performance characteristics of the ... - counterpoint · counterpoint article: author: reference:...

©2017CounterpointJournal–ApublicationofIndustrialTraining&DesignLtd. Allrightsreserved.

Performance Characteristics of the Intoxilyzer® 9000 – An Independent Assessment and Review

Insupportofaposterpresentationforthe21stInternationalAssociationofForensicSciences(IAFS2017)TriennialMeeting

Toronto,Canada

Author: JanSemenoff,BA,EMA–ForensicCriminalistEditor:Counterpoint–TheJournalofScienceandtheLawApublicationofIndustrialTraining&DesignLtd.,Saskatoon,SKCanada

AbstractID: 1235Program#: PS03-55 AbstractType: PeerReviewSubmissionTopic: 01.InternationalAssociationofForensicSciences(IAFS)

02.NewForensicTechnologies,DigitalEvidence&CybercrimeTitle: PerformanceCharacteristicsoftheIntoxilyzer®9000–AnIndependentAssessment&ReviewJuryDecision: Accepted-21stInternationalAssociationofForensicSciences(IAFS2017posterpresentation)


2

An important caveat

This assessment on an individual Intoxilyzer 9000 was done undercircumstances of complete access to the device, but with limited timeconstraints.Simplyput,wedidnothavethetimenecessarytorunexhaustivetestingonthe9000togeneratetherawdatanecessarytoensureaproperstatistical analysis. Over a ten-hour period, we were able to run about 60individualtestsonthe9000,andinspectitsinteriorandcomponentparts.Weneedfurtheraccesstothesedevicestodrawmeaningfulconclusions.Asaneditorialposition,Counterpoint,callsonthemanufacturersofALLbreathtestinstruments,andallgovernmentagenciesthatoperateandcontrolthem,tomakethesedevices,usedincriminalproceedingsasevidentiarycollectiondevices, available for independent review and analysis. Transparencyregardingboththephysicalandsoftwaredesign,theirmanufacture,andthemaintenanceandoperationofthedevicesiscriticalinmaintainingadegreeofopennessandtrusttowardsthenumericalBrACresultsgenerated.

PUBLISHER: COUNTERPOINTispublishedquarterlyby:

IndustrialTraining&DesignLtd.SaskatoonSKCanada

GM&EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: EDUCATIONALCONSULTANT&ASSOCIATEEDITOR:JanSemenoff,B.A.,E.M.A. SusanReschny,Ph.D.

ARTDIRECTOR: DIRECTOROFPHOTOGRAPHY:LesleyKerpan,B.Ed.,B.F.A. AlexanderSemenoffCONTACTUS:[email protected]:WedoNOTprovideoursubscriber’slistoranypartofyourcontactinformationtoanythird-party.OurcompletePrivacyPolicyisavailableonourwebsite.Thispublicationisaregisteredinternationaleducationaljournal,indexedintheInternationalPeriodicalIndex.ISSN2369-2774SUBSCRIPTIONRATES:ANNUALQUARTERLYSUBSCRIPTIONSare:IntroductoryPricing$109CDN;$99USDforfirstyear.IncludesGST/HSTforCanadianresidents.GST#892622424.©2017-AllRightsReserved.Reproductioninwholeorinpartisexpresslyprohibited,exceptforquotedexcerptsinreviews,newsitemsoreditorials.Contactus forpaperorelectronicreproductions.Anyproduct,material,orcourse informationissubmittedgratis.Wecannotberesponsibleforunsolicitedmanuscriptsorphotographs.


3

Table of Contents

Introduction 4

TheIntoxilyzer®9000–AnOverview 5Internaldiagnosticcheck 5Airblanks 6Thetouchscreen 6Breathsampling 7Invitroaccuracy 7

AssessmentoftheIntoxilyzer9000’sResidualAlcoholDetectionSystem 8AproblematicmeansofassessingtheResidualAlcoholDetectionSystem 11Acomparisontootherbreathtestdevices 12Obtainingpropersamples&operationalimplications 13Thenecessityofaproperdeprivationandwait/observationperiod 13OverallimpressionontheIntoxilyzer9000RADS 14

ThespecificityoftheIntoxilyzer9000towardsethanol 15CreatingaBreathAlcoholConcentration(BrAC)reading 15Measurementofinterferingchemicals 19Discussion 20ConclusionregardingethanolspecificityintheIntoxilyzer9000 21

