contaminants have full WCIT
       profiles (including analytical methods if available). More than 700 contaminants only have
       analytical methods, names and synonyms.  This tool provides drinking water-specific data
       compiled in one convenient location that can be accessed for planning and response to drinking
       water contamination incidents. By accessing WCIT, users may also use the National
       Environmental Methods Index for Chemical, Biological, and Radiological Methods (NEMI-
       CBR), a web-based tool designed to assist users in searching and displaying methods be used in
       emergency use (http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/wcit/index.cfm/).

    •   Selected Analytical Methods (SAM) for Environmental Remediation and Recovery. SAM is
       a collection of environmental methods intended to support environmental remediation  efforts
       following a homeland security-related contamination event.  SAM provides information
       regarding current analytical methods for possible  use in detecting and quantifying target analytes
       in support of remediation activities.  SAM addresses chemical, radiochemical and biological
       (pathogen and biotoxin) contaminants in a variety of environmental matrices, including drinking
       water (http://www.epa.gov/sam/).

    •   Water Information Sharing and
       Analysis Center (WaterlSAC).                Methods listed in SAM may not have
       WaterlSAC is a highly  secure                  been validated for the
       subscription-based information service that      contaminant/matrix of interest.  Users
       maintains databases of  chemical,                should verifythe status ฐf
       biological, and radiochemical agents and         recommended methods for the
       provides access to  sensitive information          contaminant of interest in the
       regarding physical, contamination, and          drinking water matrix.
       cyber threats to the Water Sector
       (http s: //portal. waterisac. org/web/).

    •   National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI). NEMI is an on-line database of analytical
       methods for water and other environmental matrices developed jointly by EPA and the U.S.
       Geological  Survey. NEMI allows users to search and compare the performance and relative cost
       of regulatory and non-regulatory environmental monitoring methods (http://www.nemi. gov/).

                                                                                          10

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

    •  Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (SM). SM is a
       subscription-based compendium of chemical and microbiological methods for the analysis of
       water and wastewater published by the American Public Health Association, the American Water
       Works Association and the Water Environment Federation. Many Standard Methods are also
       approved for Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) regulatory compliance monitoring
       (www. standardmethods. org).

    •  American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). ASTM  is a not-for-profit organization
       that develops and provides voluntary consensus standards, related technical information, and
       services having internationally recognized quality and applicability.  ASTM publishes numerous
       test methods and standards pertaining to the analysis of water including chemical and
       microbiological methods. Of particular interest to water utilities  and laboratories are the current
       (2011) ASTM Volumes 11.01 and 11.02 (Water I and Water II, respectively). These test methods
       can be obtained through subscription (http://www.astm.org/).

EPA offices and laboratories that develop and publish methods for contaminants of concern to water
security, regulated contaminants, and emerging contaminants of concern  are:
    •  Office of Water (OW), http://water.epa.gov/
    •  Office of Research and Development (ORD), http://www.epa.gov/ord/
    •  Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery (ORCR),
       http ://www.epa. gov/epawaste/hazard/testmethods/mice .htm
    •  National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL), http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/ordmeth.htm
    •  National Air and Radiation Environmental Laboratory (NAREL) http://www.epa.gov/narel/

The CDC also develops methods for their Laboratory Response Network (LRN) laboratories
(http://www.bt.cdc.gov/lrn/). State LRN laboratories can coordinate for utilities' emergency analyses for
select and some non-select pathogens and toxins.

Sections 5.3-5.6 present possible methods for detection of representative chemical, radiochemical,
pathogen, and biotoxin contaminants of concern  to water security. Most methods were identified using
resources that have been described above; however, for uncommon drinking water contaminants, possible
literature methods were identified. These methods can be adapted, validated, and used in the utility's or
partner's laboratory until which time there is a validated consensus method available.

Literature methods mentioned in this document do not constitute an endorsement for use. Some are  listed
to highlight the fact that more advanced utilities  and their laboratory partners are  free to develop or
evaluate literature methods for contaminants that are not regulated in drinking water or where there is no
consensus method. Utilities should give advance consideration to the interpretation of results from such
methods during consequence management of possible water contamination incidents.

5.2    Method Definitions

The following definitions are provided to clarify terms used in Tables 5-1 through 5-4. In most cases the
terms are consistent with those used in SAM except for specific instances when it was believed  greater
clarification was necessary.
                                                                                             11

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

Chemical Contaminants
    •   Possible Method. A written procedure for the detection and/or confirmation of a specific
       contaminant.
    •   Determinative Technique. An analytical instrument or technique used for qualitative and
       confirmatory determination of compounds or components in a sample. The determinative step is
       performed after any required sample preparation methods.
    •   Recommended Confirmatory Method. A written validated analytical method that provides
       qualitative and quantitative results for a specific contaminant using a determinative technique.
       Confirmatory methods produce quantitative contaminant data of known quality. For chemical
       contaminants the recommended confirmatory method is one for which there is published single or
       multi-laboratory data for the contaminant of interest in a drinking water matrix. For contaminants
       that are also regulated under the SDWA, the listed recommended confirmatory methods are those
       approved for regulatory compliance monitoring.

Radiochemical Contaminants
    •   Possible Method. A written procedure for the detection and/or confirmation of a specific
       contaminant.
    •   Determinative Technique. An analytical instrument or technique used for qualitative and
       confirmatory determination of compounds or components in a sample. The determinative step is
       performed after any required sample preparation methods.
    •   Recommended Confirmatory Method. A method for measurement of the activity from a
       particular radioisotope per unit of mass, volume, or area sampled.  Confirmatory methods
       produce quantitative contaminant data of known quality. For contaminants that are also regulated
       under the SDWA, the listed recommended confirmatory methods are those approved for
       regulatory compliance monitoring.

Pathogen and Biotoxin Contaminants
    •   Screening Methodology. An analytical methodology that may identify a contaminant, but does
       not provide a high level of confidence that a specific contaminant is present. The methodology
       may be offered by a number of vendors using their instrumentation, reagents, assays, etc. By
       their nature, screening methodologies are best used to inform the choice of subsequent analysis to
       confirm the presence or absence of a contaminant. Screening methodologies are typically used in
       situations that require a large number of samples to be processed.  Screening (or presumptive)
       assays generally include real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) or immunoassays.
    •   Confirmatory Methodology. A methodology that confirms, with high confidence, the presence
       of a contaminant or suggests conclusively that it is absent. The methodology may be offered by a
       number of vendors using their instrumentation, reagents, assays, etc. Confirmatory methods are
       generally more time consuming and expensive  when compared to  screening methods.
       Confirmatory methods may include time-resolved fluorescence, molecular characterization, or
       culture-based methods with biochemical/serological confirmation.

Some small molecular weight biotoxins may be determined using a chemical methodology such as liquid
chromatography-mass spectrometry and may more appropriately use the method definitions of the
chemical contaminants. Other large molecular weight biotoxins may be more appropriately associated
with pathogen methods for sample preparation and analyses.
                                                                                           12

-------
5.3
Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
 Chemical Contaminants and Analytical  Methods
The representative sub-set of chemical contaminants included in this section includes arsenic compounds,
carbamate pesticides, CWA degradation products, cyanide compounds, fluorinated organic compounds,
heavy metals, herbicides, mercury compounds, organophosphate pesticides, persistent chlorinated
organics, petroleum products, pharmaceuticals, and rodenticides.  Table 5-1 includes example chemical
contaminants in each of these categories, available methods, instrumentation, sources where additional
method information can be located, and special considerations that utilities may find helpful in identifying
analytical methods. It should be noted that the methods listed in this table are not intended to be a
comprehensive listing of all potential methods but have been selected based on applicability to drinking
water.  Some of the chemical contaminants included in this table can be analyzed by commonly available
drinking water methods routinely used for compliance monitoring.  Instrumentation, methods, and
standards for CWA degradation/hydrolysis products are commonly available  so that a utility could screen
samples for CWAs either in-house or through a partner laboratory and seek confirmation of the parent
CWA if one of its degradation/hydrolysis products is detected.

Many of the methods listed in Table 5-1 are those recommended in SAM Version 6.0 for laboratories
tasked with performing analyses on environmental samples in support of EPA restoration efforts
following a homeland security incident (refer to the latest version of SAM for more up-to-date
information), (USEPA, 2010a).  In some cases SAM-referenced methods are the same methods that
would be recommended to screen for or confirm contaminants in possible contamination incidents.
Methods may require both sample preparation and analysis procedures, while others contain sample prep
and analysis within one method. Other method sources include ASTM, Standard Methods, CDC, Food
Emergency Response Network (FERN), etc., as well as the published literature. It is EPA's goal to
develop single-laboratory validation data for contaminant/matrix combinations that may be lacking. As
this is accomplished, updates should be available in the future at http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc/pubs.html.
This EPA website also contains a feature that enables users to automatically be notified of developments
on certain topics (http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc/htm/distlist.html).
Several of the methods described in Table 5-1 are mass spectrometry
the potential to tentatively identify compounds (e.g. through
the use of a mass spectral library).  Reporting of tentative
identification is more important during incident response
analysis than in routine compliance monitoring analysis, and
the utility should modify standard procedures for incident
response analysis to ensure the laboratory report stresses the
tentative nature of the identification, along with any
qualifying statements the laboratory can provide regarding
the nature of the tentative identification. Tentative
identification of unexpected compounds during incident
response analysis may lead the utility to seek confirmation
using either the same method via the use of appropriate
standards or another confirmatory approach.
                                                       (MS) methods.  These methods have
Note: EPA has not evaluated literature or vendor methods
contained in Table 5-1 and their mention does not constitute
an endorsement or recommendation for use.
                                                       Confirmation of CWAs should
                                                       be performed by an approved
                                                       Environmental Response
                                                       Laboratory Network (ERLN)
                                                       laboratory or a qualified
                                                       commercial laboratory.
                                                       Screening for CWAs through
                                                       analyses of CWA
                                                       degradation/hydrolysis
                                                       products, however, can be
                                                       performed by utilities or
                                                       commercial laboratories with
                                                       appropriate instrumentation
                                                       and standards.

                                                                                             13

-------
                            Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Table 5-1. Representative Chemicals and Methods
Contaminant
Possible Methods
Instrumentation
Method Sou rce(1)
Special Considerations
Recommended
Confirmatory
Method(s)(2>
Arsenic (III) Compounds
Sodium arsenite
(as total arsenic) (3)
EPA 200.5
EPA 200.8
EPA 200.9
ASTM D2972 B
ICP-AES
ICP-MS
Atomic Adsorption (AA)-
Graphite Furnace
AA-Hydride
EPANERL
EPANERL
EPANERL
ASTM
C*l
w
(4)
C*l
EPA 200.5
EPA 200.8
EPA 200.9
Carbamate Pesticides
Aldicarb (J)
Carbofuran w
Oxamyl (3)
Methomyl
EPA 531.1
EPA 531. 2
EPA 538
ASTM D7645-10
EPA 531.1
EPA 531. 2
ASTM D7645-10
Liquid Chromatography
(LC)- post column
derivatization and
fluorescence detection
LC-MS-MS
LC - post column
derivatization and
fluorescence detection
LC-MS-MS
EPANERL
EPAOW
EPANERL
ASTM
EPA Region 5
EPANERL
EPAOW
ASTM
EPA Region 5
(4)
EPA 538 and ASTM D7645-10 contain
data for drinking water, but are not
approved for SDWA monitoring.
(4)
C*l
EPA 531.1
EPA 531. 2
EPA 531.1
EPA 531. 2
CWA Degradation Products
VX Degradation Products
Ethyl methylphosphonic
acid
Methyl phosphonic acid
ASTM D7597-09
LC-MS-MS
ASTM
EPA Region 5
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.

GA Degradation Product
Ethyl hydrogen dimethyl-
amidophosphate
ASTM D7597-09
LC-MS-MS
ASTM
EPA Region 5
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
-
GD Degradation Products
Pinacolyl methylphos-
phonic acid
Methyl phosphonic acid
ASTM D7597-09
LC-MS-MS
ASTM
EPA Region 5
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.

                                                                                                                                 14

-------
Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Contaminant
Possible Methods
Instrumentation
Method Sou rce(1)
Special Considerations
Recommended
Confirmatory
Method(s)(2>
GB Degradation Products
Isopropyl methyl-
phosphonic acid
Methyl phosphonic acid
Diisopropyl methyl-
phosphonate
ASTM D7597-09
EPA 538
ASTM D7597-09
LC-MS-MS
LC-MS-MS
LC-MS-MS
ASTM
EPA Region 5
EPANERL
EPAOW
ASTM
EPA Region 5
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
i*)
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.

