ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ADVISORY BOARD MEETING
Monthly Teleconference: 202-991-0477/7939251#, May 15, 2019; 1:00-3:00 p.m. ET
MEETING SUMMARY
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Environmental Laboratory Advisory Board
(ELAB or Board) teleconference meeting was held on May 15, 2019. The agenda for this
meeting is provided as Attachment A. a list of meeting participants is provided as Attachment B.
and action items are included as Attachment C. The official certification of the minutes by the
Chair or Vice-Chair and the Designated Federal Officer is included as Attachment D.
ROLL CALL/ INTRODUCTION
Mr. Mike Flournoy called the meeting to order and called roll.
APPROVAL OF THE PRIOR MINUTES
Mr. Flournoy motioned to approved minutes, as most recently edited, and the motion was passed.
Dr. Francoise Chauvin abstained from voting, because she was not present at the previous
meeting.
OPENING REMARKS AM) UPDATES FROM THE DFO
Dr. Tom O'Farrell reminded everyone to mute their phone lines when not speaking to ensure a
quality recording of the meeting.
TASK GROUP UPDATES ON CURRENT TOPICS
User-Genemted Mass Spectral Library Acceptance Criteria
In Dr. Brian Buckley's absence, Mr. Flournoy and Ms. Deb Waller updated ELAB on this topic.
Ms. Waller has previously raised concerns regarding the use of alternative tuning criteria from
SW-846 for wastewater methods. SW-846 is guidance and state certification dictates the
methods that are used. Ms. Waller wanted to ensure that Adrian Hanley (EPA) knew who raised
the concerns and why. Mr. Flournoy received communication from Adrian 1 lanley that ELAB is
the only entity that raised this concern, and for this reason, he believes this is not a widespread
issue. Ms. Waller would like Adrian Hanley and Lemuel Walker to address this issue in the
future.

-------
Acrolein and Acryhiutrile Preservation
Mr. Brad Meadows updated F.LAB on this topic. The ACIL ESS is open to sponsoring the study,
AC1L ESS proposed that ELAB write a letter to the EPA Office of Water (OW) to recommend
OW work with ACIL to design the study and get data. Dr. OT'arrcll recommended ACIL contact
OW themselves, and CC the ELAB task group.
Ms. Deb Waller presented concerns about ELAB charter not allowing any type of solicitation,
including the letter ELAB is creating to solicit laboratory participation through ACIL. She also
raised concerns about soliciting laboratories through ACIL being too exclusive. To resolve this
concern. Mr. Meadows volunteered to draft a letter to EPA to expand the solicitation to
laboratories that are not ACIL members. After approval from the Board, the letter will be sent it
to Dr. (VParrel 1. and then forwarded to OW.
Dr. OTarrell proposed timing the letter to he sent when ACIL is ready to contact EPA. Mr.
Meadow s has a committee meeting, in which they can put together a timeline. The timeline will
provide ELAB insight on the best time to send the letter.
Dr. Leibovitz recommended ELAB inform APHL about the project.
Dr. Delaney reiterated his interest in having his laboratory participate in the study.
Mr. Floumoy proposed moving this topic to inactive after the letter is completed.
600-Series Methods
Dr. Henry Leibovitz will meet with the task group on May 301h to discuss this topic. They are
going to continue the discussion regarding the list of comments Dr. Delaney compiled on the the
method update rule of the 600 series method,
OGWD)V Guidance on Drinking Water \fDLs
Mr. Floumoy motioned to vote on the current letter on this topic, and the motion was passed. Mr.
Flournoy will send the letter to Dr. O'Farrell for distribution.
IDOC Requirements
Dr, Chauvin finalized the letter, Mr, Flournoy motioned to vote on the letter for this topic, and
the motion was passed, with one abstention by Ms. Waller.
Inactive Topics
a) Whole Effluent Toxicity PT Standards
Dr. Delaney updated ELAB on this topic. Greg Savitske. the current DMRQA coordinator, is
willing to meet with the ELAB task group and a TNI wet committee representative. The issue to
be discussed is whether wet PT samples should be tested in the same manner as POTW samples.
Greg Savitske agreed to set up a meeting after following-up with Laura Phillips (EPA expert on