TheeffectofRadioFrequencyInterferenceontheIntoxilyzer9000 22WhatisRadioFrequencyInterference(RFI)? 22AproblematicmeansofassessingtheRadioFrequencyInterferenceDetectcircuitry 22TestingRFIontheIntoxilyzer®9000 25OverallimpressionontheIntoxilyzer9000’sRFIdetection 26

Contactinformation: 26

TheIAFSPoster: 27

References 28


4

Introduction Theopportunitytoconductanindependentanalysisandperformancereviewofanewbreathalcoholtestingdeviceisrare,particularlythehigher-end,evidentiary-levelunits.Accesstothesetechnologiesisstringentlycontrolledbyboththeirmanufacturersandthepoliceandgovernmentagenciesthatcontrolthem.Additionally,stateagenciesareoftenreluctanttopublishtheresultsoftheirofficialassessmentsandanalysisofthedevices1.WhengiventheopportunitytoperformsuchareviewonanewIntoxilyzer9000,Idesignedaseriesofexperimentstoquicklyanalyzetheoverallperformanceofthedevice.Iattendedthedevice’slocationwithacolleaguetodetermineitssuitabilityandreliabilityinanumberofkeyareas,including:

• Overalldesignandeaseofuse• Accuracyindetermininginvitro2BrAC3levelsusingasimulator• The ability of the device to determine the presence of FreshMouth Alcohol using a

ResidualAlcoholDetectionSystem(RADS)ortheso-called“slopedetector”• ReliabilityinreportingBrACreadingsthatarehighlyspecifictoethanol• TheeffectofRadioFrequencyInterferenceonthedevice

This article will provide a general overview of theoperationalcharacteristicsoftheIntoxilyzer9000.Wewillassesstheapparentaccuracyofthedeviceusingsimulatorreadings,andexaminetheabilityof thedevice to“flag”false positive reading caused by fresh mouth alcoholcontamination.Wewillalsoexaminetheunit’sspecificitytowards ethanol detection and its ability to identify thepresenceofvariousinterferentchemicals.Finally,wewillassess the capacity of the device to detect RadioFrequencyInterference(RFI),andwhat,ifany,effectsonabreathalcoholreadingarecreatedbyRFI.

1 Regarding the Intoxilyzer 9000, only the Georgia Bureau of Investigation - Division of Forensic Sciences haspublicallyreleasedtheirsanctionedassessmentonthedevice.Youmaywishtorunthesearchparameters“Georgiareplaces Intoxilyzer 5000” or “Georgia Intoxilyzer 9000” into your favorite search engine…Other agencies haveperformedreviewsandassessmentsontheIntoxilyzer9000,someevengoingsofarastodestroytheirownrawdataratherthanallowingtheinformationintothepublicdomain(theColoradoDepartmentofPublicHealthandEnvironment).2ALatintermusedinmedicalandscientificliterature,invitromeans“intheglass”andreferstobiochemicaltestingdoneoutsidethenormalbiologicalsetting,asinatesttube,orotherwiseartificiallyinalabsetting.UsingaSimulatortoartificiallyrecreateabiologicalBreathAlcoholConcentration(BrAC)isconsideredaninvitrotest.3 I will use the term BrAC to denote a Breath Alcohol Concentration, and BAC to refer to a Blood AlcoholConcentration.

Figure 1 - The Intoxilyzer Model 9000 and optional USB keyboard


5

The Intoxilyzer® 9000 – An Overview Reference materials:

CounterpointArticle: Author: Reference:TheNewIntoxilyzer9000 MarkThiessen Volume1,Issue1TheIntoxilyzer9000&theUnknown JanSemenoff Volume1,Issue3

