Idaho National Laboratory Interagency Exercise

Report
1st & 9th
Area Medical Laboratories
Idaho National Laboratory
Interagency Exercise
September 2008
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
History
AML Team Building
Exercise Goals
BROOM System
Workflow
Results
Review
Interagency Players
• JPEO-CBD
• EPA
• DHS
• DoD
• NGB CSTs & HAZMAT teams
Also involved in workgroup:
- FBI
- CDC
- NIST
Area Medical Laboratory
• INL-1 (‘07) – Five personnel, 9th AML,
4th squad
• INL-2 (‘08) – 14 personnel
– 9th AML 4th squad – lead
– 9th AML 3rd squad
– 1st AML 4th squad
– 1st AML 3rd squad
Problem
“How to prove that a room isn’t
contaminated?”
• GAO Report – post attack analysis,
GAO-05-493T cited lack of validated
sampling plans
• Evaluation of sampling techniques and
their efficacy in an operational
environment
Test Plan
• Based on INL-1 small scale study – sampling
strategies, efficiency of sampling methods,
testing methods & validation of dispersal and
sampling models – 5 test events
• Operational evaluation
• Reduce sample numbers without losing
robustness
• Factors affecting detection minimums
Test Plan (cont.)
• Event 1 – ORI
– Characterization & Clearance
• Event 2 – Characterization & Clearance
• Event 3 – Characterization & Clearance
• Event 4 – Characterization & Clearance
• Event 5 – Characterization & Clearance
Test Facility
S AB R E
Z one 1: T es t
S upport
TEST Trailer
CST Exit Trailer
80’
Z one 2: S ample
C ollec tion
S tag ing
Ingres s
Sabre/INL Trailer
Z one 3: T es t
CST Entr. Trailer
C enter
Ingress
Z one 4: Dec on
E gres s
“Clean”
Boundary
A ML
CST
Z one 5: L ab
A nalys is
Laboratory Set-up
Autoclaves
Power
Storage
4 section TEMPR
Grey zone
3-1 ISO Shelter
Entry
Sample Collection
•
•
•
•
•
Wipes
Swabs
Vacuum socks
DFUs
RMCs
Sample Receipt
• Logged into laboratory with the BROOM
system
Building Restoration Operations
Optimization Model - BROOM
•
•
A decision support tool to collect,
manage, and analyze sample data
– Secure SQL Server database
– GIS mapping & 3D
visualization
– Geostatistical analysis tools
– Uncertainty analysis
– Interfaces with VSP for
statistical sampling design
Data collection
– Hand-held wireless PDAs
with barcode readers and
laser rangefinders
– GPS for outdoors
– Camera for photo
documentation
– Paperless data transfer
– Secure transmission of data
– Chain of custody report
WITS – Where
Is That Sample?
Extraction & Testing
•
•
•
•
•
Samples extracted with PBST
Filter plating
Spiral plating
Q-count
RV-PCR (random 10%)
Results - Characterization
100
All Characterization Events
89 / 101
60
57 / 98
153 / 280
14 / 28
20
40
10 / 25
0
Detection Rate (%)
80
197 / 233
J
P
Sw ab
J
P
Vac uum
J
P
W ipe
Results - Clearance
Swab
Event
J
0/2
P
0/2
Sock Vacuum
J
P
0/11
0/57
Wipe
J
0/11
P
0/55
All Methods
J
P
0/24
0/114
0/2
0/2
0/11
0/59
0/8
0/58
0/21
0/119
NA
0/4
0/14
0/64
0/19
0/53
0/33
0/121
0/2
0/2
0/23
0/60
0/9
0/57
0/34
0/119
NA
0/4
0/32
0/62
0/13
0/53
0/45
0/119
ORI
Test 2
Test 3
Test 4
Test 5
Confidence that at least 98% of the Floor
is “Clean”
Event
Based on
Probabilistic
Samples Alone
Based on Hybrid
Strategy
ORI
91.5%
95%
Test 2
92.5%
95%
Test 3
93%
96.5%
Test 4
92.5%
96%
Test 5
92.5%
97%
Results – RV PCR
60
40
20
0
Percent
80
100
R V-PC R v s Plating for C harac teriz ation Sampling
ND b y Pl a ti n g De t b y Pl a ti n g
S w ab
ND b y Pl a ti n g De t b y Pl a ti n g
V acuum
Green: D etec ted by R V-PC R
ND b y Pl a ti n g De t b y Pl a ti n g
W ipe
Results
• Wipe sampling is statistically more
effective than vacuum or swab
• No statistical difference in
effectiveness of recovery between
sampling strategies in characterization
• RV-PCR vs. culture may be affected by
repeat testing
• Onsite testing provided rapid feedback
to incident commander
Last-Minute RV-PCR Run
AAR
• AML successfully deployed/redeployed
a tailored team of personnel and
equipment
• Conducted ISO-9000 equivalent survey
of operations
• Demonstrated laboratory contamination
risk in operational situation
• Accurately tracked & reported 99.97%
of ~3,000 samples
Review
•
•
•
•
•
Reasons for INL-1 & 2 events
Interagency operation
1st & 9th AML participation
Processes
Results
Acknowledgements
• MAJ Brian Walker & SFC Christian Lowry – 9th
AML
• Dr. Michael Walter – JPEO-CBD
• Dr. Robert Knowlton & Mr. Brad Melton –
Sandia National Laboratory
• Ms. Molly Isbell – Signature Science
Questions???

similar documents