EPA 538
Cyanide Compounds
Cyanide (3)
Cyanogen chloride
EPA 335.4 (total cyanide)
ASTM D6888-04 (free and
available cyanide)
EPA 524.2
ASTM D4 165-06
Distillation -
Spectrophotometry
(Automated)
Flow injection
analysis/gas diffusion
with amperometric
detection
GC-MS
Ultraviolet (UV)
spectrophotometry
EPANERL
ASTM
EPANERL
ASTM
EPA 335.4 contains data for reagent
water only, but is approved at 40 CFR
141 for drinking water monitoring.
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
Cyanogen chloride standards are not
commercially available and must be
synthesized. Possible methods can
be used for screening in absence of
standards.
EPA 335.4
ASTM 6888-04

Fluorinated Organic Compounds
Fluoroacetate salts
(analyzed as
fluoroacetate ion)
Direct Determination of
Fluoroacetate in Water by IC-MS
(Dionex Application Note 276)
IC-MS
Dionex
Corporation App
Note No. 276 (3)
it)
Dionex
Application Note
Heavy Metals
Lead l"
Thallium13'
EPA 200.5
EPA 200.8
EPA 200.9
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.8
EPA 200.9
ICP-AES
ICP-MS
AA-Graphite Furnace
ICP-AES
ICP-MS
AA-Platform
EPANERL
EPANERL
EPANERL
EPANERL
EPANERL
EPANERL
it)
it)
it)
EPA 200.7 contains drinking water
data, but is not approved at 40 CFR
141 for drinking water monitoring.
it)
it)
EPA 200.5
EPA 200.8
EPA 200.9
EPA 200.8
EPA 200.9
Herbicides
Paraquat
EPA 549.2
LC-UV
EPANERL
(4)
EPA 549.2
                                                                                                         15

-------
Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Contaminant
Possible Methods
Instrumentation
Method Sou rce(1)
Special Considerations
Recommended
Confirmatory
Method(s)(2>
Mercury Compounds
Mercuric chloride
(as total mercury) ' '
Methoxyethyl mercuric
acetate
(as total mercury) (3)
EPA 200.8
EPA 245.1
EPA 245.2
ICP-MS
CVAS (Manual)
CVAS (Automated)
EPANERL
EPANERL
EPANERL
i*)
Method 245.1 contains data for river
and natural waters only, but is
approved at 40 CFR 141 for drinking
water monitoring.
Method 245.2 contains data for
reagent and surface waters only, but is
approved at 40 CFR 141 for drinking
water monitoring.
EPA 200.8
EPA 245.1
EPA 245.2
Organophosphate Pesticides
Dichlorvos
Mevinphos
Dicrotophos
Fenamiphos
Phorate
Tetraethyl
pyrophosphate (TEPP)
EPA 525.2
EPA 3535A [Sample Preparation] /
EPA 8270D [Determinative]
EPA 3535A [Sample Preparation] /
EPA 8270D [Determinative]
EPA 538
EPA 525.2
EPA 538 (as chlorination products,
fenamiphos sulfone and
fenamiphos sulfoxide)
EPA8141B
EPA 3535A [Sample Preparation] /
EPA 8270D [Determinative]
Liquid Solid (Solid
Phase) Extraction
GC-MS
Solid Phase Extraction
GC-MS
Solid Phase Extraction
GC-MS
LC-MS-MS
Liquid Solid (Solid
Phase) Extraction
GC-MS
LC-MS-MS
GC-FPDor-NPD
Solid Phase Extraction
GC-MS
EPANERL
EPA ORCR
EPA ORCR
EPANERL
EPANERL
EPANERL
EPA ORCR
EPA ORCR
it)
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
W
Fenamiphos is instable in aqueous
matrices, and quantitative
determination is questionable.
Samples should be analyzed as soon
as possible upon receipt.
it)
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
EPA 525.2
EPA 538
EPA 538

                                                                                                         16

-------
Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Contaminant
Possible Methods
Instrumentation
Method Sou rce(1)
Special Considerations
Recommended
Confirmatory
Method(s)(2>
Persistent Chlorinated Organics
Polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) (3)
EPA 508.1 (as Aroclors)
EPA 525.2 (as Aroclors)
EPA 505 (as Aroclors)
GC-Electron Capture
Detector (ECD)
Liquid Solid (or Solid
Phase) Extraction
GC-MS
GC-ECD
EPANERL
EPAOW
EPA 508.1 contains data for reagent
and synthetic surface water only, but
is approved in 40 CFR 141 for drinking
water monitoring.
C*l
it;
EPA 508.1
EPA 525.2
EPA 505
Petroleum Products
Volatile organic
compounds indicative of
gasoline (i.e., BTEX)(3)
Diesel range organics
Gasoline range organics
Kerosene
EPA 524. 3
EPA 502.2
EPA 3520C/3535A
[Sample Preparation] /
EPA 801 5C [Determinative]
EPA 5030C [Sample Preparation] /
EPA 801 5C [Determinative]
GC-MS
GC-PID and ECD
Continuous Liquid-Liquid
or Solid Phase Extraction
GC-FID
Purge-and-trap GC-FID
EPA OGWDW
EPANERL
EPAOW
EPA ORCR
EPA ORCR
it)
Method 502.2 contains data for
reagent water only, but is approved in
40 CFR 141 for drinking water
monitoring.
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
EPA 524.3
EPA 502.2

-
Pharmaceuticals
Colchicine
Digoxin
Nicotine sulfate
(as nicotine)
LC-Tandem MS for the
Determination of Colchicine in
Postmortem Body Fluids
Development and Validation of a
Rapid Method for Direct
Determination of Colchicine in
Pharmaceuticals and Biological
Fluids
EPA 1694
EPA 3535A [Sample Preparation] /
EPA 8270D [Determinative]
(as nicotine)
LC-MS-MS
LC-UV
spectrophotometry
LC-MS-MS
Solid Phase Extraction
GC-MS
J. of Analytical
Technology, 2006,
30(8), 593-598.
J. of Liquid
Chromatography
and Related
Technologies,
2006, 29, 1-13.
EPAOW
EPA ORCR
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
Improved extraction of alkaline
compounds, such as nicotine, may
occur under basic conditions.


-

                                                                                                         17

-------
                               Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Contaminant
Possible Methods
Instrumentation
Method Sou rce(1)
Special Considerations
Recommended
Confirmatory
Method(s)(2>
Rodenticides
Crimidine
Strychnine
TETS
Pesticide monitoring of drinking
water with the help of solid-phase
extraction and high-performance
liquid chromatography
Multiresidue Analysis of 95
Pesticides at Low Nanogram/ Liter
Levels in Surface Waters Using
Online Preconcentration and High
Performance Liquid
Chromatography/ Tandem Mass
Spectrometry
Identification and Quantitation of
Herbicides and Pesticides in Water
by LC and Diode Array Detector
EPA 3535A [Sample Preparation] /
EPA 8270D [Determinative]
Analysis of Tetramethylene
Disulfotetramine in Foods Using
Solid-Phase Microextraction- Gas
Chromatography-Mass
Spectrometry
Quantitative Analysis of
Tetramethylenedisulfotetramine
(Tetramine) Spiked into Beverages
by Liquid Chromatography-Tandem
Mass Spectrometry with Validation
by Gas Chromatography-Mass
Spectrometry
Solid Phase Extraction
LC-Diode Array Detector
LC-MS-MS
LC-Diode Array Detector
Solid Phase Extraction
GC-MS
Solid Phase Micro
Extraction
GC-MS
LC-MS-MS and GC-MS
J. of
Chromatography
A, 1996,737(1),
67-74.
J. ofAOAC
International,
2010, 93(6), 1732-
1747.
Varian/Agilent
App. Note No. 9
EPA ORCR
J. of
Chromatography
A, 2008, 1192(1),
36-40.
J. Agric. Food
Chem., 2009,
57(10), 4058-
4067.
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
Improved extraction of alkaline
compounds, such as strychnine, may
occur under basic conditions.
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.
Laboratories should evaluate the
method for their drinking water matrix.



         sources:  ASTM - http://www.astm.org/Standards/water-testinq-standards.html, EPA ORCR - http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/testmethods/mice.htm, EPA
NERL (formerly EMSL) - http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/ordmeth.htm, EPA OW and EPA Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (OGWDW) -
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/drinkingwater/labcert/analvticalmethods ogwdw.cfm. EPA Region 5 Laboratory- http://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/r5lab.html
(2) If a possible method has been validated for in the drinking water matrix, it is listed as a recommended confirmatory method.
(3) This analyte is regulated in drinking water at 40 CFR 141. The possible and recommended confirmatory methods listed for this analyte provide a representative sub-set
of the methods that EPA has approved for use in monitoring drinking water for this  analyte. Other approved methods listed for this analyte for SDWA compliance monitoring
may also be used.
(4)  If no special considerations are listed, then the method has been evaluated for the drinking water matrix.
                                                                                                                                                 18

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
5.4     Radiochemical Contaminants and Analytical Methods

Drinking water radiochemical contaminants include radionuclides emitting alpha (e.g., uranium-238),
beta (e.g., strontium-90), and beta/gamma (e.g., cesium-137) radiation. During incident response there
may be a need for both sample radiation screening methods (gross activity) and specific analytical
methods for detecting, identifying, and quantifying radionuclides in water samples. For comprehensive
preparedness planning, utilities should identify a laboratory partner that can analyze for alpha and beta
emitters and develop procedures to collect samples and access the laboratory partner.  The following
information on laboratory-based screening and confirmatory methods may be especially useful to a
utility's radiochemical laboratory partner; however, field-based radiological testing equipment can be
easily adopted by a utility's field or laboratory personnel for screening of gamma and some beta emitters.

Alpha emitters are effectively shielded in containerized water samples even if present at concentrations
harmful when  ingested, as well as most beta emitters. Some high energy beta emitters are also gamma
emitters, so it is possible to detect some beta emitters indirectly through detection of the gamma emission.
An overview of radiological methods for detection of various radionuclides in water is provided in the
document, Inventory of Radiological Methodologies for Sites Contaminated with Radioactive Materials
(USEPA,  2006). This document provides an overview of field and laboratory screening methods (gross
alpha, gross beta, and gamma analysis), routine methodologies for radionuclide quantification and
discrimination (gross alpha and gross beta requiring chemical separation procedures, alpha spectrometry,
and gamma spectrometry) and specialized methodologies that rely on isotope mass rather than radioactive
particle emissions (mass spectrometry).  For example, inductively coupled plasma - mass spectrometry
(ICP-MS) is one specialized technique that may be used to detect and/or speciate some isotopes (e.g.,
iodine-129, uranium isotopes).

EPA also  has developed guidance regarding screening water samples for gross radioactivity using a
variety of common survey equipment. The Radiological Laboratory Sample Screening Analysis Guide
for Incidents of National Significance  (USEPA, 2009a)
describes how to develop laboratory methods to
perform gross  radioactivity analysis for samples.  It          ponMe mdioactivity meters cm
also  discusses technical issues associated with                ,      , ,-   .,    ,-,
                            .,   ,          ,             be used for site safety screening
screening  measurements, provides the suggested             md lahomt   screeni    of
methodologies to determine correction factors tor these             ,  /-            ,     ,   ,
          0  „         .         ,   , ,    -              samples for gamma and some beta
instruments, otters a consistent methodology tor                •!_•_ป•;    •  ;
               ,          .  .            .                 emitting radiocnemicais.
measuring sample gross activity concentrations, and
provides guidance on the calibration of screening
equipment commonly used by laboratories (available at: www.epa.gov/narel).

For example, Geiger-Mueller (GM) detectors are sensitive to all gamma and beta particles with enough
energy to pass through the sample and container walls but not to alpha particles or low-energy beta
particles, so no assessment of alpha particle or low-energy beta particle contamination can be made.
These measurements take no more than 5 to 10 seconds to complete per sample and the sample mass and
integrity remain unchanged (this is a non-destructive, non-invasive test).  Important aspects of the
outcome of these measurements are that samples can be appropriately shielded and labeled for both
radiation protection and prioritization purposes. EPA has recently published a field instrument guide
providing information regarding the use of various instruments for detection of specific analytes in
environmental matrices.  This document is titled Field Screening Equipment Information Document -
Companion to Standardized Analytical Methods for Environmental Restoration Following Homeland
Security Events, SAM, Revision 5.0 (USEPA, 2010b; http://www.epa.gov/sam/samcomp.htm). and may
be useful in identifying common field instrumentation that can be used for laboratory screening as well as
specific radiochemical analyses.
                                                                                             19

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

Rapid methods for detection of some radionuclides (e.g., amercium-241, plutonium-238 and plutonium-
239/240, isotopic uranium, radiostrontium [strontium-90], and radium-226) in water have been developed
specifically for incident response by EPA (Rapid Radiochemical Methods for Selected Radionuclides in
Water for Environmental Restoration Following Homeland Security Events, [USEPA, 2010c]). These
new methods have been single-laboratory validated and were developed to expedite the analytical
turnaround time (8 to 38 hours) while providing quantitative results. It should be noted that these
methods were not developed for compliance monitoring of drinking water samples and are not approved
for regulatory monitoring.
                                                  Additional guidance for laboratories supporting
                                          \       incident response has been developed by EPA,
      Utilities should determine if their
      emergency response partner for
      radiochemical analyses has
      knowledge of rapid methods. The
      utility should document the
      anticipated time-line for analysis
      of radio chemicals in water
      samples.

                                                  Radiological Lab oratory Sample Analysis Guide
                                                  for Incidents of National Significance -
                                                  Radionuclides in Water (USEPA, 2008b). This
                                                  document is intended to assist those analytical
                                                  laboratories that will be called upon to provide
                                                  rapid support following a radiological or nuclear
                                                  incident. Because EPA recognizes that, following
                                                  an incident, there may not be sufficient time to
                                                  coordinate and communicate complete data
                                                  quality objectives, measurement quality
                                                 objectives, and analytical priorities to the
laboratory, this document details protocols that will enable laboratories to proceed with a consistent
approach to developing and reporting appropriate data suitable for the anticipated use. Many useful
procedures in support of radiochemical sample screening can also be found in the All Hazards Receipt
Facility Screening Protocol (USEPA, 2008c) document
(http://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public record report.cfm?address=nhsrc/&dirEntryId=199346).

EPA's SAM is a valuable resource for identification of radiochemical methods that are applicable to the
analysis of drinking water samples. SAM lists appropriate qualitative and confirmatory methods for
specific radionuclides as well as methods for gross alpha/beta and gamma radioactivity determination and
analyte/method combinations are conveniently tabulated in Appendix B (http://www.epa.gov/sam/).
Included in SAM are current drinking water compliance monitoring methods that can also be used for
analysis of radiochemical contaminants in possible contamination incidents, although these methods
require more time than the recently developed rapid methods. In addition, EPA's Radiation Protection
(http://www.epa.gov/radiation/radionuclides/index.html) and the Multi-Agency Radiological Laboratory
Analytical Protocols Manual (MARLAP) (http://www.epa.gov/radiation/marlap/manual.html) websites
also provide information pertaining to radionuclides  of interest and selection of radiochemical methods.

Table 5-2 provides possible drinking water methods that can be used for analysis of gross alpha, beta, and
gamma radiation, as well as three representative radiochemical contaminants.  Until the rapid
radiochemical methods are more widely adopted, a utility may use  regulatory compliance methods and
laboratories. Utilities should discuss with their radiochemical laboratory partner in advance the need to
have rapid turn-around results in possible contamination incidents so that appropriate protocols can be
established.
                                                                                             20

-------
                             Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Table 5-2.  Representative Radiochemicals and Methods
Contaminant
Possible Methods
Instrumentation
Method
Source (1)
Special Considerations
Recommended
Confirmatory
Method
Alpha Emitters
Gross Alpha
Uranium-238
EPAOO-02/900.0
[Confirmatory]
EPA 908.0
[Qualitative Determination]
D3972-02 [Confirmatory]
EPA 200.8
[Quantitative Determination]
Isotopic Uranium (238U, 235U, and
234U) in Water: Rapid Method for
High-Activity Samples
[Confirmatory]
Alpha Beta scintillation sealer or gas-flow
low-background proportional detector
Alpha scintillation counting or gas- flow
proportional detector
Alpha spectrometry
ICP-MS
Extraction chromatography + alpha
spectrometry
EPA NERL
EPA NERL
ASTM
EPA NERL
EPA NAREL
Total (gross) for alpha and beta
emissions; does not distinguish isotopes.
Qualitative determination; does not
distinguish uranium isotopes.
Isotopic confirmation
May distinguish uranium isotopes.
Measures total uranium; does not
measure radioactivity.
Isotopic confirmation; although the
method can detect concentrations of
238U, 235U, and 234U on the same order of
magnitude as methods used for the
SDWA, this method is not a substitute for
SDWA-approved methods for isotopic
uranium.
EPA 900.0
EPA 200.8
Beta Emitters
Gross Beta
Strontium-90
Rapid sample screening
[Qualitative Determination]
EPAOO-02/900.0
[Confirmatory]
SM 7500-Sr B [Confirmatory]
Open-end or pancake style GM detectors
with ratemeter
Alpha Beta scintillation sealer or gas-flow
low-background proportional detector
Beta counting by gas-flow or thin-window
proportional detector
EPA NAREL
EPA NERL
SM
Sample/container shielding of low energy
beta emissions.
Total (gross) for alpha and beta
emissions; does not distinguish isotopes.
Selective sample precipitation required.
EPA 900.0
7500-Sr B (SM)
Beta + Gamma Emitters
Gross
Gamma
Cesium-137
Rapid sample screening
[Qualitative Determination]
EPA 901.1 [Qualitative
Determination and Confirmatory]
EPA 901.1
[Qualitative Determination and
Confirmatory]
GM detector with ratemeter
High purity germanium (HPGe) gamma
spectrometry
HPGe gamma spectrometry
EPA NAREL
EPA NERL
EPA NERL
Total (gross) for gamma and high energy
beta emissions; does not distinguish
isotopes.
Total (gross) for gamma emissions; does
not distinguish isotopes.
Qualitative determination can be
performed by application of the method
over a shorter count time than that used
for confirmatory analysis.
EPA 901.1
^Method information: ASTM - http://www.astm.org/Standards/water-testinq-standards.html EPA NAREL - http://www.epa.gov/narel/ EPA NERL (formerly EMSL) -
http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/ordmeth.htm
                                                                                                                                        21

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
5.5     Pathogen Contaminants and Analytical Methods

EPA has identified more than 15 pathogens including bacteria, viruses, and protozoa among the drinking
water contaminants of concern. Some of these pathogens have been declared select agents by the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) due to their potential to pose a severe threat to public
health and safety and as such, their possession, use, or transfer is regulated. These safety and security
concerns limit the availability of qualified laboratories and methods for select agent analyses. Further
information on representative pathogens of concern (including select agents) and laboratory biosafety
requirements can be found in Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories (BMBL), 5th
Edition (USHHS, 2009).

Resources for identifying pathogen methods include Standard Methods for the Evaluation of Water and
Wastewater (Eaton, et al, 2005), USEPA Microbiology Methods (USEPA, 2010d), and the  USEPA
Manual of Methods for Virology (USEPA, 2001). EPA's Microbiological and Chemical Exposure
Assessment Research Division (MCEARD) website
(http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/microbes/epamicrobiologv.html) provides access to a number of drinking
water methods that have been developed for microbial monitoring (bacteria, viruses, and protozoa). SAM
and WCIT are additional resources for identifying appropriate laboratory methods for pathogens of
concern. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) supports FERN and the development of
microbiological methods for food-borne pathogens (e.g., Salmonella, E. coll O157:H7, Shi gelid) that may
be applicable to drinking water. However, reagents and methods for representative pathogens of concern
developed for FERN and CDC's LRN are only available to qualified laboratories within each network.
Additional information regarding FERN and the LRN may be found in Section 6.

If the selection of a method of analysis for a particular agent is made by a public health laboratory partner
and not the utility, the utility and laboratory partner should discuss the level of confidence of the selected
method. For example, many bacterial pathogens have
established confirmatory culture-based methods as well
as more rapid detection procedures (e.g., PCR or
immunoassay) that can be used in tandem to rule-out or        As  many pathogens are not
confirm a potential contaminant. In these cases, results         routinely analyzed for m the
from the more rapid method may be used by the utility to       drinking water matrix, utilities
make consequence management decisions while               should veri^ that a Panned
awaiting the confirmatory results from culture-based            emergency response laboratory
methods.  Conversely, most viral and protozoan               Partner has demonstrated
pathogens are difficult to identify by culture or may            capability and method
require lengthy procedures (turn-around times on the           performance in the drinking water
order of weeks).  For these reasons, the preferred               matrix in Advance of an
methods for these pathogens are often immunoassay or         emergency.
PCR-based. It is important to note that pathogen
viability or infectivity is not addressed by techniques that
target agent-specific markers such as genomic or antigenic markers.
PCR-based methods have been developed for the detection and identification of some representative
pathogens of concern, including select agents, in drinking water. These methods include commercially
available assay formats as well as some that are intended for specific applications and laboratories (e.g.,
LRN Bioterrorism [BT] Agent Screening Protocol). PCR technologies can potentially provide rapid and
sensitive qualitative detection of target agents but due to the low infectious dose of many pathogens of
concern coupled with small assay volumes typically used, large volume sample collection and sample
concentration may be required to achieve detection levels below estimated lethal/infective dose ranges.
PCR is often used for downstream analyses of culture isolates to verify or confirm pathogen identification
                                                                                            22

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

but this process may require lengthy enrichment or isolation procedures and may not support the need for
rapid results.

Several commercial PCR formats, including field-deployable and laboratory-stationed platforms, have
been tested for use in drinking water by EPA's Technology Testing and Evaluation Program (TTEP) and
National Risk Management Research Laboratory's Environmental Technology Verification (ETV)
Program, and all were found to have target detection capabilities above levels of concern (lethal/infective
dose) and offer a limited number of pathogen-specific assays (USEPA, 2010e).  Nonetheless, this
technology holds great potential for rapid, high-throughput, and cost-effective detection of multiple
                                                  pathogens when coupled to appropriate sample
                                                  concentration and processing procedures (Francy,
      EPA has developed a portable,
      ultrafiltration device for
      concentration of bacterial and
      viral agents in water so that large
      volume sample concentration can
      be performed in the field.
      http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc/news/ne
      ws081409.html

                                                  et al, 2009, Holowecky, P.M., et al., 2009 and
                                                  Polaczyk, A.L., et al., 2008).

                                                  Immunoassays for representative pathogens of
                                                  concern are not generally recommended for direct
                                                  analysis of drinking water where contaminant
                                                  levels are anticipated to be very low. However,
                                                  concentration of drinking water (e.g.,
                                                  ultrafiltration) may increase the potential for
                                                 target detection using immunoassay formats. An
overview of commercial immunochemical assays for pathogen detection is available (U.S. Department of
Homeland Security, 2005, Guide for the Selection of Biological Agent Detection Equipment for
Emergency First Responders) and EPA's ETV program has evaluated several commercial formats for use
in drinking water (http://www.epa.gov/etv/). Both resources focus primarily on screening technologies
that could provide rapid information during incident response.  Antibody-based techniques (e.g.,
immunoassays, immunomagnetic separation, immuno-PCR) are frequently used in conjunction with other
pathogen detection methods or following culture enrichment or sample concentration to facilitate target
detection and/or identification.  Many public health and diagnostic laboratories utilize immunoassays for
various pathogens of clinical importance and these capabilities may provide support for identification or
confirmation of some representative pathogens of concern but generally these methods require initial
isolation (e.g., culture) or enrichment of the target
agent.
                                                        Utilities should identify their LRN
Bacterial agents of concern to drinking water security       partner in the planning phases of
include select agents and non-select agents. A few           building capabilities for select
LRN laboratories provide support for the analysis of 5        bioterrorism pathogens and toxins
bacterial select agents (bioterrorism threat agents) in         and make sure they understand
drinking water samples and  SAM Version 5.0 lists           how to access an LRN lab.
LRN Sentinel (or Level A) protocols (American
Society for Microbiology [ASM]) or LRN comparable
assays for culture-based and PCR/immunoassay analytical methods for these bacterial select agents.
Analytical methods for representative bacterial agents of concern are generally more accessible than
select agent methods and SAM, Revision 5.0 can be consulted for guidance in  selecting appropriate
drinking water methods (USEPA, 2009b) (consult the latest version of SAM for the most up-to-date
information).  Alternative methods for some representative pathogens of concern (e.g., PCR method for
Escherichia coli O157:H7) may be commercially available and for agents not listed in SAM (e.g.,
Clostridiumperfringens, Escherichia coli), additional resources should be consulted (e.g., SM). NHSRC
recently completed single-laboratory verification of culture-based methods for E. coli O157:H7, Vibrio
cholerae Ol and O139, Salmonella Typhi, and non-typhoidal Salmonella  spp.  and will initiate multi-
laboratory validation of culture-based methods for E. coli O157:H7 and non-typhoidal Salmonella.  These
methods are available through the EPA's National Homeland Security Research Center (NHSRC) website
(http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc).  This website also contains a feature that enables users to automatically be
notified of developments on certain topics (http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc/htm/distlist.html).

                                                                                             23

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination


Enteric viruses, including caliciviruses (noroviruses and sapoviruses) and enteroviruses (polioviruses,
echoviruses, coxsakieviruses A and B, and non-polio enteroviruses) are not select agents but are
considered contaminants of concern.  Analytical methods for viruses include tissue culture-based
(infectivity assays) methods, PCR-based methods, and Integrated cell culture (ICC)-PCR methods.  Since
                                                  some enteric viruses cannot be cultured, a PCR-
                                                  based strategy may be helpful in screening
      Utilities should learn in advance of            samPles for a vi™1 Contaminant. SAM, Revision
      any special sample collection,                  5Uฐ llsts Pfff1 metho^ for enteroviruses but
                                                  these methods have not been thoroughly evaluated

                                                                 •matrices (USEPA, 2009b).
     partner laboratory.                           EPA Methuฐd ^15' which detects enterovirus and
                                                  norovirus by culture and Real lime-quantitative
                                                  PCR (RT-qPCR) has recently been developed and
evaluated by EPA and is available at (http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/online.html#vis/).

Crypto'sporidium is a contaminant that is commonly monitored in source water using EPA Methods 1622
or 1623.  Numerous laboratories conduct EPA Methods 1623 or 1622. Utilities that elect to use these
methods for finished drinking water should ensure that appropriate matrix spikes are evaluated per
method requirements.  Additional methods for Cryptosporidiumparvum include tissue culture and PCR,
but may require additional evaluation for application to drinking water.

Rickettsial agents are considered contaminants of concern as well as select agents. It should be noted that
some of these agents (e.g., Coxiella burnetii) are obligate intracellular bacteria and as such are listed in
SAM as bacteria rather than rickettsial agents. Analytical methods for these agents include host cell
culture, PCR, and immunoassay procedures.

Sample processing techniques (e.g., filter concentration) may impact pathogen viability and thus impose
limitations on the use of culture-based methods. Also, drinking water, particularly when concentrated,
may contain substances that interfere with PCR and immunoassay methods (Hill, V.R., et al., 2007).
Guidelines for establishing PCR practices and method controls are available to assist laboratories in
developing these capabilities (USEPA, 2004). Recovery criteria for ultrafiltration procedures have been
developed by the EPA's NHSRC and the Water Laboratory Alliance (WLA) to help laboratories
demonstrate and maintain proficiency.

Table 5-3 provides a list of representative pathogens of concern to water security, possible methods, and
special considerations that utilities may find helpful in identifying analytical methods and developing
laboratory support networks. It should be noted that the methods listed in Table 5-3 are not intended to
be a comprehensive listing of all potential methodologies but have been selected based on applicability to
drinking water. Pathogens identified as select agents in Table 5-3 are included in the HHS/U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA) select agent list and should be analyzed in accordance with
appropriate regulatory compliance (42 Code of Federal Regulations  [CFR] parts 72 and 73, and 9 CFR
part 121) and safety and biosafety level (BSL) requirements (see CDC's BMBL, 5th Edition,
http://www.cdc.gov/biosafety/publications/bmbl5/index.htm). Additional information on the LRN,
including laboratories capable of receiving and processing drinking water samples for specific pathogen
analyses is available at: http://www.bt.cdc.gov/lrn/.

Note: EPA has not evaluated literature or vendor methods contained in Table 5-3 and their mention does
not constitute an endorsement or recommendation for use.
                                                                                             24

-------
                            Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Table 5-3. Representative Pathogens and Methods
Contaminant
Screening
Methodology
(presumptive)
Screening Method Source (1)
Confirmatory
Methodology
(viability/other)
Confirmatory Method Source
Special
Considerations
Bacteria
Bac/7/us
anthracis
Burkholderia
spp.
Clostridium
perfringens
Escherichia coli
O157:H7
Immunoassay
(commercial formats)
PCR (commercial
formats)
RAPID.""/
PathAlert™
Real-time PCR (LRN
protocols 2)
PCR (commercial
formats)
Real-time PCR (LRN
protocols2)
Not Available
Immunoassay
(commercial formats)
EPA (TTEP and ETV reports)
Detecting Biological
Contaminants in Water, Using
Rapid PCR Technologies
(http://wvwv.epa.gov/nhsrc/ne
ws/news070808a. html)
LRN
EPA (TTEP and ETV reports)
LRN
Not available
EPA (TTEP and ETV reports)
Culture
(rule-out or refer for
confirmation)
Culture/confirmation
(LRN protocols)
PCR/Viability
Culture
(rule-out or refer for
confirmation)
Culture/confirmation
(LRN protocols)
Membrane
filtration/culture/
verification
Broth culture/ selective
isolation/ biochemical
and serological
confirmation
Broth culture/ immuno-
magnetic separation
(IMS)/ selective media/
biochemical and
serological confirmation
Real-time PCR
verification of culture
isolates
Public Health Reports, 1977, 92(2): 176-
186.
Not publicly available^
Development and Verification of Rapid
Viability Polymerase Chain Reaction (RV-
PCR) Protocols for Bacillus anthracis -
For application to air filters, water and
surface samples (EPA/600/R-10/156).
ASM Sentinel Laboratory Guidelines for
Suspected Agents of Bioterrorism:
Burkholderia mallei and Burkholderia
pseudomallei.
Not publicly available^
Membrane Filtration Method for C.
perfringens (EPA/600/R-95/178).
SMฐ 9260 F: Pathogenic Escherichia coli.
Standard Analytical Protocol for
Escherichia coli O157:H7 in Water
(EPA/600/R-1 0/056).
Applied and Environmental Microbiology,
2003, 69(10): 6327-6333.
Select Agent/BSL-3
Sample
concentration
Select Agent/BSL-3
Sample
concentration
BSL-2
Anaerobic spore
former
BSL-2
Concentrated
samples may be
acceptable
                                                                                                                                 25