TheIntoxilyzer9000usesaWindows™Mobileplatformtouchscreeninterfaceforoperatorinput,andcontrolofthebreathtestsequence.Additionally,theunitwehadaccesstoofferedagenericcomputerUSBkeyboard.Ourunitalsohadanexternallaserprinterthatprovidedaprintoutofbreath test results. Both the external keyboard and printer are optional – the unit can beoperatedwithoutthemusingtheonscreentouchkeyboard,andanoptionalinternalprinter.The9000canalsoincorporateanoptionalbarcodereaderormagneticswipescannertoallowautomaticinputofbothoperatorcertificationandtest-subjectdriver’slicenseinformation.The9000alsocanrunportablyonexternalbatterypowerusingaDCadapter(12VDC@8Amps).Uponinitiatingthetestingprocess,theoperatorispromptedtoenterinformation:Nameoftestsubjectandoperator,driver’slicensenumber,occurrencenumber,etc.Theenteredoptionsareuser configured. The unit then performs an internal diagnostic check, and begins the largelyautomatedbreathtestsequence.Internal diagnostic check

I have no information on what specificinternal measurements are taken andstandards compared to in order todetermine the pass or fail parameters ofthisdiagnostic,nordoIknowwhatfactorsarenecessary for thediagnostic toeither“pass”or“fail”.Assuch,Icannotcommenton the overall reliability of the InternalDiagnostic Check algorithm. It wasestablished that the internal diagnosticchecksonboth the5000, and to a lesserextent,the8000couldbecompromisedbydisconnectingvariousinternalcomponentsand circuitry, and still generate a“DIAGNOSTICPASS”message.

Figure 2 - When the 9000 is powered up, it performs an internal diagnostic test.


6

Air blanks Similarly, the Air Blanks performed at thebeginning and throughout the breath testsequence may well be “floating Zero” airblanks.SeeCounterpointVolume2,Issue1,Article6,“BestPractice inBreathAlcohol Testing,Part 1 – Environmental Conditions” for adiscussion on the implementation of“floatingzero”airblanksinabreathtest.

Regardless, theunit seemedtoperformasonewouldotherwiseexpect.WeencounterednoAmbientFailerrors(nonethatwedidnottryandgenerate,inanycase),andwedidn’texperienceanydiagnosticfailuresfromthisbrand-newModel9000.The touchscreen

One thing that we discovered with thecalibration and performance of thetouchscreen interface was the difficultyinmakingcontactwiththedesiredpointson the screen. One had to push veryforcefully to get the touch screen torespond, or respond correctly. Itscalibration was off, often enabling thefunction of a button beside the onepressed instead of the intended buttonpushed. This lead to many tests beinguser-aborted due to incorrect functionchoices. In a few instances, thetouchscreenlockedupentirely,requiringacompleterebootoftheinstrument.

Theperformanceofthetouchscreenprovedfrustrating,andIthinkifthisproblemissystemicand not the aberration of an individual instrument, will result in a lot of operator angst,particularlyasweoftenhadtore-enteranentiresequenceofpre-testquestionsbeforetheunitwouldacceptabreathsample.Theinadequacyofthetouchscreenseverelyimpededourability

Figure 3 - When a test is initiated, the 9000 performs an initial Air Blank to establish a Zero reference point, and to determine the suitability of the ambient room air.

Figure 4 - The touchscreen interface in the test unit had calibration issues and proved to be a frustrating interface to the instrument's operational sequencing.


7

toassessthe9000,asitsloweddowntheprocesstoprobablyhalfthespeeditcouldhavebeen.Ifthisisasystemicissue,Iforeseeunitswithdamagedtouchscreensbeingreturnedforrepairbyfrustratedoperators(particularlyafterenteringthesameinformationoverandoveragain,atthreeinthemorning).Breath sampling Providing the actual breath sample was comparable to most other similar evidentiaryinstruments. The exhalation force to provide the breath sample, and the length of sampledurationwereaboutthesame.Rememberthatbreathalcoholtestingdevicestypicallyusefourparameterstodeterminethesuitabilityofabreathsample:

• Thepressurebywhichthetestsubjectexhales• Thelengthoftimeoftheexhalation• Thevolumeoftheexhaledsample,and• The“slope”ofthereadingsobtainedfromonesecondtothenext

In vitro accuracy Usingaknownalcoholconcentrationandasimulator,Iwasabletogetaseriesofreadingsonthe Intoxilyzer 9000 that closely corresponded to the anticipated results of the simulatorsolution.Thiswasasexpected.

