INTRODUCTION 



Purpose of Study 



Senate Joint Resolution No. 24, passed by the 41st Montana Legis- 

 lative Assembly, directed the Legislative Council to study and 

 evaluate the various state agency and university laboratories, 

 their functions, responsibilities, services and degree of ef- 

 ficiency. The clauses preceding this directive noted the impor- 

 tance of the laboratory f\inction to the work of state regulatory 

 agencies and the inefficiencies arising when expensive laboratory 

 equipment becomes obsolete or when agency activities overlap. 

 The resolution asked that the Legislative Coxincil look for areas 

 of duplication in state laboratory effort or places where common 

 laboratory activities could be consolidated. 



Study Procedures 



Due to the highly technical nature of this study, the Council felt 

 it necessary to utilize the services of a consultant who was 

 versed in the scientific aspects of laboratory activity. Several 

 professionals were interviewed, and the study group subsequently 

 engaged Dr. Ralph J. Fessenden, Chairman of the Department of 

 Chemistry at the University of Montana, Missoula. Dr. Fessenden 

 met with the study group to discuss alternative approaches to the 

 study. The procedure thus decided upon was as follows: 



Step One - Identification of operating laboratories within the 

 state . All state agencies were contacted by phone in order to 

 determine which agencies presently maintained laboratory opera- 

 tions or were contemplating laboratory activity in the future. A 

 crosscheck of the information derived in this manner was made 

 through correspondence with laboratory equipment vendors and the 

 State Purchasing Bureau. Federal, municipal and private labora- 

 tories were identified during the initial stage of the study in 

 order to locate areas where state agency laboratory activities 

 could be more efficiently handled through private or federally- 

 funded facilities. 



Step Two - Classification of laboratories . Following the identifi- 

 cation of operating laboratories, each unit was categorized ac- 

 cording to its primary function. Generally, all laboratories fell 

 within the following broad categories: 



1. Education 



2. Health and Medical 



3. Testing and General Analytical 



4 . Regulatory 



5. Miscellaneous 



Step Three - Analysis of selected state laboratories . Laboratories 

 from each functional group were selected based on their administra- 

 tive relationship to state agencies or the extent of their 