-------
Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Contaminant
Escherichia coli
O157:H7
Francisella
tularensis
Francisella
tularensis
Salmonella
Typhi
Vibrio cholera
O1
Yersinia pestis
Screening
Methodology
(presumptive)
PCR (commercial
formats)
TaqManฎ E. coli
O1 57: H7 Detection
System/ R. A. P. I. D.ฎ
Immunoassay
(commercial formats)
PCR (commercial
formats)
R.A.P.I.D.ฎ/
PathAlert™
Real-time PCR (LRN
protocols1)
PCR (commercial
formats);
Requires culture
enrichment
PCR (commercial
formats);
Requires culture
enrichment
Immunoassay
(commercial formats)
PCR (commercial
formats)
Screening Method Source (1)
EPA (TTEP and ETV reports)
Detecting Biological
Contaminants in Water, Using
Rapid PCR Technologies
(http://wvwv.epa.gov/nhsrc/ne
ws/news070808a. html.
http://www.epa.qov/nhsrc/tte r
apidpcr.html)
EPA (TTEP and ETV reports)
Detecting Biological
Contaminants in Water, Using
Rapid PCR Technologies
(http://www.epa.qov/nhsrc/ne
ws/news070808a. html.
http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc/tte r
apidpcr.html)
LRN
Vendor
Vendor
EPA (TTEP and ETV reports)
Confirmatory
Methodology
(viability/other)
PCR/Viability
Culture (rule-out or refer
for confirmation)
Culture/confirmation
(LRN protocols)
Broth culture/ selective
isolation/ biochemical
and serological
confirmation
Broth culture/ selective
isolation/ biochemical
and serological
confirmation
Culture (rule-out or refer
for confirmation)
Confirmatory Method Source
Environ. Sci. Technol., 2011, 45(6):
2250-2256.
CDC, ASM, Association of Public Health
Laboratories (APHL) Basic Protocols for
Level A Laboratories for the Presumptive
Identification of Francisella tularensis.
Not publicly available^
SMJ 9260 B: General Qualitative Isolation
and Identification Procedures for
Salmonella.
Standard Analytical Protocol for
Salmonella Typhi in Drinking Water (EPA
600/R-10/133).
SMJ 9260 H: Vibrio cholerae
Standard Analytical Protocol for Vibrio
cholerae O1 and O139 in Drinking Water
and Surface Water (EPA 600/R-1 0/1 39).
ASM Sentinel Laboratory Guidelines for
Suspected Agents of Bioterrorism:
Yersinia pestis.
Special
Considerations

Select Agent/BSL-3
Select Agent/BSL-3
Sample
concentration
BSL-2
Concentrated
samples may be
acceptable
BSL-2
Concentrated
samples may be
acceptable
Select Agent/BSL-3
                                                                                                         26

-------
Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Contaminant
Yersinia pestis
Yersinia pestis
Screening
Methodology
(presumptive)
R.A.P.I.D.^/PathAlert™
Real-time PCR (LRN
protocols2)
Screening Method Source (1)
Detecting Biological
Contaminants in Water, Using
Rapid PCR Technologies
(http://wvwv.epa.gov/nhsrc/ne
ws/news070808a. html.
http://www.epa.qov/nhsrc/tte r
apidpcr.html)
LRN
Confirmatory
Methodology
(viability/other)

Culture/confirmation
(LRN protocols)
Confirmatory Method Source

Not publicly available^
Special
Considerations

Select Agent/BSL-3
Sample
concentration
Protozoa
Cryptosporidium
parvum
Not available
Not available
IMS/ Fluorescent
antibody/ Microscopy
(Not suitable for viability
determination)
Tissue culture (Viability
determination)
Real-time PCR (Not
suitable for viability
determination)
EPA Method 1622: Cryptosporidium in
Water by Filtration/IMS/FA and
EPA Method 1623: Cryptosporidium and
Giardia in Water by Filtration/IMS/FA.
Applied and Environmental Microbiology,
1999, 65(9): 3936-3941.
Applied and Environmental Microbiology,
2007, 73(13): 4218-4225.
BSL-2
Sample
concentration
Rickettsia
Coxiella burnetii
Not available
Not available
Culture/confirmation
(LRN protocols)
Not publicly available^
Select Agent/BSL-3
Propagation in
tissue culture
Viruses
Caliciviruses
(Norovi ruses)
Enterovirus
Real-time PCR
(commercial formats)
Real-time PCR
(commercial formats)
Vendor
Vendor
Real-time PCR (Not
suitable for viability
determination)
Real-time PCR (Not
suitable for viability
determination)
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 2004,
42(10): 4679-4685.
Applied and Environmental Microbiology,
2003, 69(6): 3158-3164.
BSL-2
Sample
concentration
Non-culturable virus
BSL-2
Sample
concentration
                                                                                                         27

-------
                               Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Contaminant
Enterovirus and
norovirus
Screening
Methodology
(presumptive)
RT-qPCR or cell
culture
Screening Method Source (1)
EPA NERL
Confirmatory
Methodology
(viability/other)
Cell culture
RT-qPCR (Not suitable
for viability
determination)
Confirmatory Method Source
EPA Method 1615: Measurement of
Enterovirus and Norovirus in Water by
Culture and RT-qPCR
Special
Considerations
BSL-2
Sample
concentration
^Screening method information: EPA TTEP - http://wvwv.epa.gov/nhsrc/pubs.html
                              EPA ETV - http://www.epa.gov/etv/publications.html
                              LRN - http://www.bt.cdc.gov/lrn/
  CDC/LRN protocols and reagents are restricted to LRN laboratories
(3) Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater
(2)
                                                                                                                                               28

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
5.6     Biotoxin Contaminants and Analytical Methods

Drinking water contaminants of concern to water security include biotoxins from plant, bacterial, algal,
fungal, and animal sources; some of these contaminants are also included among HHS and USDA select
agents and toxins. Methodologies for biotoxins include a variety of approaches designed to address
specific properties and more than one of these may be required to identify and evaluate the health threat
                                                  of a biotoxin during incident response. For
                                                  example, botulinum neurotoxins can be rapidly
     Confirmation of many low
     molecular weight biotoxins can be
     performed using liquid
     chromatography mass spectrometry
     (LC-MS) and commercially
     available standards. Such methods
     could be easily adopted by utilities
     with this instrumentation.
detected and identified using immunologic or
instrumental techniques but a bioassay (e.g.,
mouse bioassay) is required to confirm toxicity. In
contrast, many of the smaller non-protein
biotoxins can be detected and identified using
immunologic and/or instrumental techniques that
determine intact compound structure and toxicity
or biological activity, since these are generally
assumed to be based on structural integrity.
Immunoassays for many biotoxins are available through commercial sources but these might only provide
presumptive results. Analytical support for some biotoxins (e.g., ricin, botulinum toxins) may be
available through LRN, FERN, and some commercial laboratories.  In general, support for biological
activity determinations or bioassays (e.g., mouse bioassays) will require coordination with laboratories
that routinely conduct these analyses (e.g., public health, LRN, FERN, CDC, specialized commercial
laboratories).

Analytical methods (presumptive, confirmatory, and biological activity) for biotoxins are summarized in
SAM but it should be noted that most of these methods have not been evaluated for use with drinking
water matrices.  EPA is collaborating with other agencies to develop and validate methods for biotoxins,
and these new methods will be listed in future revisions of SAM.

There are a variety of commercially available immunoassays that can provide rapid screening capability
for some important biotoxins, particularly ricin and botulinum toxins. In addition, some general toxicity
test systems are responsive to biotoxins (e.g., ricin and botulinum toxins) but do not identify the agent
responsible for the toxic response.  EPA has evaluated some of these commercial technologies
(immunoassays and general toxicity tests) in drinking water and test results are available through EPA's
TTEP website (http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc/ttep .html) and ETV Program
(http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/std/etv/verifiedtechnologies.html).

Table 5-4 provides a representative list of biotoxins, available methods, and special considerations that
utilities may find helpful in  identifying analytical methods and developing laboratory support networks.
Further information on these methods can be found in SAM.  Biological activity assays (e.g., mouse
bioassay) are not listed in Table 5-4 but may be required to demonstrate toxicity.

Note: EPA has not evaluated literature or vendor methods listed in Table 5-4 and their mention does not
constitute an endorsement or recommendation for use.
                                                                                             29

-------
                             Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Table 5-4.  Representative Biotoxins and Methods
Contaminant
Presumptive Method
Presumptive
Method Source'11
Confirmatory Method
Confirmatory
Method Source
Special Considerations
Algal Toxins
B revet oxins
Micro cystins
Saxitoxin
Immunoassay (Enzyme-
linked Immunosorbent
Assay [ELISA)
Immunoassay (ELISA)
Immunoassay
(competitive ELISA)
Environmental Health
Perspectives. 2002.
110(2): 179-185.
Journal of AOAC
International. 2001. 84(4):
1035-1044.
SAM (Revision 6.0)
(Commercial Kit)
Chromatography-tandem mass
spectrometry (HPLC-MS-MS)
HPLC-photodiode array (PDA)
detector
Chromatography-
fluorescence detector HPLC-
FL (post column derivatization)
Toxicon., 2004, 43(4): 455-465.
Analyst, 1994, 119(7): 1525-
1530.
Journal of AOAC International,
1995, 78: 528-532.
Requires standards
Consider LC-MS
Select agent/toxin status
(HHS)
Consider LC-MS
Animal Toxins
Tetrodotoxin
Immunoassay
(competitive ELISA)
Journal of Clinical
Laboratory Analysis.
1992. 6:65-72.
HPLC-MS and HPLC-MS-MS
Analytical Biochemistry, 2001,
290: 10-17.
Select agent/toxin status
(HHS)
Bacterial Toxins
Botulinum
toxins
Immunoassay (multiple
formats)
SAM (Revision 6.0)
EPA (TTEP and ETV
reports)
Immunoassay (ELISA)
FDA, Bacteriological Analytical
Manual Online, January 2001,
Chapter 17, Clostridium
botulinum.
Select agent/toxin
status(HHS/USDA);
Commercial immunoassays
available; Consider LC-MS
Fungal Toxins
Aflatoxin
T2 mycotoxin
Antibody capture followed
by HPLC (fluorescence
detection)
Immunoassay (ELISA)
AOAC Official Method
991.31.
Journal of Food
Protection. 2005. 68(6):
1294-1301.
Antibody capture followed by
HPLC (fluorescence detection)
LC-MS (HPLC- time-of-flight
mass spectrometry)
AOAC Official Method 991.31.
Rapid Communications in Mass
Spectrometry, 2006, 20(9):
1422-1428.
Consider LC-MS
Select agent/toxin status
(HHS/USDA); Consider LC-
MS
Plant Toxins
Abrin
Alpha
amanitin
Ricin
Immunoassay (ELISA and
electrochemiluminescence
detection)
Immunoassay (ELISA)
Immunoassay (multiple
formats)
Journal of Food
Protection. 2008. 71(9):
1868-1874.
Journal of Food
Protection. 2005. 68(6):
1294-1301.
SAM (Revision 6.0)
EPA (TTEP and ETV
reports)
Ribosome inactivation (in vitro
assay)
HPLC with amperometric
detection
Immunoassay (ELISA and
electrochemiluminescence
detection)
Adapted from Pharmacology &
Toxicology, 2001, 88(5): 255-
260.
Journal of Chromatography B,
1991, 563(2): 299-311.
Journal of AOAC International,
2008, 91(2): 376-382.
Select agent/toxin status
(HHS)
Consider LC-MS
Select agent/toxin status
(HHS);
Commercial immunoassays
available; Consider LC-MS
(ricinine biomarker)
(1)
  Presumptive method information: EPA TTEP - http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc/pubs.html. EPA ETV - http://www.epa.gov/etv/publications.html
                                                                                                                                         30

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination


        Section 6.0:   Building Laboratory Support Networks


6.1     Developing External Laboratory Support

In-house laboratory analytical capabilities can often be a utility's "front-line" for confirming or ruling out
a broad range of contaminants in the absence of specific information to direct the analytical approach in
possible contamination incidents.  Expanding the utility's laboratory network can support a utility
throughout the credibility determination process, confirmation, remediation and recovery.
Potential laboratory partners should be consulted during the design phase of the utility's sampling and
analysis program for emergency response to ensure that analytical capability and procedures for
emergency access and rapid turn-around are adequately addressed. Laboratory partners should also be
involved to ensure that critical proficiencies (sample collection, packaging, transport, chain-of-custody,
Quality Assurance (QA)/Quality Control (QC), analyses, and results reporting procedures) for emergency
response preparedness are established and maintained.

When reviewing existing in-house and existing partner capabilities, utilities should consider the
following:

    •   Can existing in-house analytical methods be used to screen for, or confirm, contaminants of
        concern to water security?
    •   Will the utility be required to report results from baseline monitoring (any new monitoring efforts
        to establish baseline contaminant occurrence in the distribution system) to the state's primacy
        agency if regulatory compliance monitoring methods are used for non-regulated contaminants of
        concern to water security?
    •   Could new analytical methods be implemented by the utility using  existing in-house
        equipment/instrumentation and personnel to target contaminants of concern to water security?
    •   Are there scenarios under which a method or existing staff would not be available or used during
        incident response?
    •   If new instrumentation or equipment is acquired for emergency response sampling and analysis,
        is it sustainable and/or does it have dual-uses?

Utilities should consider the following when developing laboratory support networks:

    •   Experience of a laboratory using the method for the analyte in a drinking water matrix
    •   Proximity of laboratories can impact time to results due to sample shipping requirements
    •   Laboratory qualifications/certifications to conduct specific analyses
    •   Analytical turn-around time during emergency response
    •   Sample load capacity
    •   Existing and up-to-date accreditations or certifications
    •   QA program that encompasses method/analyte/matrix of interest
    •   How the laboratory will be paid (e.g., contracts, agreements, purchase orders) in an emergency
    •   Sample requirements (e.g., volumes, preservatives, packaging, shipping, sample information,
        chain of custody procedures) specified by individual support laboratories
    •   QC requirements for emergency response samples
    •   Adequacy of data review and reporting procedures
    •   Ability and willingness to analyze samples containing "unknown" contaminants
    •   Laboratory emergency readiness (e.g., available personnel, reagents and hours of operation)
                                                                                            31

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

Sections 6.1.1-6.1.5 of this document describe the EPA's Environmental Response Laboratory Network
(ERLN) and resources developed by EPA through the WLA for utilities during the process of building a
laboratory network to support sample analyses during incident response. A utility can use these resources
to plan for expanded analytical capabilities through the development of relationships and contractual
agreements with external support laboratories.  Furthermore, suggestions are provided regarding the
various types of support laboratories that utilities may contact to ensure coverage of chemical,
radiochemical, and biological contaminants for which external analytical support would be needed.