Additionally, it does not seem possible tocovertheexhaustportofthedeviceinorderto prevent exhaust escape. The Intoxilyzermodels 5000, 5000EN, 8000 and the 9000utilizea“flowthrough”design–theexhaledbreath sample is not “captured” as it is onsome other devices. It has beendemonstratedinthepastwiththe5000and8000modelsthatanyblockageofthebreathsample’s exhaust port, intentional orotherwise, has the net effect of artificiallyraising the reported BrAC reading, with theover-reportingdependentuponthedegreeofblockageoftheexhaledsample,anditslevelofcontamination.

Thedesignof theexhaustportpreventseitheraccidentalor intentionalblockageof theportitself.Theport isshieldedbyaplatewithanexhausthole itself,andblockingtheportseemsdifficult,andunlikelytooccuraccidentally.Timewilltell…

Figure 5 - The exhaust port (top left, in red circle for emphasis) was shielded and could not be accidentally blocked.


8

Assessment of the Intoxilyzer 9000’s Residual Alcohol Detection System Reference Materials: CounterpointArticle : Reference:

BreathSamplingCriteria Volume1,Issue4,Page302EstablishingReliability Volume1,Issue4,Page309

ItisunknownandunreportedintheavailableliteraturewhatspecificalgorithmisusedbytheIntoxilyzer9000todeterminethesuitabilityofabreathsampleintermsofwhatiscommonlyreferredtoasthe“slope”detector,morecorrectlycalledtheResidualAlcoholDetectionSystem(hereafter–RADS)4.Itmaybehelpfultolookatthearticleslistedaboveasameansofreview:Ingeneral,RADSaredesignedtodeterminethepresenceoffresh-mouthalcohol.Asubjectwhomayhaverecentlyintroducedalcoholintotheirmouthandrespiratorytractby:

•Vomitingorstomachcontentregurgitation,includingstomachgases•Burpingorbelching,howeverslight•AmedicalconditionsuchasAcidRefluxDisease,orGERD,

willhavean initial rapidrise inBACthatalsofallsoffsharplyasthefalse-highalcoholreadingdissipatesandisreplacedbya“true”near-levelslope.Let’spretendthatthesubjectabovehascontaminatedtheir oral pathway with “fresh mouth alcohol”immediately prior to orwhile providing a sample, asshowninredinFigure7onthenextpage:Continuedonthenextpage

4IpreferthetermResidualAlcoholDetectionSystem(RADS)tothecommonlyusedterm“slopedetector”,asIfeelthelatterimpliesanactualphysicalcomponentwithinthebreathtestingdeviceitself,ratherthanthemathematicalalgorithmthatthesystemsactuallyemploy.Assuch,IwillusethetermRADStorefertowhatmostpeoplecallthe“slopedetector”.

Figure 6 - The interior of the Intoxilyzer Model 9000


9

Figure 7 – Sample exhalation curve showing a breath alcohol reading caused by the introduction of fresh mouth alcohol contamination (shown in red) in comparison to the "true" BAC (shown in blue).

Ideally, theunit is able todetermine the rise and subsequent fall inBrAC readings fromonesecondtothenextduringtheactualexhalationofthetestsubject.AnysuddenorsharpdropinBrACreadingshouldbeusedtodeterminethatthesampleitselfiscontaminated.Itisbelievedthatthe“true”BrAClevelshouldnotspikeinthismannerwiththesuddendropinreading.TheIntoxilyzer9000hasspecificrequirementsindeterminingthesuitabilityofabreathsample:

• First,itrequiresaminimumflowrateof0.15litrespersecond,withaminimumbreathtimeoffiveseconds.

• Thesampleprovidedmustbeaminimumof1.1litresinvolume.• The sample exhalation lengthmust be a minimum of five-seconds, uninterrupted, in

duration.• TheIRsourceontheIntoxilyzer9000pulsesatonly10cyclespersecond(Hz).Withfour

filters,abreathsamplereadingisobtainedevery1/10ofasecond(100milliseconds)oneachofthefour-filteredpoints,foratotalof40discretepulsespersecond.Asthepulsesareanalyzed,consecutiveBrACreadingsthatdonotdifferbyapre-determinedmarginwillindicatealevelslope.

Oncethefourcriteria(flowrate,volume,exhalationtime,andslope)aremet,aZEROappearsinfrontofthepreliminarybreathtestresults,indicatingthesampleobtainedissuitableforanalysis.


10

The9000canalsodisplayahistogramofthebreathtestresultsthatshows:• Thesubject'sbreathflowcurve(profileofexhaledbreath)and• Thesubject'sflowrateinlitres/second• Thesubject'sBrACcurve(thepeakBrAC,andaprofileoftheBrACfromsecondto

secondduringexhalation)• Thesubject'sexhalationdurationinseconds

It should be noted that the histogram display is a user-configurable option. A number ofjurisdictionshaveelectedtoeliminatethiscomponentfromthefinalprintoutofresults.

Figure 8 - The optional histogram printout on the 9000 shows the exhalation profile indicating the flow rate and BrAC curve.

Theforensicallyacceptablestandardofobtainingtworeadingswithin0.02grams/100mlofeachanother,coupledwithacorrectlyconductedobservationperiodbeforeandbetweenthetworeadingsmerelyassists inobtainingsuitablesamples.TheRADSaddsonlyacertaindegreeofvaliditytothetestingprocess.Manyjurisdictionsaroundtheworlddonotobtaintworeadings,sotheRADSbecomeevenmorevaluabletothem.Unfortunately,RADSsystemsingeneraldonotseemtowarrantthatdegreeoftrust.5

5 Gullberg, R.G.,The Inadequacy of Instrumental “Mouth Alcohol” Detection Systems in Forensic Breath AlcoholMeasurement,NorthwestAssociationofForensicSciences,Oct.,2000.


11

A problematic means of assessing the Residual Alcohol Detection System IhaveoftenheardforensiccriminalistsandstatecrimelabchemistsortechniciansdescribeincourthowtheyassessthereliabilityofRADSduringroutineannualinspectionormaintenance.Typically,analcohol-freesubject(asinthetechniciansthemselves)swishandspitoutanalcohol-laden solution (often, a simplemouthwash containing ethanol), then immediately provide abreathsample.ThereisasuddenspikeinBrACreadingonthebreathtestingdevicethatrapidlydeclinestoa“true”BrACreadingofzero,settingofftheRADSerrormessage.SeeFigure9:

Figure 9 - Laboratory testing of the RADS, with a Zero-BAC test subject (Blue) and an artificially inflated mouth alcohol contamination (Red).

Thisis,inmyopinion,amimproperwayofassessingthereliabilityoftheRADS.Intherealworld,underactualoperatingconditions,thetestsubjecthasprobablyconsumedalcohol,perhapsevenaconsiderableamount.ComparetheBrACexhalationcurvesinFigures7and9.Theexhalationprofilesaremarkedlydifferent.Thedifferencebetweenthe“true”baselineBrACreading,andthefalsely-elevatedreportedreadingduetothealcoholcontaminationisoftennotenoughforthe“riseandfall”algorithmtoidentifythepresenceofcontamination.TestingasperFigure9,inmyopinion,artificiallycreatesthesituationuponwhichthebreathtestingdeviceeasilypassesthiscriterion,andinnoway,reflectstheconditionsexperiencedbytheunitsinthefield,asshownpreviouslyinFigure7.


12

WhenItestedtheIntoxilyzer9000onatestsubjectthathadanactualBACconcentration,andprovidedsomesortofveryminorlevelsoforalcontaminate(asmalldropofethanolintroducedbypipettetothetipofthetonguethatwasswirledanddissipatedinthemouthfor30secondspriortoprovidingabreathsample),the9000oftenreportedfalsely-inflatedreadings,asshowninFigure10:

Intoxilyzer9000Results“True”BrACReading

ReportedBrAC FalsePositiveAmount

ErrorMessageGeneratedby9000

.010 .030 .020 -

.010 .025 .015 -

.010 .024 .014 -

.010 .068 .058 -

.010 .038 .028 -

.008 .060 .052 -

.008 .076 .068 -

.008 .038 .030 -

.008 .245 .237 InvalidSample

.008 .135 .127 InvalidSample Figure 10 – The Breath Alcohol Concentration (BrAC) results generated by an Intoxilyzer 9000 with a contaminated oral pathway from a test subject with a low-level Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC).

