298 / 328
First Action Recommendation
ER 1
Yes.
ER 2
Yes
ER 3
Yes
ER 4
I recommend that the method, which has been gone through AOAC collaborative study successfully, for determination of
PAHs in seafood using GC-MS be adopted Official Fist Action
ER 5
No
ER 6
Not yet....I think it needs validation with a natural matrix CRM such as SRM 1974c.
ER 7
Yes, with minor modifications (please see After First Action Recommendation)
ER 8
yes
After First Action Recommendation
ER 1
Explore for ways to improve inter-lab precision RSD(R)%
ER 2
NO
ER 3
See comments above.
ER 4
na
ER 5
It may be helpful to refer to the FDA's LIB # 4475 to get a better feel for how the Method should be formatted and
important quantitative data to include. The only exception here is the Safety Section is not in the front of this FDA LIB.
ER 6
As mentioned above, information on the method performance using SRM 1974c
ER 7
Fish samples should be analyzed in the future to see if this method is applicable to fish as well, especially those with high
fat content. Was matrix effect significant? or the internal standards (13C PAHs) added to samples before extraction
corrected the matrix effect of their corresponding PAHs? How about the alkyl PAHs that did not include their isotope
labeled standards in this study? Should matrix matched calibration be more appropriate? I would suggest the study group
to compare the PAH recoveries using this method and one of the other currently accepted methods to test an oyster
reference material stored at - 20 C to show if the degradation of Ant and BaP is method dependent.
ER 8
no
ERP PROFILE SUMMARIES
258