6.1.1  Overview of the Environmental Response Laboratory Network
The ERLN is an EPA administered network of laboratories of known quality. These pre-approved
laboratories can provide analytical support to address responses to acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or
other catastrophic events which may result in large numbers of environmental samples.  The ERLN
addresses environmental samples potentially contaminated with chemicals (including CWAs),
radiochemical agents, and biological agents (including select agents).

The primary mission of the ERLN is to provide decision-makers with reliable, high quality analytical data
in support of remediation and recovery activities. The ERLN is one of the member networks of the
federal Integrated Consortium of Laboratory Networks (ICLN) (Figure 6-1).
                            Joint Leadership Council (JLC)
                                      DHS Chair
         Tech Subgroups
         and Workgroups
                Network Coordinating
                    Group (NCG)
                     DHS Chair
                             Exec Sec
                               DHS
     LRN
   Laboratory
   Response
    Network
   NAHLN
  National
Animal Health
 Laboratory
  Network
  NPDN
 National
  Plant
Diagnostic
 Network
  FERN
  Food
Emergency
Response
 Network
   ERLN
   Env
 Response
Lab Network
   DLN
Department
 of Defense
Lab Network
Figure 6-1. Integrated Consortium of Laboratory Networks

ICLN members have established relationships with other federal laboratory networks to address human
health, food safety, crops, and animal health. Unlike the other networks, the ERLN is comprised of
public and private sector laboratories. The WLA is the water matrix component of the ERLN and has a
specific emphasis on water contamination.

The ICLN was established by a Memorandum of Agreement in June 2005 to create a structure for an
integrated and coordinated response to and consequence management of nationally significant incidents
requiring laboratory response capabilities. The ICLN provides the mechanism by which laboratory
networks can share information, optimize, and coordinate resources and conduct strategic planning. The
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) chairs the Joint Leadership Council and  the Network
Coordinating Group of the ICLN.  In addition to the DHS, the other nine participating federal agencies
are: USD A, Department of Commerce, Department of Defense (DOD), Department of Energy, HHS,
Department of Interior, Department of Justice, Department of State, and EPA.
                                                                                           32

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

The participating laboratory networks, as shown in Figure 6-1, include the following:

    •   LRN managed by CDC, under the HHS for clinical sample analysis
    •   National Animal Health Laboratory Network (NAHLN) under the USDA for food and animal
       analyses
    •   National Plant Diagnostic Network (NPDN) also under the USDA for crop and plant sample
       analysis
    •   FERN managed by FDA, under the USDA, for analysis of the human food supply
    •   ERLN managed by EPA for environmental analyses including soil, air, water, and surface
       samples
    •   Defense Laboratory Network (DLN) within the DOD for analyses of environmental and clinical
       samples for bioterrorism agents

6.1.2  Overview of the WLA
The WLA provides the Water Sector with an integrated nationwide network of laboratories with the
capabilities and capacity to analyze water samples in the event of natural, intentional, or unintentional
water contamination involving chemical, biological, or radiochemical contaminants. The WLA relies on
the ERLN for CWA and radiochemical capabilities and, in turn, the ERLN relies on the WLA for its
water response capability. Further information about the WLA, in addition to training opportunities and
tools can be found at http ://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/secres/wla.cfm.

6.1.3  Benefits of the ERLN/WLA to Utilities
Utilities can benefit from the ERLN/WLA in a number of ways. In the event that a utility experiences a
confirmed contamination incident or is unable to process routine regulatory samples due to natural
disasters, such as earthquakes or hurricanes, WLA member laboratories can be identified and solicited for
support. In addition to supporting expansion of utility capabilities in a contamination incident, the WLA
provides access to validated analytical methods for
unregulated contaminants of concern to water security,
the opportunity to participate in emergency response           WLA  membership offers
exercises, and water security-related training                  networking opportunities and
opportunities.                                             training to utilities covering a wide
                                                         variety of topics related to
When accessing WLA member laboratories, utilities are        laboratory operations during
assured that the laboratories have complied with various       emergencies.
useful measures related to laboratory quality, capability,
capacity, and data management and reporting,  including:

    •   Drinking water certification or quality system consistent with International Organization for
       Standardization 17025
    •   Sample management system
    •   Facilities to handle and secure samples
    •   Data management and exchange procedures
    •   Accurate inclusion of capability information into the Compendium of Environmental Testing
       Laboratories (CETL or Lab Compendium)

Utilities are strongly encouraged to develop and utilize intrastate mutual aid and assistance agreements,
sometimes known as Water/Wastewater Agency Response Networks (WARNs), which include a
laboratory component. WARNs can help to reduce the typical response gap between local and statewide
agreements, as they do not require emergency declaration prior to activation.  The mission of WARNs is
to provide expedited access to specialized resources needed for response and recovery. WARNs provide
both public and private utilities with emergency assistance through sharing of equipment, personnel, and
other resources required for responding to any crisis.  An overview of the goals of WARN can be found in

                                                                                            33

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

the document Mutual Aid and Assistance: Utilities Helping Utilities (USEPA, 2007,
http://www.epa.gov/flowoftheriver/pdf/fs watersecurity warn.pdf).

Aside from the benefits of ERLN/WLA services, utilities can benefit further if their laboratory becomes
an ERLN/WLA member. This includes access to standards, specialized training, and reimbursement for
analytical services provided during a declared emergency. Further information on the benefits of
becoming an ERLN/WLA member can be found at
http://www.epa. gov/oamsrpod/ersc/ERLN2/index.htm.
6.1.4   Coordinating External Laboratory Support
Utilities should inventory in-house laboratory capability and capacity prior to a possible contamination
incident in order to identify analytical gaps. Once completed, the utility can begin to develop a network
of support laboratories that could be accessed during incident response, depending on the specific
expanded analytical needs that have been identified. There are several ways that utilities can identify
external laboratories to provide analytical support:

    •   The utility should consult with their state environmental or public health laboratories, primacy
        agencies, and local commercial laboratories to become familiar with their analytical capabilities

    •   Utilities should become familiar with EPA regional laboratory capabilities even though access, if
        needed, will likely occur by request from a state agency
    •   For all external laboratories that a utility anticipates would be utilized during the early phases of
        incident response, a contractual agreement or memorandum of understanding is recommended to
        formalize sample analysis requirements (e.g., results turn-around time, analytical costs, etc.)

A utility can consider participation in local emergency preparedness exercises, or joining an existing
mutual aid laboratory network as a way to build relationships and to increase familiarity with laboratory
support mechanisms. The Compendium of Environmental Testing Laboratories (CETL, or Lab
Compendium) is a secure, web-based tool that provides users with  laboratory information such as
emergency contacts, analytical capabilities, matrices of specialization, and capacity  (available through the
WLA Web site: http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/secres/wla.cfm). A caveat to using the
compendium is that the information provided is voluntary and may or may not be up to date; however,
users can be assured that ERLN member laboratories have updated their information within the previous
six months.

Table 6-1 presents the types of laboratories that would generally be able to provide  analytical support for
the indicated contaminant class.  Due to the fact that analytical capabilities vary widely among state,
public health, commercial, and EPA regional laboratories, it is important that utilities consult directly
with potential support laboratories to determine the specific capabilities that are  available at each. A
utility should identify and communicate with laboratories for analysis of representative contaminants
from the contaminant classes of concern in advance of needed service to ensure timely analytical support
during an emergency.  This may also include establishing how the utility will procure the services.
                                                                                             34

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Table 6-1.  Typical Support Laboratories for Chemicals, Radiochemicals, Pathogens, and
Biotoxins
Contaminant Type
Chemicals (except CWAs)
Chemical Warfare Agents1
Chemical Warfare Agent
Degradation Products2
Radiochemicals
Biological Agents
(non-select agents)
Biological Agents1
(select agents)
Support Laboratories
• Utility
• State environmental and public health laboratories
• Commercial laboratories
• EPA regional laboratories
• ERLN CWA laboratories
o Must be arranged by the state through an EPA regional laboratory or the
EPA Headquarters Office of Emergency Management (OEM)
• Utility
• Commercial laboratories
State, EPA regional and commercial laboratories
• Utility
• State environmental and public health laboratories
• Commercial laboratories
• EPA regional laboratories
State public health laboratories (CDC LRN)
 Confirmatory laboratory support for CWAs and select agents will normally occur through the Incident Command System (ICS) to a
federal lead agency.
2 During the early phases of incident response, methods for CWA degradation products could be implemented first (at a capable
support laboratory) unless there is compelling evidence that dictates the need for confirmation of a suspected CWA.

Utilities may access ERLN/WLA member laboratories regardless of whether they are a member,
however, how utilities access laboratory resources will depend on the credibility of the event.  Following
the National Incident Management System (NIMS), local events should be addressed with local resources
until overwhelmed.  Utilities may access laboratory support directly, including ERLN/WLA laboratories,
at their own expense at any time during smaller incidents. To access ERLN/WLA laboratories during
significant events, the following conditions should  apply:

    •  When local resources are overwhelmed, and state or federal assistance is required
    •  The utility will normally request assistance through the local emergency management
       coordination structures
    •  During significant events, such as terrorism or natural disasters, access to laboratory support will
       normally be through the established  ICS structures
    •  The ICS Environmental Unit (EU) supports obtaining and managing analytical services
    •  EU personnel will have access to ERLN/WLA laboratory assets and other federal laboratory
       assets through the Unified Command under NIMS

The WLA Response Plan (WLA-RP) provides processes and procedures to provide coordinated analytical
response to water contamination events
(http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/wla/upload/WLAResponsPlan  November2010.pdf)
The WLA-RP can be used for incidents ranging from small local events to large,  multi-regional events
and provides a good reference document for utilities in managing the analytical needs of a contamination
event. The Plan was developed with the national input of laboratories, utilities, and emergency response
personnel, and has been extensively tested in table top and full scale exercises.

The WLA-RP covers a wide variety of subjects and includes helpful checklists which guide the user
during an incident. The Plan covers the following topics, among others:

    •  Laboratory roles and responsibilities
    •  Laboratory coordination


                                                                                              35

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

    •  Integration of the ICS with WLA-RP processes and procedures
    •  Communication and logistics
    •  Sample brokerage, tracking, and transport
    •  Sample analyses - field screening, rapid, and confirmatory
    •  QA/QC
    •  Data review and validation
    •  Data reporting and data storage
    •  Reimbursement
6.1.5  Example Utility Laboratory Networks
As discussed in this guidance, it is recommended that utilities design a sampling and analysis program to
achieve broad contaminant coverage from the full range of contaminant classes described in Section 4.
The manner in which a utility achieves broad contaminant coverage will vary; some utilities may need to
establish partnerships with external partners to build analytical capabilities for contaminants of concern,
whereas other utilities may have extensive existing  capabilities which would allow them to conduct
analyses in-house for a large sub-set of contaminants of concern to drinking water security as well as
contaminants of local/regional concern.  Tables 6-2, 6-3 and 6-4 contain examples of selected
contaminants and how three differently qualified utilities may choose to build capabilities  for a wide
range of contaminants of concern. The blue shading in Tables 6-3 and 6-4 denotes the differences
between capabilities (for utilities 2 and 3) when compared to utility 1 (Table 6-2) and shows that there are
many ways of accomplishing the desired objective of broad contaminant coverage.

The conditions for use (routine and/or incident response) of the described method are listed to illustrate
how a laboratory may choose to use the method: routinely to establish baseline contaminant occurrence
and method performance or only during  incident response.  Methods only used during incident response
may be for contaminants requiring external emergency response partners or for contaminants where
historical data indicates no baseline occurrence.

Utility 1: This water utility achieved broad contaminant coverage through a combination of existing in-
house capabilities as well as through partnerships with various external laboratories.  Prior to
implementing a CWS, the utility had laboratory capabilities primarily for compliance monitoring; total
coliforms and regulated chemicals.  To increase their in-house laboratory capabilities, the utility decided
to expand analyte screening to include organophosphate pesticides using Method 525.2.

The utility had an existing partnership established with the  state Department of Health to provide analysis
of compliance monitoring samples for radiochemicals, as well as one commercial laboratory for metals
and carbamate pesticide analyses.  The utility further supplemented their overall incident response
preparedness by establishing a protocol for accessing the state LRN laboratory for select agents and
toxins, as well as an EPA regional laboratory for coverage of CWAs. To identify these partner
laboratories, the utility accessed EPA's Lab Compendium through the ERLN or WLA Web site.  In
addition to  expanding contaminant coverage, the utility established procedures for sampling, packaging
and rapid delivery of samples to partner laboratories in the  event of an emergency.
                                                                                             36

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Table 6-2. Example Utility Capabilities and Laboratory Network (Utility 1)
Laboratory
In-house
State LRN
Laboratory
State
Department of
Health
Commercial
Environmental
Laboratory
ERLN CWA
Laboratory
Method
EPA 524.3: Measurement of
Purgeable Organic Compounds
in Water by Capillary Column
Gas Chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry
EPA 525.2: Determination of
Organic Compounds in Drinking
Water by Liquid-Solid
Extraction and Capillary
Column Gas
Chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry
ASTM D6888-04
LRN Sample Concentration and
BT-Agent Screening Protocol
EPA OO-02 / 900.0 Gross
Alpha and Gross Beta
Radioactivity in Drinking Water
EPA 901.1: Gamma
Spectrometry
EPA 200. 8: Determination of
Trace Elements in Waters by
Inductively Coupled Plasma -
Mass Spectrometry
EPA 531 . 1 : Measurement of N-
Methylcarbamoyloximes and N-
Methylcarbamates in Water by
Direct Aqueous Injection High
Performance Liquid
Chromatography with Post
Column Derivatization
EPA 549. 2: Diquat and
Paraquat in Drinking Water by
LSE and HPLC-UV
Quantitation of Fluoroacetic
Acid and Fluoroacetamide with
Mass Spectrometric Detection
(in-house method based on
Dionex Application Note 276)
ERLN CWA Laboratory
Methods
Contaminants
Volatiles indicative of
gasoline
Dichlorvos, Mevinphos,
Fenamiphos, PCBs (as
Aroclors), and MS
Screening
Free Cyanide
Select agents: pathogens
and toxins
Gross Alpha and
Gross Beta Activity
Radionuclide Screen and
Gross Gamma Activity
Arsenic, Mercury, and
Metals Screening
Aldicarb, Carbofuran,
Oxamyl, and other
regulated EPA 531.1
analytes
Paraquat
Sodium fluoroacetate
GB, GD, GA, and VX
Contaminant
Class
Petroleum
Products
Organophosphate
Pesticides and
Persistent
Chlorinated
Organics
Cyanide
Compounds
Plant Toxins,
Viruses, Bacteria
Radionuclides
Radionuclides
Arsenic and
Mercury
Compounds,
Heavy Metals
Carbamate
Pesticides
Herbicides
Fluorinated
Organic
Compounds
CWAs
Conditions
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Incident
response
                                                                                           37

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

Utility 2: Prior to implementing a CWS, utility #2 had a variety of in-house laboratory capabilities in
place for regulatory compliance monitoring.  Many of these capabilities were leveraged for the sampling
and analysis program for water security. The utility broadened contaminant coverage through laboratory
partnerships. The utility established a protocol for accessing the state LRN laboratory to provide
coverage for select pathogens and toxins, and identified an EPA regional laboratory (ERLN Laboratory)
to provide for confirmation of CWAs. The utility also identified a new commercial laboratory partner
through use of EPA's Lab Compendium and established a contract for non-select pathogen agent sample
analyses (Salmonella Typhi and V. cholera Ol).  Note: asterisks in the table which precede method names
indicate unique capabilities for utility 2 in comparison to utility 1.

