Water Laboratory Alliance Coordination and Water Laboratory Alliance Response Plan Adrian Hanley, US EPA Jennifer Scheller, CSC Water Laboratory Alliance Security Summit March 22,

Overview Purpose of the Water Laboratory Alliance (WLA) History and development of the WLA Response Plan (WLA-RP) Key characteristics of the WLA- RP Highlights of the WLA-RP Full-Scale Exercises to test the WLA-RP 2

Purpose of the WLA Provide the Water Sector with an integrated nationwide network of laboratories Analytical capabilities and capacity to support monitoring, surveillance, response and remediation of natural, intentional and unintentional water contamination incidents –For chemical, biological and radiochemical contaminants The WLA is the water component of the EPA Environmental Response Laboratory Network (ERLN) 3

Laboratory Black Box Often during emergency response, laboratories are treated as a black box for data generation: Samples go in and data comes out. 4

Need for a Laboratory Response Plan The incidents of 9/11 and natural disasters, like hurricane Katrina, highlighted the need for better laboratory coordination to water contamination incidents These types of larger incidents often require support from multiple laboratories This need was initially met by developing Regional Laboratory Response Plans (RLRPs) to coordinate laboratory response activities within an EPA Region 5

Contributors to RLRP Development EPA Water Security Division EPA Office of Emergency Management EPA Regional laboratories State environmental laboratories State public health laboratories Water utility laboratories EPA and state drinking water programs EPA On-Scene Coordinators Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) National Guard Civil Support Teams (CSTs) 6

Laboratory Response: Next Steps Regional Laboratory Response Plans (11) Water Laboratory Alliance – Response Plan (1) Full-Scale Exercises to Test WLA-RP ERLN Response Plan (ERP) 7

Purpose of the WLA-RP Establishes a comprehensive, national approach to laboratory response to intentional or unintentional water contamination incidents Can be used to coordinate laboratory response for multi- regional and smaller scale incidents Provides guidance on communication, sample analyses, and data reporting issues 8

Highlights of the WLA-RP 9

Scope of Laboratory Support Types of Laboratory Support Analytical support Sharing of resources (staff, reagents, etc.) Rapid, on-site training of staff Data review Sample storage Consulting 10

Roles and Responsibilities Analytical Service Requester (ASR) Primary point of contact who requests analytical assistance Primary decision maker regarding analyses needed, data turnaround times, etc. Primary Responding Laboratory (PRL) Initial laboratory contacted by the ASR Help coordinate activities of other support laboratories Mutual Support Laboratory (MSL) Additional laboratory engaged by ASR or PRL to provide resources to meet the analytical needs of an incident 11

Laboratory Coordination Laboratory coordination within the Incident Command System (ICS) OperationsLogisticsPlanningFinance MSL Environmental Unit Incident Commander (IC) MSL PRL ASR Transfer of Coordination Initial Coordination Structure Expanded Coordination Structure 12

Laboratory Communication Lines of communication and information flow should be established at the beginning of the response: Example: ASR  PRL  MSL PRL and MSLs should set up a command center –Dedicated phone line; someone to answer phone at all times –Computer access –Fax machine Document communications –Use forms in the WLA-RP –Follow-up conversations with s 13

Sample Shipping and Tracking Laboratories should be trained in shipping and receipt of hazardous materials The ASR and PRL/MSL should agree on chain-of-custody (COC) requirements Example COC and list of minimum data elements (Appendices G & H) Additional guidance on criminal investigation samples (Appendix I) If sample integrity is compromised during shipping (e.g., holding time or sample temperature exceeded), laboratories should decide in consultation with ASR whether to receive and analyze samples 14

Analytical Methods and QC Analytical Methods Provides guidance on Basic Field/Safety Screening, Rapid Analysis, Confirmatory Methods Suggests selection of methods is based on monitoring needs, including data turnaround times Provides preferred sources for confirmatory methods Quality Control (QC) Emphasizes setting quality assurance (QA)/QC requirements based on monitoring needs Establishes a minimum set of QC that should be performed for all analyses 15