I’mconcernedabout the last tworesults, shown inbold.TheRADSseems toproperly reportInvalidSamplereadingsonlyatveryhighlevelsofcontamination.Ihaveoftenheardpolicebreathtestoperatorsdescribe,incourt,thatthey“sawareadingonthescreen”beforeanerrormessagewasgenerated,andattempt tohave thatpreliminary resultenteredasevidenceofanactualmeasuredBACreading.Weseetworeadingsherethatarewellbeyondtheperselevel,thatwereproperlyidentifiedbythe9000asInvalidSamples,yetanumericalresultwasalsodisplayed.Itmustbestressedtoqualifiedtechniciansduringtrainingthatthepreliminaryresultscanneverbereliedupon,especiallysowhenanerrormessageisindicated.A comparison to other breath test devices IfthisproceduretoassesstheRADSonthe9000seemsinappropriate,considerthatIappliedthesamemethodologytothefollowingbreathtestdevices:

• Intoxilyzer8000• DataMasterDMT

InALLinstances,theDataMasterDMTcorrectlyidentifiedthepresenceoffreshmouthalcoholcontaminateandabortedthebreathtestingprocesswithoutgeneratinganumericalresult.


13

Tovaryingdegrees,theIntoxilyzer8000provided,onmorethanoneoccasion,numericalresultsthatwerefalselyelevated:

BreathTestDevice “True”BAC ReportedBrAC ErrorMessageIntoxilyzer8000 .009 .062 -

.010 .047 -

.010 .066 -DataMasterDMT .015 - Invalid

.010 - Invalid.010 - Invalid

Figure 11 – The Breath Alcohol Concentration (BrAC) results generated by an Intoxilyzer 8000 and a DataMaster DMT with a contaminated oral pathway from a test subject with a low-level Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC).

This isalsomygeneralexperiencewiththeolder Intoxilyzer5000and5000ENmodels. Ihavegeneratedfalsely-elevatedreadingsduringtrainingprogramdemonstrationsconsistentwiththe8000readingsabove. Obtaining proper samples & operational implications Relyinguponthepressure/time/volume/RADStoautomaticallydeterminethesuitabilityofthesampleisinsufficient.Itmuststillbetheresponsibilityofthequalifiedtechniciantoensurethat a suitable sample is properly obtained. The Model 5000, 8000 or 9000 setsminimumstandardsforasuitablesample,basedonanaveragesubject.Thequalifiedoperatoristheonewho must ensure that a given subject has provided their own unique suitable sample. Thisnecessitatesaproperdeprivation,waitandobservationperiodforthetestsubjectpriorto,andbetween,thetakingofsuitablesamples.The necessity of a proper deprivation and wait / observation period ThereisnooverrideontheModel5000,8000or9000asthereareonsomeroadsidescreenersthatarecapableofmanuallydrawingabreathsampleintothetestchamber.TheModel5000,8000and9000willcontinuetoreceivethesampleaslongasitsparametersdon’tfalloutsidetheresidualalcoholdetectionsystem’sthresholdvalues.Aslongasthesubjectcontinuestoprovideexhaledbreath sufficient to keep thepressure transducer open, the samplewill be analyzedeither4,10or30timespersecond,pereachinstrument’sdesign.TheRADS,coupledwithanobservationperiodof a reasonable lengthof time,mayprovide adegreeof reliability in thebreathtestingresults.Butremember,anobservationperiodisexactlythat–observation.Theoperatorshouldbepayingattentionwiththeireyes,ears,andinsomecasestheirnosestodetectthesmellofthefreshburp,orunnoticed“micro-burp”.