Table 6-3.  Example Utility Capabilities and Laboratory Network (Utility 2)
Laboratory
In-house
State LRN
Laboratory
State
Department of
Health
Commercial
Environmental
Laboratory 1
Commercial
Environmental
Laboratory 2
ERLN CWA
Laboratory
Method
EPA 524.3 Measurement of Purgeable
Organic Compounds in Water by
Capillary Column Gas
Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry
EPA 525. 2 Determination of Organic
Compounds in Drinking Water by
Liquid-Solid Extraction and Capillary
Column Gas Chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry
ASTM D6888-04
LRN Sample Concentration for BT
Agent Screening Protocol
*EPA200.8 Determination of Trace
Elements in Waters by Inductively
Coupled Plasma - Mass Spectrometry
*Quantitation of Fluoroacetic Acid and
Fluoroacetamide with Mass
Spectrometric Detection (Dionex
Application Note 276)
LRN BT-Agent Screening Protocol
EPA OO-02 / 900.0 Gross Alpha and
Gross Beta Radioactivity in Drinking
Water
EPA 901.1 Gamma Spectrometry
EPA 531.1 Measurement of N-
Methylcarbamoyloximes and N-
Methylcarbamates in Water by Direct
Aqueous Injection High Performance
Liquid Chromatography with Post
Column Derivatization
EPA 549.2 Diquat and Paraquat in
Drinking Water by LSE and HPLC-UV
- *PCR (commercial formats),
requires culture enrichment
[Screening]
- *Broth culture/selective
isolation/biochemical and
serological confirmation
[Confirmatory]
ERLN CWA Laboratory Methods
Contaminants
Volatiles indicative
of gasoline
Dichlorvos,
Fenamiphos,
Mevinphos, PCBs
(as Aroclors), and
MS Screening
Free Cyanide
Select agents:
pathogens and
toxins
Arsenic, Mercury,
and Metals
Screening
Sodium
fluoroacetate
Select agents:
pathogens and
toxins
Gross Alpha and
Gross Beta Activity
Radionuclide
Screen and Gross
Gamma Activity
Aldicarb,
Carbofuran,
Oxamyl, and other
regulated EPA
531.1 contaminants
Paraquat
Non-select agents
GB, GD, GA, and
VX
Contaminant
Class
Petroleum
Products
Organophosphate
Pesticides and
Persistent
Chlorinated
Organics
Cyanide
Compounds
Plant Toxins,
Viruses, Bacteria
Arsenic and
Mercury
Compounds,
Heavy Metals
Fluorinated
Organic
Compounds
Plant Toxins,
Viruses, Bacteria
Alpha and Beta
Emitters
Gamma Emitters
Carbamate
Pesticides
Herbicides
Bacteria
CWAs
Conditions
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine only
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Incident
response
                                                                                             38

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

Utility #3: This water utility is well equipped and staffed, with strong capabilities and experience in
analyses of many contaminants of concern to water security. To enhance in-house laboratory capabilities
for a CWS, the utility implemented several new methods to provide contaminant coverage for
organophosphate pesticides (dicrotophos and fenamiphos) and non-select agents pathogens. The utility
determined that procuring an LC-MS system would provide a long-term benefit as it could be used for
analyses of endocrine disrupters and be used to screen for biotoxins and some pharmaceuticals.  The
utility purchased a Geiger counter for laboratory screening of beta and gross gamma activity prior to
emergency response sample analyses. The laboratory established a protocol for accessing the state LRN
laboratory for select pathogens and toxin analyses, and formed a partnership with an EPA regional
laboratory (ERLN member) for CWA confirmatory analyses. Note: asterisks in the table which precede
method names indicate unique capabilities for utility 3 in comparison to utility 1.

Table 6-4. Example Utility Capabilities and Laboratory Network (Utility 3)
Laboratory
In-house
Method
EPA 524.3: Measurement of
Purgeable Organic Compounds in
Water by Capillary Column Gas
Chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry
EPA 525.2: Determination of
Organic Compounds in Drinking
Water by Liquid-Solid Extraction
and Capillary Column Gas
Chromatography/Mass
Spectrometry
*EPA 538: Determination of
Selected Organic Contaminants in
Drinking Water by Direct Aqueous
Injection-Liquid
Chromatography/Tandem Mass
Spectrometry
ASTM D6888-04
*EPA200.8: Determination of
Trace Elements in Waters by
Inductively Coupled Plasma -
Mass Spectrometry
*EPA 531.1: Measurement of N-
Methylcarbamoyloximes and N-
Methylcarbamates in Water by
Direct Aqueous Injection High
Performance Liquid
Chromatography with Post
Column Derivatization
*Quantitation of Fluoroacetic Acid
and Fluoroacetamide with Mass
Spectrometric Detection (in-house
method based on Dionex
Application Note 276)
*EPA 549.2: Diquat and Paraquat
in Drinking Water by LSE and
HPLC-UV
*ln-house Method - High
Performance Liquid
Chromatography- Mass
Spectrometry
*Rapid Sample Screening
(qualitative determination)
Contaminants
Volatiles indicative of
gasoline
Dichlorvos, Fenamiphos,
Mevinphos, PCBs (as
Aroclors), and MS
Screening
Dicrotophos and
Fenamiphos
Free Cyanide
Arsenic, Mercury, and
Metals Screening
Aldicarb, Carbofuran,
Oxamyl, and other
regulated EPA 531.1
contaminants
Sodium fluoroacetate
Paraquat
Pharmaceuticals and
Endocrine Disrupters
Gross Beta and
Gross Gamma Activity
Contaminant
Class
Petroleum Products
Organophosphate
Pesticides and
Persistent
Chlorinated
Organics
Organophosphate
Pesticides
Cyanide
Compounds
Arsenic and
Mercury
Compounds, Heavy
Metals
Carbamate
Pesticides
Fluorinated Organic
Compounds
Herbicides
Pharmaceuticals
Colchicine,
Crimidine
Beta and Gamma
Emitters
Conditions
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response
                                                                                             39

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination
Laboratory








In-house











State LRN
Laboratory
EPA
Regional
Laboratory
(ERLN
CWA
laboratory)
Method
*EPA OO-02 / 900.0 Gross Alpha
and Gross Beta Radioactivity in
Drinking Water
*EPA 901.1 Gamma
Spectrometry

*ASTM Method D7597-09:
Standard Test Method for
Determination of Diisopropyl
Methylphosphonate, Ethyl
Hydrogen Dimethylamido-
phosphate, Ethyl
Methylphosphonic Acid, Isopropyl
Methylphosphonic Acid,
Methylphosphonic Acid and
Pinacolyl Methylphosphonic Acid
in Water by Liquid
Chromatography/ Tandem Mass
Spectrometry
- *PCR (commercial formats),
requires culture enrichment
[Screening]
- *RT-PCR
- *Broth culture/selective
isolation/biochemical and
serological confirmation
[Confirmatory]
LRN Sample Concentration and
BT-Agent Screening Protocol


ERLN CWA Laboratory Methods


Contaminants
Gross Alpha and
Gross Beta Activity
Radionuclide Screen and
Gross Gamma Activity






Degradation Products of
GB, GD, GA, and VX







Non-select agents



Select agents:
pathogens and toxins


GB, GD, GA, and VX


Contaminant
Class
Alpha and Beta
Emitters
Gamma Emitters






CWA Degradation
Products







Bacteria and
Enteric Viruses



Plant Toxins,
Viruses, Bacteria


CWAs


Conditions
Routine and
incident
response
Routine and
incident
response





Routine and
incident
response







Routine and
incident
response


Incident
response


Incident
response


Note: The above examples are for illustrative purposes only.  Individual utilities may select different
contaminants, methods, and laboratories to achieve the goal of broad coverage for representative
contaminants of concern to drinking water security.
                                                                                              40

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination


   Section 7.0:   Reimbursement of Analytical  Costs Incurred
                        During Emergency Response

Utilities may be eligible for reimbursement of analytical costs incurred by support laboratories during
emergency response through local, state, or federal mechanisms.  To be eligible for federal
reimbursement, the expenses incurred by the utility would have to be covered under a formal declaration
of a national emergency.  State procedures may vary. Utilities are encouraged to prepare for possible
reimbursements by doing the following:

   •   Establish pre-incident emergency procurement procedures to acquire supplies and services
   •   Join a mutual aid and assistance program
   •   Review insurance policies for coverage and limits
   •   Develop pre-incident accounting, documentation, and personnel policies for emergencies (as
       appropriate)
   •   Explore the web-based tool called Federal Funding for Utilities - Water/Wastewater- in National
       Disasters (Fed FUNDS) where you can obtain information tailored to the water sector on
       applicable federal disaster funds, documentation templates, lessons learned, successful funding
       applications from utilities, and access to funding mentors. See the following
       http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecurity/emerplan/index.cfm
   •   Become familiar with reimbursement eligibility, mechanisms, and resources and how they differ
       at the local, state, and  federal level.  See Reimbursement Tips for Emergency Laboratory
       Support- (USEPA, 2009c) for additional information:
       (http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/wla/upload/2009 8 14 watersecuritv_pubsfs
       watersecurity  reimbursementtips laboratory.pdf)

The reimbursement process can be complicated and dependent on many factors.  If a contamination
incident is not an act of terrorism or a nationally significant event (e.g., natural disaster or unintentional
contamination incident), federal funding may not be available for reimbursement. Each state also has its
own rules for reimbursement, and utilities are encouraged to develop a good understanding of state
mechanisms prior to an event.

In order to facilitate reimbursement following an incident, the utility should do the following during the
event:

   •   Coordinate efforts with emergency
       management agencies at the local, state, and
       federal level                                     If an incident is elevated to the
   •   Document emergency work prior to any federal       level of a federal response, ERLN
       declarations of disaster                            member laboratories are eligible
                                                      for reimbursement of analytical
   •   Document labor costs, equipment usage,             ^ (h    h Q Bagic Orderi
       material purchases, and validate/store all             Agreement (BOA)
       records

When performing eligible analyses, members of the ERLN/WLA are compensated by EPA with federal
funding through Basic Ordering Agreements (BOAs) that are established when they become network
members. This is one of the benefits of membership mentioned above because a BOA is not a contract,
but a written instrument of understanding negotiated between EPA and a contractor (state, local,
municipal, or commercial laboratory). There are, however, important details about BOAs that non-
member laboratories would not necessarily know but should be familiar with, in case they require services
from member laboratories. Only authorized requestors identified in the BOA can order services from an

                                                                                         41

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

ERLN/WLA laboratory under the BOA. Typically, authorized requestors are EPA's On-Scene
Coordinators (OSC) from a regional office.  Therefore, a utility may not utilize a federal BOA directly
with another ERLN/WLA laboratory.  However, if the analytical support is for a utility under an
appropriate situation (i.e., formal declaration of national emergency) EPA may pay the support laboratory
through a BOA.

A BOA contains the following:

    •  Terms and clauses applying to future purchase orders between the parties during its term;
    •  Description, as specific as practicable, of supplies or services to be provided; and
    •  Methods for pricing, issuing, and delivering future purchase orders under the BOA.

Work is ordered from a BOA holder either directly from the laboratory (sole source) or on a competitive
basis. Sole-source purchase orders may be issued during national emergencies or other EPA defined
specific incidents (defined case by case). At all other times, EPA will generate a Request for Quote
(RFQ). Both the RFQ and the Purchase Order will detail the level of effort required for a particular
service and will include specific information including the  following, among others:

    •  Specific site or incident
    •  Description of services (how many samples, what type)
    •  Analytical method
    •  Reporting
    •  QA/QC procedures
    •  Payment terms

EPA OSCs may also request ERLN/WLA laboratories to follow ERLN requirements as established in the
BOAs, and may purchase services directly using government-issued credit cards (up to certain dollar
limit).  The EPA headquarters WLA personnel may facilitate use of ERLN commercial laboratories by
water utilities during incident response through coordination using an EPA regional laboratory, OSC, or
ERLN BOA Project Officer. Utilities can also obtain services from ERLN/WLA laboratories outside the
BOA at their own expense.
                                                                                            42

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination


                             Section 8.0:  References

American Society for Microbiology, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Association of
Public Health Laboratories, 2001-8, Sentinel Level Clinical Microbiology Laboratory Guidelines.
Washington, B.C. (http://www.asm.org/index.php/policv/sentinel-level-clinical-microbiologv-laboratory-
guidelines.html.).

ASTM International. 201 1. ASTM Volume  1 1.01 Water (I) and 1 1.02 Water (II). (http://www.astm.org').

Awwa Research Foundation and KiwaN.V. 2006. Early Warning Monitoring in the Drinking Water
Sector- Threats, Impacts and Detection, AwwaRF Project # 2779.

Cheze M, et al. 2006. Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for the determination of
colchicine in postmortem body fluids. Case report of two fatalities and review of the literature. Journal of
Analytical Toxicology. 30(8): 593-598.

De Jager, L.S., et al. 2008. Analysis of tetramethylene disulfotetramine in foods using solid-phase
microextraction-gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Journal of Chromatography A. 1 192 (1): 36-
40.

Eaton, A.D., et al. 2005. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 21st Edition,
Part 9000; Microbial Examination.

Fout,  G.S., etal. 2003 . A Multiplex Reverse Transcription-PCR Method for Detection of Human Enteric
Viruses in Groundwater. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 69(6): 3158-3164.

Francy, D.S., et al. 2009. Performance of traditional and molecular methods for detecting biological
agents in drinking water: U.S. Geological Survey  Scientific Investigations Report, 2009-5097, p. 17.

Garber, E.A.E., et al. 2005. Feasibility oflmmunodiagnostic Devices for the Detection ofRicin, Amanitin,
andT-2 Toxin in Food. Journal of Food Protection. 68(6): 1294-1301.