Data Review and Data Reporting Data Review The plan provides guidance for internal review of data Any data released prior to completion of internal data review should be labeled “Preliminary Data Pending Confirmation” Data Reporting Submit data in an electronic spreadsheet following the Electronic Data Deliverable (EDD) format EDD provides consistent format for data reporting Facilitates data validation and compilation of data from multiple laboratories 16

Full-Scale Exercises to test the WLA-RP 17

Full Scale Exercises Three Full-Scale Exercises (FSEs) have been conducted –2009 – EPA Regions 1 & 2 (Northeastern US) –2010 – EPA Regions 9 & 10 (Western US) –2011 – EPA Regions 7 & 8 (Mountain and Central US) Coordination of laboratory response to a combined public health and environmental emergency Included both chemical and biological scenarios The 2011 exercise involved three laboratory networks –ERLN/WLA –Laboratory Response Network (LRN) –Food Emergency Response Network (FERN) 18

Goals of the Region 7 & 8 FSE Practice the procedures of multi-regional WLA-RP Evaluate the response of multiple national laboratory networks to a public health and environmental emergency Practice integration of laboratory efforts with ICS structure Assess the practical use of the EPA field-portable ultrafiltration (UF) device Utilize the recently validated EPA non-typhoidal Salmonella protocol 19

Chemical Scenario Contamination of a remote water storage tank with a sump pump truck full of contaminant dissolved in water –Environmental: Drinking water samples to assess effectiveness of flushing and soil samples from near the storage tank –Clinical: Urine samples from potentially exposed patients –Food: Root beer samples manufactured using potentially contaminated water 20

Biological Salmonella Scenario Agricultural flooding results in contamination of a distribution system and in-ground finished reservoir − Environmental: Source water and drinking water − Food: Powdered milk from a local elementary school where many students were sick − Used a newly validated protocol for analysis of non-thyphoidal Salmonella in water 21

Biological Select-Agent Scenario Intentional introduction of a select agent into a drinking water distribution system which primarily impacts a local elementary school − Environmental: water samples were analyzed using CDC’s UF device and select agent screening protocol − Sample collection using the EPA field-portable UF device 22

Region 7 and 8 FSE by the Numbers 1 WLA-RP evaluated by testing collective laboratory capabilities 14 States 4 Federal Agencies: CDC, EPA, FDA, and FBI 19 State and county environmental and public health laboratories 4 Commercial Laboratories 3 EPA laboratories 3 Concurrent scenarios: Chemistry, Select Agent, and Non-Select Agent >1000 Multi-media samples spiked with chemical and biological contaminants >140 Number of “injects” to exercise made to keep the scenarios moving 4 Drinking Water Laboratories 1 Mobile Laboratory 23

Things That Worked Laboratories were able to successfully analyze their assigned samples –Fast turnaround for chemical samples –New Salmonella protocol worked well for a variety of water matrices Existing relationships facilitated a coordinated response Regional EPA coordinators managed communications with laboratories in their regions The EPA field-portable UF device was easy to use in the field Establishing a “war room” with dedicated phone line noted as a best practice 24

Lessons Learned Develop a cadre of individuals to support the EU for major incidents Use tools to facilitate communications –Help Sheet for Requesting Analytical Support (Appendix C) –Regular conference calls with laboratories – groups to facilitate messaging Data submission needs improvement –More training and drills on use of Web-based Electronic Data Review (WebEDR) and LRN Results Messenger –Project specific template for WebEDR 25

Next Steps Complete After-Action Reports Continue collaboration with ERLN to create a unified ERLN/WLA Response Plan Coordinate with regions, ERLN/WLA, LRN, FERN and other laboratory networks for the next FSE 26

The Next FSE Anticipate inclusion of EPA Regions 4, 5 & 6 Tentatively scheduled for November 2012 May expand scope to test the ability of laboratories to support multiple laboratory networks during the same response –ERLN/WLA, LRN and FERN will fully participate in both the chemical and biological scenarios 27

How can you get involved? Participate in the next FSE Participate in WLA-RP Table Top Exercise (TTX) webcasts Who can Participate? –EPA Regions –Laboratories –Mobile laboratories/ civil support teams –State water programs –Utilities –FBI/law enforcement –Public Information Officers 28

Contact Information For more information on the WLA-RP or Full-Scale Exercises, please contact: Adrian Hanley, US EPA Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water Phone: