UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

"v-	Office of Research and Development

£	%	Washington, D.C. 20460	"M"1» -

I3E2I	ElV

«fr

ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY VERIFICATION PROGRAM
VERIFICATION STATEMENT

TECHNOLOGY TYPE:

POLYCHLORINATED BIPHENYL (PCB) FIELD ANALYTICAL
TECHNIQUES

APPLICATION:

MEASUREMENT OF PCBs IN SOILS AND SOLVENT EXTRACTS

TECHNOLOGY NAME:

RaPID ASSAY SYSTEM FOR PCB ANALYSIS

COMPANY:
ADDRESS:

STRATEGIC DIAGNOSTICS INC.
Ill PENCADER DRIVE
NEWARK, DE 19702-3322

PHONE:

(302) 456-6789

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has created a program to facilitate the deployment of innovative
technologies through performance verification and information dissemination. The goal of the Environmental Technology
Verification (ETV) Program is to further environmental protection by substantially accelerating the acceptance and use
of improved and more cost-effective technologies. The ETV Program is intended to assist and inform those involved in
the design, distribution, permitting, and purchase of environmental technologies. This document summarizes the results
of a demonstration of the Strategic Diagnostics Inc. (SDI) RaPID Assay System for polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)
Analysis.

PROGRAM OPERATION

The EPA, in partnership with recognized testing organizations, objectively and systematically evaluates the performance
of innovative technologies. Together, with the full participation of the technology developer, they develop plans, conduct
tests, collect and analyze data, and report findings. The evaluations are conducted according to a rigorous demonstration
plan and established protocols for quality assurance. EPA's National Exposure Research Laboratory, which conducts
demonstrations of field characterization and monitoring technologies, with the support of the U.S. Department of
Energy's Environmental Management program, selected Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) as the testing
organization for the performance verification of PCB field analytical techniques.

DEMONSTRATION DESCRIPTION

In July 1997, the performance of six PCB field analytical techniques was determined under field conditions. Each
technology was independently evaluated by comparing field analysis results to those obtained using approved reference
methods. Performance evaluation (PE) samples were also used to assess independently the accuracy and comparability
of each technology.

The demonstration was designed to detect and measure PCBs in soil and solvent extracts. The demonstration was
conducted at ORNL in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, from July 22 through July 29. The study was conducted under two climatic
conditions. The first site was outdoors, with naturally fluctuating temperatures and relative humidity conditions. The
second site was inside a controlled environmental chamber, with generally cooler temperatures and lower relative

EPA-VS-SCM-17

The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement

iii

August 1998


-------
humidities. Multiple soil types, collected from sites in Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee, were analyzed in this study.
Solutions of PCBs were also analyzed to simulate extracted surface wipe samples. The results of the soil and extract
analyses conducted under field conditions by the technology were compared with results from analyses of homogeneous
replicate samples conducted by conventional EPA SW-846 methodology in an approved reference laboratory. Details of
the demonstration, including a data summary and discussion of results, may be found in the report entitled Environmental
Technology Verification Report: Immunoassay Kit, Strategic Diagnostics Inc., RaPID Assay System for PCB Analysis,
EPA/600/R-98/111.

TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION

The RaPID Assay System applies the principles of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to the determination of PCBs.
The sample to be tested is added, along with an enzyme conjugate, to a disposable test tube, followed by paramagnetic
particles coated with PCB-specific antibodies. Both the analyte PCB (which may be in the sample) and the labeled PCB
(the enzyme conjugate) compete for the antibody binding sites on the paramagnetic particles. At the end of an incubation
period, a magnetic field is applied to hold the paramagnetic particles (which contain the analyte PCB and labeled PCB
bound to the antibodies in proportion to their original concentration) in the tube and allow the unbound reagents to be
decanted. After decanting, the particles are washed with washing solution. The presence of PCBs is detected by adding
the enzyme substrate (hydrogen peroxide) and the chromogen (3,3',5,5'-tetramethylbenzidine). The enzyme-labeled PCB
conjugate bound to the PCB-specific antibody catalyzes the conversion of the enzyme substrate/chromogen mixture to
a colored product. After an incubation period, the reaction is stopped and stabilized by the addition of acid. Because the
labeled PCB (enzyme conjugate) is in competition with the analyte PCBs (in the sample) for the antibody sites, the color
development is inversely proportional to the concentration of PCB in the sample (e.g. the darker the color, the less analyte
PCB is present in the sample).