-------
WKT). He inquired whether EPA or TNI are responsible lor how PT studies are conducted. Dr.
Delancy believes the EPA is responsible because the EPA wrote the instruction letter for the
DMR-QA. Dr. Dclancy proposed discussing this topic at the August facc-to-face meeting, if
Greg Savitske is unable to set up a meeting soon. Dr. Leibovitz slated an interest in this topic of
who designs PT studies and creates instructions for the other parameters. Ms. Waller informed
ELAB that there is an EPA document that addresses drinking water criteria, but that does not
address WKT PT samples. Ms. Stacie Crandall informed Kl.AB about the TNi proficiency
testing tables that do provide instruction for how PT samples should be prepared. Ms. Crandall is
unaware of any existing criteria for how the instructions are being written. Ms. Waller reminded
everyone that not all states are part of NELAC. NELAC accredited members and PT providers
approved by TNI are required to use the TNI proficiency testing tables. Dr. Leibovitz believes
that when EPA externalized the regulation of PT samples, either EPA or NiST wrote a
document. This document could provide some insight about how PT samples should be tested.
Dr. Dclancy will pursue the meeting with Greg Savitske and contact Lynn Bradley (TNI).
This topic will remain inactive.
h) Addressing Emerging Contaminants
There are no updates on this topic, and it will be removed for the list.
c) Drinking Water Program Adoption of Recently Approved Methods
A Thank You letter will be sent to OW for their recent response letter. This topic will remain
inactive.
NEW TOPICS/ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
a) Method Flexibility in Drinking Water Methods
ELAB commented on an e-mail from Scott Siders that was forwarded to ELAB, raising concerns
about some stales not allowing flexibility explicit!} staled within in the methods. Dr. Delancy
disagreed with states not allow ing flexibility explicitly stated in the methods, and Ms. Waller
agreed, He confirmed with EPA Region I and Massachusetts that they would allow for
flexibility explicitly stated within the method. Ms. Waller questioned why Scott Siders believes
that the EPA enforces the method, instead of the states. Ms. Crandall proposed finding specific
examples to lead an ELAB discussion, if ELAB were to address this issue, Ms. Waller does not
believe ELAB should address this issue because state regulations can be more stringent then the
federal regulations. Dr. Meadows seconded this idea, and agreed to reply to the e-mail from Scott
Siders. To address Ms. Crandall"s concerns that Scott Siders won't be satisfied with the
response. Dr, Meadows pointed to state regulation in the response and mention the Standard
Interpretation Request (SIR). Dr. O'Parrel! stated that ELAB does not need to address this issue,
if it can be addressed by other means. Ms. Crandall added that the SIR is not intended to be
method specific, and Scot Siders will need to connect it to a TNI requirement and provide
specific examples. ELAB will work with Scott Siders to resolve this issue.

-------
h) The use of collision reaction cell chemistry technology for drinking water
While evaluating the purchase of an 1CPMS. Mr. Meadows noticed the ban on collision reaction
cell chemistry technology on drinking water is still in place. He questioned whether it has been
approved recently, or if not, if this is an appropriate topic for BLAB to take up. He reasoned that
now that the technology has been in use for 15 to 20 years, there should be enough information
for an approval. Ms. Crandall agrees that there is a need in the community to address this issue.
Dr. Delaney does not have any current information on this topic and asks where it is explicitly
staled that laboratories cannot use the technology. He is aware that this topic was addressed in a
2006 memo from EPA headquarters to the regions, but the memo is no longer available on the
EPA website. Ms. Waller and Dr. Delaney agree that if the memo is something everyone needs
to follow, it should be available on the website. Ms. Waller commented that this is the reason for
ELAB's transparency on guidance request to the EPA. Mr. Floumoy does not believe there is
any reason for EPA not to allow the use of the technology, especially if it has more power.
Mr. Floumoy asked if ELAB should ask the community for a question for ELAB to address, so
that this issue becomes official topic. Dr. Leibovitz answered a question previously raised by Dr.
Delaney, by stating that on the EPA webpage where laboratories ask questions on analytical
methods, it is explicitly stated that the technology is banned.
Mr. Meadows asked if the question needs to come from someone outside of ELAB, or if his
affiliations qualify him enough to be the originator the official question. Mr. Floumoy asks if
ELAB should add this as a question, and if Mr. Meadows would lead the response. Mr. Meadows
agrees.
Mr. Richard Gossett asked why EPA is against the technology, and Dr. Delaney responded that
EPA did not have enough data to approve the technology 10 years ago. Ms. Waller comments
that the author of the method. Jack Creed, never used the equipment, and that he is the correct
person to direct the question to. She also adds the discussion that states will not allow the use of
the technology unless the approval is promulgated in the Federal Register. Mr. Meadows
volunteered to reread 200.8 to check what is allowed and not allowed in the method. He believes
that there is nothing in the current method that bans the use of the technology, so EPA would not
need to generate a new method.
Dr. Leibovitz indicated that there may be some EPA testing on-going to determine the
acceptability of the technology. I Ic proposed ELAB ask what studies the EPA arc conducting to
determine future accessibility instead of asking why the technology is banned. Then he indicated
vendors may have stake in this issue as it may help them streamline and generate matrices, in
addition to combining methods.
Mr. Meadows believes there may be several ways to ask the question, and that they should be
written up and then voted on.
Mr. Floumoy motioned for a vote to add this topic for ELAB to address with Mr. Meadows
leading the response. The motion was passed unanimously.

-------
c) Holding Time Regulations
Mr. Meadows received complaints that some some states interpreted HPA regulations on holding
times spanning multiple days to be enforced down the hour. He will send HLAR members more
specific informal ion. Ms. Waller commented that for some tests, like Cryptosporidium, some
state regulators may require hold limes down to the minute, while others dictate the hold times
do not extend beyond a 24-hour period. Ms. Waller is aware of some discussion held by TNI
regarding consistency among the regulations and believes Ms. Aaron Alger may have more
information regarding this topic. Mr. Meadows adds thai this issue did not originate with TNI.
but from a technical bulletin from a government agency. He raised the question: should HLAB
address this topic'? Ms. Waller commented this issue is like the drinking water topic and ihe
answer should be that if the states want to be more stringent, they have the authority to do so.
Mr. Meadows believes that regulating hold times down to the hour for items with an expiration
of 7 or more days could be problematic for labs and is concerned this could impact the data. His
opinion was influenced by a presentation he recently saw by a former HPA personnel on hold
times. Dr. Delancy seconds this opinion. Dr. Lcibovitz believes this issue is analogous to
significant figures: hold times in hours should be hours, hold times in days should be in days, etc.
Dr. Delanev believes that the question should be framed around defining the units of the holding
times.
Ms. Waller commented that if a client sends a sample a day before it's due. the client needs to be
notified. TNI labs are allowed the qualify samples out of hold, while non-TNI slate labs are not.
Dr. Leibovilz added that state labs can reject the sample if the client did not allow enough time
for analysis. Ms. Waller said that most contract labs will take the sample, run it. and qualify it
because they can. Dr. Lcibovitz indicated that the labs should instead notify the client, and Ms,
Waller agreed. Ms. Waller slated that most times labs take the blame for analyzing a sample out
of hold, when the client thai senl the sample did not allow enough time. Dr. Lcibovitz added that
the fact that sample w as out of holding lime does not get noticed in many cases where the client
just takes the numbers off the report. Ms. Waller commented thai the issue will impact She client
when they use the results and are found in violation of their permit. Mr, Meadows commented
that this issue expands beyond samples that arrive a day before expiration.
Mr, Meadows will find the memo this issue originated from and send it to BLAB. He believes
this topic should be up for consideration if it did in fact originate from a government agency.
d) PFAS
Dr. Lcibovitz led a discussion on PFAS. Basically, there is concern that there are currently no
consistent methods laboratories are using for testing and validation. Mr. Meadows agreed this is
an issue, slating thai misinformation is being spread. Dr. Leibovilz concurred, adding that the
misinformation is resulting in premature legislation. Mr. Meadows agreed, staling he has seen 6
to 8 bills on PFAS be introduced in California. Dr. Lcibovitz is concerned that the use of
different reporting methods for laboratories could result in drastic differences in the results. Dr.
Leibovitz would like this to be a potential topic for ELAB. but now may be too soon to address.
Dr. Delaney agreed, because there is no clear question yet.

-------
WRAP-UP/SUMMARY OF ACTION ITEMS
1.	Brad Meadows - Draft letter to EPA encouraging Agency to work with ACIL on their
Acrolein/Acrvlonitrile/pH study. It is suggested that this letter is timed with the initial
contact of ACIL with the HP A Office of Water.
2.	Brad Meadows - Let ACIL know that API SL should be informed of the
Acrolein/Acrylonitrile/pH study.
3.	I lenry Leibovitz - A 600-Series Methods Task Force meeting will be held May 30.
4.	Mike Flournoy - Send final Drinking Water MDL and I DOC requirements letters to EPA
to Tom O'Farrell for distribution to EPA.
5.	ELAB - Will work with Scott Siders to resolve his issues with method modification and
flexibility of Drinking Water methods. Mike Flournoy to send an email to Scott and cc
the board asking if Dan Hautman's response was indeed sufficient.
6.	ELAB - Will start lo work on the topic of getting EPA to allow collision reactor cell
technology to be used with drinking water methods.
CLOSING REMARKS/ADJOURNMENT
The May 2019 ELAB Meeting will be held on June 20, 2019 at 1 pm Eastern.
Mr. Flournoy moved to adjourn at 2:33 p.m.. and it was passed.