14

Overall impression on the Intoxilyzer 9000 RADS As stated before, this assessment on the Intoxilyzer 9000was done under circumstances ofcompleteaccess,butwastimelimited.Simplyput,wedidnothavethetimenecessarytorunexhaustivetestingonthedevicetogeneratetherawdatanecessarytomakeaproperstatisticalanalysis.Weneedfurtherinquirytodrawmeaningfulconclusions.Ithasbeenmyexperiencethat,ingeneral,theRADScan,andoftenare,fooledunderavarietyofcircumstances,mostnotably,recentintroductionofasmallquantityofalcohol,similartowhatwouldoccurduringaburpor“micro-burp”.ThiscircumstanceispreciselywhattheRADSwasdesignedtodetect,yetfailstodoso.IhaveroutinelyobservedtheRADSfailtoregistermouthalcoholthatisafewminutesold,oftenallowingtheunittoregisteranabnormallyhighreadinggivenasimpleswishofalcohol,orevenasmalldropofalcoholonthetipofthetonguethatisallowed to dissipate for a few minutes. I can only conclude that the RADS is merely aninvestigativeaid,and isahighly inaccuratedetectorofmouthalcohol,withmostevidentiarybreathtestdevices,withthenotableexceptionoftheDataMasterDMT.WhatisconcerningistheapparentinabilityoftheIntoxilyzer9000toaccuratelydeterminethiscontamination.My testing shows,albeitwith limiteddata, that the9000 routinelygave falsepositivereadingswithminimummouthalcoholcontamination.Ineveryinstancebuttwowherewecontaminateda“true”readingwithaminutequantityofethanol,afalsely-inflatedreadingwasobtainedandreportedasatruevalue.OurlimiteddatashowsthatthetrueBrACreadingcould be added to by as much as 0.014 to 0.068 without identifying the mouth alcoholcontamination.TheonlytwoinstancesthatreportedanINVALIDsampleerrormessagewaswhenextremelyhighlevelsofcontaminatewere introduced (adding .127to .237gramsto the trueamount).Eventhen,anumericalresultwasdisplayedasapreliminaryreadingthatwassubsequentlyreportedasINVALID.SimplyputRADSorslopedetectors,ingeneral,aresuspectatbest,andintheIntoxilyzer9000,donotprovideareliablemeansofidentifyingfreshmouthalcoholcontamination.Thispointstothenecessityofaproperlyobservedandconducteddeprivationandobservationperiodpriortoandbetweenreceivingevidentiarybreathalcoholsamplesforforensicorcourtpurposes,andforthecontinueduseofreplicateorduplicatebreathalcoholtestingthatmustfallwithinacceptableparametersofcongruency.


15

The specificity of the Intoxilyzer 9000 towards ethanol Reference Materials: CounterpointArticle: Reference:

InfraredSpectroscopy FreeIssue,Page19AnIntroductiontoSpecificity Volume1,Issue4,Page293TheIntoxilyzer9000 Volume1,issue3,Page195

First,weshouldagreeonthedefinitionofsometerms:

• Forourpurposes,specificityreferstotheabilitytoanalyzeforaspecificsubstance,andto isolate that specific substance from any other substances with similar physical orchemicalcharacteristics. Inbreathalcoholtesting,thecompoundweare lookingfor isethanol.Specificitytowardsethanoldetectionishighlydesirous.

• An interfering compound Any other chemical compound that appears to the breathtestingdeviceasethanol.

• Shouldthat interferingcompoundaddorevenmultiplytheapparentethanolreadingsobtained,theresultswouldbeconsideredafalse-positivereading.

• Shouldthat interferingcompoundreducetheapparentethanolreadingsobtained,theresults would be considered a false-negative reading. To date, no false-negativecompoundshavebeenidentified.

Creating a Breath Alcohol Concentration (BrAC) reading The breath sampling system Thebreathsamplingsystemconsistsofaseriesoftubes,bothexternalandinternal,thatdrawinroomair,breathsamples,andcalibrationsolutionvaporsordrygasintotheopticalchamber(orbench).Additionally,thissub-assemblyrequiresopeningandclosingofvalvesinsequence,andameanstomeasuretheflowrateoftheexhaledtestsubject’sbreathsample.TheIntoxilyzer9000hasspecificrequirements6indeterminingthesuitabilityofabreathsample.First,itrequiresaminimumflowrateof0.15litrespersecond,withaminimumbreathtimeoffiveseconds.Thesampleprovidedmustbeaminimumof1.1litresinvolume.Inmostbreathalcoholtestingdevices,thevolumedeterminationisusuallyacalculatedvalue,createdbymultiplyingthe flowrate, in litrespersecond,by thenumberofsecondsthe flowmeetstheminimumcriteriatodeterminethecalculatedvolumeofexhaledbreath. IhavenoinformationonhowtheIntoxilyzer9000createsthisreportedvolumevalue.

6Asreportedinthe“EvaluationofBreathAlcoholTestingInstrumentstoReplacetheIntoxilyzer5000”,GeorgiaBureauofInvestigationCrimeLaboratory,Sept2012,(authorunknown).