Garber, E.A.E., et al. 2008. Detection ofAbrin in Food Using Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay and
Electrochemiluminescence Technologies. Journal of Food Protection. 71(9): 1868-1874.

Garber, E.A.E. 2008. Detection ofRicin in Food Using Electrochemiluminescence-Based Technology.
Journal of AOAC International. 91(2): 376-382.
Hale, M. L. 2001 . Microtiter-Based Assay for Evaluating the Biological Activity ofRibosome-Inactivating
Proteins. Pharmacology & Toxicology. 88(5): 255-260.

Hill, D.W. and Langner, K.J. 1987. HPLC Photodiode Array UV Detection for Toxicological Drug
Analysis. Journal of Liquid Chromatography and Related Technologies. 10:  377-409.

Hill, V.R., et al. 2007. Multistate Evaluation of an Ultraflltration-based Procedure for Simultaneous
Recovery of Enteric Microbes in 100-liter Tap Water Samples . Applied Environmental Microbiology 73:
4218-4225.

Holowecky,  P.M., et al. 2009. Evaluation ofultraflltration cartridges for a water sampling apparatus.
Journal of Applied Microbiology. 106(3): 738-747.
                                                                                            43

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

Identification and Quantitation of Herbicides and Pesticides in Water by LC and Diode Array Detector.
Varian Application Note, Number 9. (http://www.chem.agilent.com/Library/applications/lcQ9.pdf).

Jansson, C. and Krueger, J. 2009-2010. Multiresidue Analysis of 95 Pesticides at Low Nanogram/Liter
Levels in Surface Waters Using Online Preconcentration and High Performance Liquid
Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry. Journal of AOAC International. 93(6): 1732-1747.

Jinneman, K.C., et al. 2003. Multiplex Real-Time PCR Method To Identify Shiga Toxin Genes stxl and
stx2 andEscherichia coli O157:H7/H~ Serotype. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 69(10):
6327-6333.

Journal of AOAC International. ISSN: 1060-3271. (http://www.aoac.org).

Junker-Bucheit, Witzenbacker. 1996. Pesticide Monitoring of Drinking Water with the Help of Solid-
Phase Extraction and High-performance Liquid Chromatography. Journal of Chromatography A. 737
(1): 67-74.

Keya Sen, James L. 2011. Development of a Sensitive Detection Method for Stressed E. coli O157:H7 in
Source and Finished Drinking Water by Culture-qPCR. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45(6): 2250-2256.

Kroll, D. 2008. "Testing the Waters - Improving Water Quality and Security via On-line Monitoring,"
International City/County Management Association, Richmond,  VA, September 22, 2008.

Lawrence, J.F., et al. 2001. Comparison of Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry, ELISA,  and
Phosphatase Assay for the Determination ofMicrocystins in Blue-Green Algae Products. Journal of
AOAC International. 84(4): 1035-1044.

Lawton, L.A., et al. 1994. Extraction and high-performance liquid chromatographic method for the
determination of microcystins in raw and treated waters. Analyst. 119(7): 1525-1530.

Naar, J., et al. 2002. A competitive ELISA to detect brevetoxins from Karenia brevis (formerly
Gymnodinium breve) in seawater, shellfish, and mammalian body fluid. Environmental Health
Perspectives.  110(2):  179-185.

Oshima, L. 1995. Postcolumn derivatization liquid chromatographic method for paralytic shellfish toxins.
Journal of AOAC International. 78(2): 528-532.

Owens, J., etal. 2009. Quantitative Analysis ofTetramethylenedisulfotetramine (Tetramine) Spiked into
Beverages by Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry with Validation by Gas
Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 57(10): 4058-4067.

Pang, X., et al. 2004. Evaluation and Validation of Real-Time Reverse Transcription-PCR Assay Using
the LightCycler System for Detection and Quantitation ofNorovirus. Journal of Clinical Microbiology.
42(10): 4679-4685.

Polaczyk, A.L., et al. 2008. Ultraflltration-based techniques for rapid and simultaneous concentration of
multiple microbe classes from 100-L tap water samples. Journal  of Microbiological Methods. 73: 92-99.

Raybould, T.J., et al. 1992. A monoclonal antibody-based immunoassay for detecting tetrodotoxin in
biological samples. Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis. 6: 65-72.

Rees, H.B., et al. 1977. Epidemiologic and laboratory investigations of bovine anthrax in two Utah
counties in 1975. Public Health Reports.  92(2): 176-186.


                                                                                            44

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

Samanidou, V.F., et al. 2006. Development and Validation of a Rapid Method for Direct Determination of
Colchicine in Pharmaceuticals and Biological Fluids. 29: 1-13.

Sen, K., et al. 2011. Development of a Sensitive Detection Method for Stressed E. coll O157:H7 in Source
and Finished Drinking Water by Culture-qPCR. Environmental Science & Technology. 45(6): 2250-
2256.

Shoji, Y., et al. 2001. Electrospray lonization Mass Spectrometry ofTetrodotoxin and Its Analogs: Liquid
Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry, Tandem Mass Spectrometry,  and Liquid Chromatography/Tandem
Mass Spectrometry. Analytical Biochemistry. 290: 10-17.

Slifko, T. R., et al. 1999. A Most-Probable-Number Assay for Enumeration of Infectious Cryptosporidium
parvum Oocysts. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 65(9):  3936-3941.

Solomon, H. and Lilly Jr., Timothy. Chapter 17 Clostridium botulinum. Bacteriological Analytical
Manual. (http://www.fda.gov/Food/ScienceResearch/LaboratoryMethods/).

Tagliaro, F., et al.  1991. Improved high-performance liquid chromatographic determination with
amperometric detection ofa-amanitin in human plasma based on its voltammetric study. Journal of
ChromatographyB. 563(2): 299-311.

Tanaka, H., et al. 2006. Development of a liquid chromatography/time-of-flight mass spectrometric
method for the simultaneous determination oftrichothecenes, zearalenone and aflatoxins in foodstuffs.
Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry. 20(9): 1422-1428.

U.S. Centers for Disease Control and  Prevention. 2005. Laboratory Response Network: Partners in
Preparedness,  (http://www.bt.cdc.gov/lrn).

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2009.  Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical
Laboratories (BMBL), 5th Edition. Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
National Institutes of Health, HHS Publication No. (CDC) 21-1112.
(http://www.cdc.gov/biosafetv/publications/bmbl5/index.htm).

U. S. Department of Homeland Security. 2005.  Guide for the Selection of Biological Agent Detection
Equipment for Emergency First Responders. Guide 101-04, Volume II.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010a.  Standardized Analytical Methods for Environmental
Restoration Following Homeland Security Events, Revision 6.0. EPA/600/R-10/122.
(http://www.epa.gov/sam/).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010b. Field Screening Equipment Information - Companion
Document to Standardized Analytical Methods for Environmental Restoration Following Homeland
Security Events (SAM) - Revision 5.0. (http://www.epa.gov/sam/samcomp.htm).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010c.  Rapid Radiochemical Methods for Selected Radionuclides
in Water for Environmental Restoration Following Homeland Security Events. EPA 402-R-l 0-001.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010d. Microbiology Methods.
(http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/microbes/epamicrobiologv.html).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2010e.  Environmental Technology Verification Program.
(http://www.epa.gov/etv/).
                                                                                           45

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2009a. Radiological Laboratory Sample Screening Analysis
Guide for Incidents of National Significance. EPA 402-R-09-008. (http: //www. epa. gov/narel/).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2009b. Standardized Analytical Methods for Environmental
Restoration Following Homeland Security Events, Revision 5.0. EPA 600-R-04-126E.
(http://www.epa.gov/sam/SAM092909  Revision5.pdf).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2009c. Reimbursement Tips for Emergency Laboratory Support.
(http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecurity/wla/upload/2009 8  14 watersecurity_pubs fs waterse
curitv reimbursementtips laboratory.pdf).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2008a. Water Security Initiative: Interim Guidance on
Developing Consequence Management Plans for Drinking Water Utilities.  817-R-08-001.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2008b. Radiological Laboratory Sample Analysis Guide for
Incidents of National Significance - Radionuclides in Water.
(http://nepis.epa.gov/Adobe/PDF/60000LAW.PDFV

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2008c. All Hazards Receipt Facility Screening Protocol. 600-R-
08-105. (http://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public record report.cfm?address=nhsrc/&dirEntryId=l99346).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2008d. Sampling Guidance for Unknown Contaminants in
Drinking Water. 817-R-08-003.
(http://www.epa.gov/watersecuritv/pubs/guide watersecurity samplingforunknown.pdf).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2007.  Water Sector Mutual Aid and Assistance:  Utilities Helping
Utilities, (http://www.epa.gov/flowofiheriver/pdf/fs  watersecuritvwarn.pdf).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. Inventory of Radiological Methodologies For Sites
Contaminated With Radioactive Materials. EPA 402-R-06-007.
(http://www.epa.gov/narel/IRM Final.pdf).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2004.  Quality Assurance/Quality Control Guidance for
Laboratories Performing PCR Analyses on Environmental Samples. 815-B-04-001.
(http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/documents/qa qc_pcrlO 04.pdf).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2001. Manual of'Methods for Virology. EPA/600/4-84/013.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Response Laboratory Network.
(http://www.epa.gov/oamsrpod/ersc/ERLN2/index.htm).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental Technology Evaluation  Program.
(http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/std/etv/verifiedtechnologies.html).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Water Contaminant Information Tool.
(http://www.epa.gov/wcit).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Water Laboratory Alliance.
(http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/secres/wla.cfm).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Water Laboratory Alliance-Response Plan.
(http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/wla/upload/WLAResponsPlan November2010.pdf).
                                                                                            46

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Exposure Research Laboratory. Microbiological and
Chemical Exposure Assessment Research Division.
(http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/microbes/epamicrobiologv.html').

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Homeland Security Research Center. Publications.
(http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc/pubs.html).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Homeland Security Research Center. Technology
Testing and Evaluation Program. (http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc/ttep.html).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Security Division. Water Security initiative.
(http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/lawsregs/initiative.cfm).

Wang, Z. et al. 2004. LC/MS analysis ofbrevetoxin metabolites in the Eastern oyster (Crassostrea
virginica). Toxicon. 43(4): 455-465.

Water Environment Research Foundation. 2010. "Identify, Screen, and Treat Contaminants to Ensure
Wastewater Security," WERF Report 03-CTS-2S.

Water Information Sharing and Analysis Center (WaterlSAC). WaterlSAC Pro Subscriber Portal.
(http s: //portal. waterisac. org/web/).
                                                                                             47

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination


                   Section 9.0:   Summary of Resources

Section 9 provides a summary of relevant resources that may be useful when implementing sampling and
analysis as part of a CWS at a utility.  The following includes information on contaminant resources,
method resources, laboratory networks, and laboratory guidance, as referenced in this document.

9.1    Contaminant Resources

Contaminant resources provide specific information on regulated and non-regulated contaminants of
interest, as discussed in Section 4.

Hach Homeland Security Technologies (Hach HST)
http://www.hachhst.com/
This company manufactured advanced analytical water quality testing systems for over than 65 years for
nearly all sectors of water treatment and distribution. As part of their development of an event detection
system based on profiles of various contaminant classes, Hach HST has generated a commercial list of
contaminants of concern.

Water Contaminant Information Tool (WCIT)
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/datait/databases/wcit/index.cfm
This tool is a secure, on-line database that provides information on chemical, biological, and radiological
contaminants of concern for water security.  Access is password-protected and will be granted to select
personnel from drinking water and wastewater utilities; State Primacy (primary enforcement) Agencies;
federal officials (including government laboratory personnel); public health agencies; and water
associations.

Water Environment Resource Foundation
http://www.werf.org
This organization provides information on numerous aspects of wastewater and storm water issues,
including water quality monitoring via laboratory analysis.  Specifically for contaminants, this
organization provides an extensive list of publications for sampling, measurement, and analysis.

9.2    Methods Resources

The following resources provide information on general, chemical, biological, and radiological methods
to detect regulated and  non-regulated contaminants of interest, as discussed in Section 4.  Field screening
method resources are also included.
9.2.1  General Method Resources

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Sampling Guidance for Unknown Contaminants in Drinking
Water (2008) EPA-817-R-08-003
http://www.epa.gov/safewater/watersecurity/pubs/guide watersecurity samplingforunknown.pdf
This document provides comprehensive guidance that integrates recommendations for pathogen, toxin,
chemical, and radiochemical sample collection, preservation, and transport procedures to support multiple
analytical approaches for the detection and identification of potential contaminants in drinking water.
The guidance is intended to support sampling for routine and baseline monitoring to determine
background concentrations of naturally occurring pathogens, sampling in response to a triggered event,
and sampling in support of remediation or decontamination efforts.
                                                                                           48

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, and Water Environment
Federation. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater Website
http://www.standardmethods.org/
A comprehensive resource covering a variety of techniques developed by a number of water quality
researchers who have been members of the Standard Methods Committee (SMC).  This committee,
consisting of over 500 people, is charged with the review and approval of methods to be included in
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. In addition, committee members serve
on Joint Task Groups (JTGs) that are charged with the review, revision, and approval of specific methods.

ASTM International (formerly the American Society for Testing and Materials)
http://www.astm.org/
This organization has 30,000 members which contribute to over  12,000 standards as well as test methods,
specifications, guides, and practices that support industries and governments worldwide.