VERIFICATION OF PERFORMANCE

The following performance characteristics of the RaPID Assay System were observed:

Detection limits: EPA defines the method detection limit (MDL) as the minimum concentration of a substance that can
be measured and reported with 99% confidence that the analyte concentration is greater than zero. The MDL was
calculated to be 1.5 ppm based on the performance evaluation sample analyses. This was slightly higher than SDI's
specified MDL of 0.5 ppm.

Throughput: Throughput was 10 to 11 samples/hour. This rate included sample preparation and analysis.

Ease of Use: Three operators analyzed samples during the demonstration, but the technology can be run by a single
trained operator. Minimal training (2 to 4 hours) is required to operate the RaPID Assay System, provided the user has
a fundamental understanding of basic chemical and field analytical techniques.

Completeness: The RaPID Assay System generated results for all 232 PCB samples for a completeness of 100%.

Blank results: No PCBs were detected in either the soil or extract blanks above the RaPID Assay's MDLs; therefore, the
percentage of false positive results was 0%. Two false negative results (1%) were reported for the nonblank soil samples.

Precision: The RaPID Assay System exhibited a significant "site effect" in terms of precision. The overall precision,
based on average relative standard deviations (RSDs), was 25% (under outdoor conditions) and 12% (under chamber
conditions) for soil samples. The outdoor precision was comparable to the reference laboratory's precision (21% RSD),
while the chamber precision was better. The RaPID Assay's precision was comparable to the reference laboratory's (12%
and 14%, respectively) for extract samples.	

EPA-VS-SCM-17

The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement

iv

August 1998


-------
Accuracy: Accuracy was assessed using PE soil and extract samples. The data showed that the RaPID Assay System
exhibited both positive and negative bias depending on the Aroclor type present in the sample. Because the bias was evenly
distributed (positive and negative), this was not reflected in the overall accuracy (which was based on average percent
recoveries) of 103% for the PE soil samples. Extract measurements were relatively unbiased, with an overall average
percent recovery of 101 %. Evaluation of the data generated at each site indicated that there were no significant differences
between the two data sets based on environmental conditions.

Comparability: This demonstration showed that the RaPID Assay System generated data that exhibited a linear
correlation to the reference laboratory data. The coefficient of determination (R2), which is a measure of the degree of
correlation between the reference laboratory and the RaPID Assay data, was 0.754 when all soil samples (0 to 700 ppm)
were considered. For the concentration range from 0 to 125 ppm, the R2 value was 0.716. Approximately 36% of the soil
sample results had percent difference values within the range of ±25%. For extract samples, the data were highly
correlated with the reference laboratory, R2 of 0.977.

Regulatory decision-making: One objective of this demonstration was to assess the technology's ability to perform at
regulatory decision-making levels for PCBs, specifically 50 ppm for soils and 100 (jg/100cm2 for surface wipes. For PE
and environmental soil samples in the range of 40 to 60 ppm, the precision was 21% RSD with a mean accuracy of 126%
recovery. For extract samples representing surface wipe sample concentrations of 100 (jg/100cm2 and 1000 (jg/100cm2
(assuming a 100 cm2 wipe sample), measurements were precise (12% RSD) and accurate (101% recovery).

Data quality levels: The overall performance of the RaPID Assay System was characterized as slightly biased and precise,
under a given set of environmental conditions. Although there was a significant "site effect" in terms of the precision, it
should be noted that the RaPID's worst-case precision (25% RSD) was comparable to the best case precision (21% RSD,
excluding suspect values) for the reference laboratory.

The results of the demonstration show that the SDI RaPID Assay System for PCB analysis can provide useful, cost-
effective data for environmental problem-solving and decision-making. Undoubtedly, it will be employed in a variety of
applications, ranging from serving as a complement to data generated in a fixed analytical laboratory to generating data
that will stand alone in the decision-making process. As with any technology selection, the user must determine if this
technology is appropriate for the application and the project data quality objectives. For more information on this and other
verified technologies, visit the ETV web site at http://www.epa.gov/etv.

Gary J. Foley, Ph.D.

Director

National Exposure Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development

NOTICE: EPA verifications are based on an evaluation of technology performance under specific, predetermined criteria and the
appropriate quality assurance procedures. EPA makes no expressed or implied warranties as to the performance of the technology
and does not certify that a technology will always, under circumstances other than those tested, operate at the levels verified. The end
user is solely responsible for complying with any and all applicable federal, state, and local requirements.

EPA-VS-SCM-17

The accompanying notice is an integral part of this verification statement

V

August 1998


-------
vi


-------