-------
Attachment A
AGENDA
Teleconference Numbers 202-991-0477 / 7939251#
May 15, 2019
Webconference:
epawebconferencing.acms.com/ofarrelIl/
I.	Call Meeting to Order	Flournoy
II.	Introduction of Board Members/Roll Call	Board
III.	Approval of Minutes for Previous Meetings	Flournoy
IV.	Remarks and Updates from the DFO	O'Farrell
VI.	Updates on Current Topics
a.	User-Generated Library Acceptance Criteria		Buckley
b.	Acrolein and Acrylonitrile Preservation and pH		Meadows
c.	600-Series Methods		Leibovitz
d.	OGWDW Guidance on Drinking Water MDLs				Delaney
e.	IDOC requirements				Chauvin
f.	Inactive topics awaiting feedback/input:
• Whole Effluent Toxicity proficiency study standards
(will move to active when meetings are scheduled)	Delany
¦	Addressing Emerging Contaminants					Mertens
¦	Drinking Water Program Adoption of
Recent Approved Methods				 Waller
VII.	New Topics/Issues for Consideration	Flournoy
• Drinking water method modification and flexibility
What does the Laboratory community want ELAB to work on? (Waller)
VIII.	Wrap-Up/Summary of Action Items	O'Farrell/Flournoy
IX.	Closing Remarks/Adjourn	O'Farrell/ Flournoy

-------
Attach merit B
PARTICIPANTS LIST
Board Members Attendance
(Y/N)
Name
Affiliation
Y
Dr. Michael (Mike) Delancy
Massachusetts Water
Resources Authority
(MWRA)
Representing: MWRA
Y
Mr, Michael Flournoy (Chair)
(iiirollns Environment Testing
USA
Representing: American
Council of Independent
Laboratories
Y
Dr. Thomas O'Farrell (DFO)
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency
Representing: FPA
N
Dr. Kim Anderson
Oregon State University
Representing: Academia-
Oregon State University
N
Dr. Brian Buckley
Rutgers Environmental and
Occupational Health Sciences
Institute
Representing: Academia and
Laboratory—Rutgers
Y
Dr. Francoise Chauvin
NYC Dept. of Environmental
Protection
Representing: NYCDEP
N
Dr. Deyuan (Kitty) Kong
Chevron Energy Technology
Company

-------


Representing: Chevron
Y
Ms, Stacie Crandall
Hampton Roads Sanitation
District
Representing; HSRD
Y
Dr. Henry Lcibovitz
Rhode Island Stale Health
Laboratories
Representing: Association of
Public Health Laboratories
Y
Mr. Brad Meadows
Babcock Laboratories. Inc.
Representing: Commercial
Laboratory— Babcock
Laboratories, Inc.
N
Ms. Sharon Mertens
Milwaukee Metropolitan
Sewerage District
Representing: The NELAC
Institute
Y
Mr, Richard Gossett
PHYSIS Labs
Representing: PHYSIS Labs
N
Mr. David Thai
Environmental Standards Inc.
Representing: Environmental
Standards Inc.
Y
Dr. Jayesh Ghandi
Metrohm USA
Representing; Metrohm USA
Y
Ms. Debra (Deb) Waller
New Jersey Department of
Environmental Protection
(NJDEP)
Representing; State

-------


Government—NJDEP
Y
Mr. Ray Frederici
TcstAmerica
Representing: TestAmerica
PARTICIPANTS LIST (CONT)
Contractors and Guests
Attendance (Y/N)
Name
Affiliation
Y
Ms. Alexis Bryant
EPA
Y
Penny Shanbdlin
1 lunton, Andrews, Kurtli
Y
Dale "I'app
Water One










-------
Attachment C
Action Items
1.	Brad Meadows - Draft letter to HP A encouraging Agency to work with ACIL on their
Acrolein/Acrylonitrile/pH study. It is suggested that this letter is timed with the initial
contact of ACIL with the EPA Office of Water.
2.	Brad Meadows - Let ACIL know that APHL should be informed of the
Acrolein/Acrvlonitrile/pH study.
3.	I lenry Leibovitz - A 600-Series Methods Task Force meeting will be held May 30.
4.	Mike Flournoy - Send final Drinking Water MDL and I DOC requirements letters to EPA
to Tom O'Farrell for distribution to EPA.
5.	ELAB - Will work with Scott Siders to resolve his issues with method modification and
flexibility of Drinking Water methods. Mike Flournoy to send an email to Scott and cc
the board asking if Dan Hautmaif s response was indeed sufficient.
6.	ELAB - Will start to work on the topic of getting EPA to allow collision reactor cell
technology to be used with drinking water methods.

-------
Attachment I)
I hereby certify that this is the final version of the minutes for the Environmental Laboratory
Advisor}' Board Meeting held on May 15. 2019.

6/27/2019
Mr. Michael Flournov
Chair
X
ffl
'WmJ
6Im'M
Dr. Thomas O'Farrell
Designated Federal Officer

-------