National Environmental Methods Index (NEMI) and National Environmental Methods Index for
Chemical, Biological, and Radiological Methods (NEMI-CBR)
https://www.nemi.gov/apex/f?p=237:1:3957726782660559
This index of water quality methods is maintained by numerous water quality experts from federal, state,
and local agencies; municipalities; industry; and private organizations. NEMI provides a searchable
database of numerous methods. The index provides mainly analytical laboratory method summaries,
although some field sampling summaries are also available. NEMI is meant to provide guidance on the
implementation of water monitoring strategies.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Forum on Environmental Measurements: Improving the
Quality of Agency Methods
http://www.epa.gov/fem/agencv methods.htm
The purpose the Forum on Environmental Measurements (FEM) is to improve the quality of EPA
methods. FEM aims to develop guidelines for minimum levels of method validation and peer review
before materials are issued by EPA. It is comprised of two action teams which act to identify and correct
concerns with current EPA issued methods, as well as address the importance of adequate validation
across all EPA issued methods.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Sample Collection Information Document:  Companion to
Standardized Analytical Methods for Environmental Restoration Following Homeland Security Events
(SAM) - Revision 5.0 (2010) EPA 600-R-09-074
http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc/pubs/600r09074.pdf
A companion document to SAM provides information regarding collection of samples for analysis by the
methods listed in SAM.  This document is intended to provide information regarding sample containers,
preservation, size, packaging, and sources for additional information supporting collection of samples to
be analyzed using the methods listed in SAM Revision 5.0.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Standardized Analytical Methods for Environmental
Restoration Following Homeland Security Events (SAM) website
http://www.epa.gov/sam/index.htm and http://www.epa.gov/sam/archive.htm
The information on this website includes selected methods for use by multiple laboratories when
detecting and measuring chemical, radiochemical, pathogen, and biotoxin contaminants during
remediation following a homeland security-related contamination incident.  The methods are intended for
use in evaluating the nature and extent of contamination and assess decontamination efficacy.
                                                                                          49

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

9.2.2  Biological and Chemical Method Resources
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Biosafety in Microbiological andBiomedical
Laboratories fBMBL), 5th Edition (2009) CDC-21-1112
http://www.cdc.gov/biosafety/publications/bmbl5/index.htm
Addresses the fundamentals of containment including the microbiological practices, safety equipment,
and facility safeguards that protect laboratory workers, the environment, and the public from exposure to
infectious microorganisms that are handled and stored in the laboratory.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Microbiology Methods and USEPA Methods for Virology
website
http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/microbes/epamicrobiology.html
This site provides access to microbiology related information that has been developed or managed by the
Agency.  EPA methods related to bacteria, viruses and protozoans can be found, in addition to links to
drinking water health documents and training modules.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL) -
Microbiological and Chemical Exposure Assessment Research Division (MCEARD)
http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/microbiologv.html
Research performed by NERL provides information on environmental pathways through which
contaminants of public health concern are transported to populations at risk. Analytical quantitative
methods are developed to accurately and specifically measure human risk factors associated with
inhalation, ingestion, and dermal pathways.  Surveys and monitoring studies are carried out to determine
the levels of hazardous chemicals and microbials in environmental matrices, and human populations are
studied to determine significant exposure pathways, the levels of exposure and the sources of exposure
factors.  State-of-the-art analytical methods are used to measure organic and inorganic chemicals.
Genomic and immuno-based methods, as well as traditional cultural methods, are used to measure
hazardous bacteria, viruses, fungi and protozoa.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Quality Assurance/Quality Control Guidance for
Laboratories Performing PCR Analyses on  Environmental Samples (2004) EPA 815-B-04-001
http://www.epa.gov/nerlcwww/documents/qa qc_pcrlO 04.pdf
Provides general guidance for development of laboratory- and method-specific QA/QC procedures for
PCR analysis of environmental samples, including QA/QC of reagents, kits, primer sets, and enzymes;
method development and assessment; quality control samples for methods using PCR; and data recording,
record keeping, and evaluation.

9.2.3  Radiological Method Resources
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Multi-Agency Radiological Laboratory Analytical Protocols
Manual (2004) NUREG-1576, EPA 402-B-04-001A, NTIS PB2004-105421
http://www.epa. gov/radiation/marlap/manual .html
Developed by a number of government agencies, this manual provides a consistent approach to producing
radioanalytical data for a program's data requirements, as well as guidance for the planning,
implementation, and assessment phases of laboratory analysis projects.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Radiological Laboratory Sample Analysis Guide for Incidents
of National Significance - Radionuclides in Water (2008) EPA 402-R-07-007
http://nepis.epa.gov/Adobe/PDF/60000LAW.PDF
Guidance on the analysis of water samples that may have been contaminated as the result of a radiological
or nuclear event, such as a radiological dispersion device (ROD), improvised nuclear device  (IND), or an
intentional release of radioactive materials into a drinking water supply. In the event of a major incident
that releases radioactive materials into the environment, EPA will turn to selected radioanalytical


                                                                                           50

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

laboratories to support its response and recovery activities. In order to expedite sample analyses and data
feedback, the laboratories will need guidance on EPA's expectations.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. RapidRadiochemical Methods for SelectedRadionuclides in
Water for Environmental Restoration Following Homeland Security Events (2010) EPA 402-R-10-001
http://www.epa.gov/narel/reports/Rapid Radiochemical Methods  In Waterwith cover_06-24-10.pdf
Provides rapid radioanalytical methods for selected radionuclides in an aqueous matrix, as developed to
expedite the  analytical turnaround time necessary to prioritize sample processing.
9.2.4   Field Screening Resources
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Field Screening Equipment Information Document:
Companion  to Standardized Analytical Methods for Environmental Restoration Following Homeland
Security Events (2010) EPA 600-R-10-091
http://www.epa.gov/sam/Field Screening Equipment  Guide.pdf
This document provides information regarding the capabilities of field equipment currently being used or
considered by OSCs for detecting chemical and radiochemical analytes listed in SAM.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Guide for the Selection of Biological Agent Detection
Equipment for Emergency First Responders Vols. 1 & 2 (2005) NIJ Guide 101-04
https://www.rkb.us/contentdetail.cfm?content id=97649
This guides focus on chemical and biological equipment in areas of detection, personal protection,
decontamination, and communication. The document focuses specifically on biological agent (BA)
detection equipment and was developed to assist the first responder community in the evaluation and
purchase of BA detection equipment. It serves as the follow-on document to An Introduction to
Biological Agent Detection Equipment for Emergency First Responders (NIJ Guide 101-00) published in
December 2001.

U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency All Hazards
Receipt Facility Screening Protocol (2008) DHS/S&T 08-0001; EPA 600-R-08-105
http://cfpub.epa.gov/si/si_public record report.cfm?address=nhsrc/&dirEntryId= 199346
The protocol described in this document represents the result of a multi-agency effort to develop,
construct, and implement All Hazards Receipt Facilities (AHRFs) for screening samples of unknown and
potentially hazardous character prior to laboratory receipt and analysis. The effort was initiated in
response to requests from state and federal agencies, particularly public health and environmental
laboratories, to help protect laboratory facilities and staff.

9.3     Laboratory Networks

The following resources include information on laboratory networks that utilities may enlist for certain
analytical functions, as described in Section 5.

Association  of Public Health Laboratories
http://www.aphl.org/Pages/default.aspx
This national nonprofit organization represents governmental laboratories that monitor and detect public
health threats. It provides a forum for information exchange between public health laboratories and
federal agencies as well as for training, education, and research.

Centers for  Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Laboratory Response Network (LRN)
http://www.bt.cdc.gov/lrn/
This LRN is charged with the task of maintaining an integrated network of state and local public health,
federal, military, and international laboratories that can respond to bioterrorism, chemical terrorism and
other public  health emergencies. There are 150 biological and 46 chemical laboratory members.

                                                                                            51

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

Food Emergency Response Network (FERN)
http://www.fernlab.org/
This organization integrates the nation's food-testing laboratories at the local, state, and federal levels into
a network that is able to respond to emergencies involving biological, chemical, or radiological
contamination of food.  The FERN structure is organized to ensure federal and  state inter-agency
participation and cooperation in the formation, development, and operation of the network.

Integrated Consortium of Laboratory Networks
http://www.icln.org/
This organization is a partnership between ten federal government agencies.  The goal of the effort is to
create the basis for a system of laboratory networks capable of integrated and coordinated  response to and
consequence management of acts of terrorism and other major incidents requiring laboratory response
capabilities.

International Organization for Standardization
http://www.iso.org/iso/home.html
This organization is a network of the national standards institutes, both public and private, that form the
world's largest developer and publisher of International Standards.

National Animal Health Laboratory Network
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal health/nahln/
This network is part of a nationwide strategy to coordinate the work of federal agencies and laboratories
managed by state governments and universities providing animal disease surveillance and  testing services
when a large-scale  animal-disease outbreak occurs; tracking its progress and performing diagnostic tests.

National Plant Diagnostic Network
http://www.npdn.org/
This organization provides a nationwide network of public agricultural institutions with a system to
quickly detect high consequence pests and pathogens that have been introduced into agricultural and
natural ecosystems and report them to appropriate responders and decision makers.  NPDN has invested
in plant diagnostic  laboratory infrastructure and training, developed an extensive network of first
detectors through education and  outreach, and enhanced communication among agencies and
stakeholders.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Environmental Response Laboratory Network (ELRN)
http://www.epa.gov/oemerlnl/
ELRN is EPA's national network of laboratories that can be accessed as needed to support large scale
environmental responses; solely  dedicated to the testing of environmental samples.  Participation in the
ERLN is based on a laboratory's ability to meet the ERLN's core quality requirements, which streamline
the network and allow for consistent  analytical capabilities, capacities, and quality data that are managed
in a systemic, coordinated manner.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Water Laboratory Alliance
http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/secres/wla.cfm
EPA's WLA provides the drinking water sector with an integrated nationwide network of laboratories
with the analytical  capability and capacity to respond to intentional and unintentional drinking water
contamination events involving chemical, biological, and radiochemical contaminants.
                                                                                             52

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Water Laboratory Alliance -Response Plan (2010) EPA 817-
R-10-002
http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/wla/uploadAVLAResponsPlan November2010.pdf
This document provides processes and procedures for coordinated laboratory response to water
contamination incidents that may require additional analytical support and a broader response than a
typical laboratory can provide. The WLA-RP is designed to work within existing ICS structures and
procedures.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Water Sector Mutual Aid and Assistance: Utilities Helping
Utilities (2007) EPA 817-F-07-015
http://www.epa.gov/flowoftheriver/pdf/fs watersecuritvwarn.pdf
Utilities can leverage laboratory support through intrastate mutual aid and assistance agreements,
sometimes known as WARNs. WARNs provide both public and private utilities with emergency
assistance through sharing of equipment, personnel, and other resources required for responding to any
crisis.

9.4     Laboratory Guidance

The following resources can be leveraged for general laboratory guidance, and are referenced throughout
this document.

American Society for Microbiology
http://www.asm.org/
This organization has 43,000 members and is home to multiple journals, educational opportunities, and
publication of texts in the field.

AOAC International (formerly the Association  of Official Analytical Chemists)
http://www.aoac.org/
This organization assists in the development and use of validated analytical methods and laboratory
quality assurance programs and services. AOAC is a primary resource for knowledge exchange and
laboratory information.

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
http ://www.hhs. gov/
This organization is the United States government's principal agency for protecting the health of all
Americans. In the context of this document, HHS has declared  certain pathogens as select agents as
safety and security concerns  limit the  availability of qualified laboratories and methods for select agent
analyses.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program
http ://www.epa. gov/etv/
EPA's ETV program verifies the performance of innovative technologies that have the potential to
improve protection of human health and the environment. ETV accelerates the entrance of new
environmental technologies into domestic and international marketplaces. Verified technologies are
included for all environmental media: air, water, and land.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - National Air and Radiation Environmental Laboratory
(NAREL)
http://www.epa.gov/narel/
EPA's NAREL provides services to a wide range of clients, including other EPA offices and federal and
state agencies. NAREL's mission is a commitment to developing and  applying the most advanced
methods for measuring environmental radioactivity and evaluating its risk to the public.
                                                                                           53

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination


U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL)
http://www.epa.gov/nerl/
EPA's Drinking Water Research is directed to achieve three long term goals: (1) provide scientific support
for EPA's implementation and reevaluation of existing regulations; (2) provide a scientific foundation for
decisions on emerging and currently unregulated contaminants; and (3) provide data, tools and
technologies to protect source waters and distribution systems.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - National Homeland Security Research Center (NHSRC)
http://www.epa. gov/nhsrc/
EPA's NHSRC assists with improving water security through detection of water contamination events
caused by CBR agents, minimizing exposure and damage to infrastructure from contamination events,
treating water and decontaminate water infrastructure, and assessing and communicating risks.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water (OGWDW)
http://water.epa. gov/drink
EPA's OGWDW, together with states, tribes, and many partners, will protect public health by ensuring
safe drinking water and protecting ground water. This is accomplished using the following principles:
prevention as an effective approach; risk-based priority setting for new and existing regulations, based on
sound science, quality data in reliable databases, and quality methods and standards; partnership and
involvement of public and private organizations, citizens, and communities; flexibility and effectiveness
in implementation while maintaining a national public health baseline; accountability of all parties
through public participation and accessible information; and results documented and presented clearly.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Office of Research and Development (ORD)
http://www.epa.gov/ord/
EPA's ORD uses scientific study to protect the quality and sustainability of water resources, ensure that
treatment facilities are capable of controlling waterborne contaminants, understand and manage health
risks associated with public water supplies, prevent and mitigate impacts of water distribution and storage
systems on drinking water quality, and improve infrastructure reliability and sustainability.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Office of Water (OW)
http://water.epa. gov/
EPA's OW provides oversight for the quality of drinking water, ground water, watersheds, and aquatic
habitats.  In addition, OW provides guidance to regional, state, and local  governments in terms of
specifying methods, data collection, and other outreach activities related to water quality. It includes the
OGWDW, Office of Science  and Technology, Office of Waste water Management, and Office of
Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Technology Testing and  Evaluation  Program (TTEP)
http://www.epa.gov/nhsrc/ttep.html
EPA's Homeland Security Research Program has developed TTEP to conduct third-party performance
evaluations of commercially available homeland security related technologies.  TTEP tests technologies
that are readily available to facility or building mangers, responders, or those responsible for site
decontamination.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Water Security Division  (WSD)
http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/
EPA's Water Sector Security  Mission is to provide national leadership in developing and promoting
security programs that enhance the sector's ability to prevent, detect, respond to, and recover from all-
hazards.  This site provides resources for water utilities, state and local governments, public health
                                                                                             54

-------
       Guidance for Building Laboratory Capabilities to Respond to Drinking Water Contamination

officials, emergency responders and planners, assistance and training providers, environmental
professionals, researchers and engineers, law enforcement, and others.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Security Initiative
http://water.epa.gov/infrastructure/watersecuritv/lawsregs/initiative.cfm
EPA's Water Security (WS) initiative is a program that addresses the risk of intentional contamination of
drinking water distribution systems. EPA established this initiative in response to Homeland Security
Presidential Directive 9, under which the Agency must "develop robust, comprehensive, and fully
coordinated surveillance and monitoring systems, including international information, for...water quality
that provides early detection and awareness of disease, pest, or poisonous agents."

Water Information Sharing  and Analysis Center (WaterlSAC) Portal
https://portal.waterisac.org/web/
This organization's mission is to keep drinking water and wastewater utility managers informed about
potential risks to the nation's water infrastructure from contamination, terrorism and cyber threats. The
mission has been expanded to help utilities respond to and recover from all hazards.

Water Research Foundation
http://www.waterrf.org
This organization forms a partnership with over 900 utilities, 40 consulting companies, manufacturers,
and regulators that help advance research in treatment, distribution, resources, monitoring and analysis,
management, and health effects issues with drinking water.
                                                                                              55

-------