16

The optical chamber (also called: sample chamber, or optical bench) Theopticalchamber,oftenreferredtoanasopticalbenchorsimply“samplechamber”,consistsofachamber, tubeorpathway inwhichbotha roomair,wet-bathsolutionvaporordry-gascalibrationstandard,orexhaledbreathsampleareanalyzed.Lightorheatenergywillalsopassthroughtheair,gas,orbreathsampletodeterminethepresenceandconcentrationofethanolinthesample.

Figure 12 - A representative diagram of the optical chamber on the Intoxilyzer 9000

Wedonotknowtheinternalvolumeoftheactualsamplechamberonthe9000.Externally,itmeasuresabout10”x2”x¾”.This internalvolume iscritical, in that largeropticalchambersrequirealargerexhalationvolume.Alargersampleisalsothoughttodeliveramoreanalyticallyprecise measurement. Folded-path chambers are often utilized to deliver a more precisemeasurementaswell.Weknowthe9000doesnotutilizeafoldedpathway.Althoughwedon’tknowitspreciseinternalvolume,orphysicalspecifications,theexternaldimensionsgiverisetoaninternalvolumeabout240mL.Thisisperhapsanover-estimateofitsinternalvolume,giventhattheIntoxilyzerModel5000hadasamplechamberofaround80mL,andtheModel8000avolumeofonlyabout29mL.Olderunitsemployedaluminumchambersthatweresensitivetopittingandcorrosion,orthatpromotedthegrowthofmoldovertime.Somedevicesusepolishedstainless-steelchambersthatminimizethiscontaminationorcorruption.Whatarethe9000’scharacteristicsinthisregard?


17

Figure 13 - The optical bench of the Intoxilyzer 9000 showing the breath sample inlet tube (left) and outlet port (right). The chamber is wrapped by a thermal blanket that was measured at 47.0°Celsius.

The sample chamber is also heated by an external warming blanket. We measured thetemperatureoftheinteriorofthechamberat47.0°C,exactlyatitsstatedvalue.The infrared source Another component of the Optical Bench is its infrared source. The Intoxilyzer 5000 used ahalogenlightbulbasitsinfraredsource.The8000usedapulsedinfraredsource,asapparentlydoesthe9000,nowincorporatingpulsingLEDs(LightEmittingDiodes).ThisisimportantinassessingthereliabilityoftheResidualAlcoholDetectionSystem.Intheolder5000,thefilterwheelcomponentspunataround1800RPM.Thismeantthat,foratensecondexhaled breath sample, about 300 readings were obtained from EACH filter. For theModel5000EN,withfivefilters,thismeantthat1500discretereadingswereobtained,analyzedandcompared.TheModel8000movedfromaHalogenlightbulbandspinningfilterwheeltoawirethatwasheatedandcooled2 timespersecond (4Hzpulse).Only two filterpointswereutilized.Thatmeantthatthesametensecondexhaledbreathsample,only80discretereadingswereobtained,analyzed, and compared. As such, the so-called slope detector was less precise. Third-partytestingindicatedthattheResidualAlcoholDetectionSystemontheModel8000waslessreliablethanontheolder5000.


18

Ithasbeenreported7 that the IRsourceonthe Intoxilyzer9000pulsesatonly10cyclespersecond(Hz).Withfourfilters,abreathsamplereadingisobtainedevery1/10ofasecond(100milliseconds)oneachofthefour-filteredpoints,foratotalof40discretepulsespersecond.Asthepulsesareanalyzed,consecutiveBrACreadingsthatdonotdifferbyapre-determinedmarginwillindicatealevelslope.Oncethefourcriteria(flowrate,time,volumeandslope)aremet,aZEROappearsinfrontofthepreliminarybreathtestresults,indicatingthesampleobtainedissuitableforanalysis.The infrared filters In addition to the infrared source, the infrared filters provide a preciseway tomeasure theethanol concentration within the test chamber. The older Model 5000 had reported filterspecificationof3.39µ(micron),3.48µ,and3.80µ,etc.TheModel8000didnotreportthespecificwavelengthsused,butwecametoknowthattheywereat3.40µand9.36µ.The9000 filters areapparently somewhere≥8µbut, ≤9µ. Fourdiscrete filters areused,withspecificwavelengthsandresolution(orprogrammedinstrumenttolerance)undisclosed.

Figure 14 - The infrared spectra of ethanol, with the range of detection in the 3.3 - 3.8 µ (micron) range from the previous Intoxilyzer Model 5000 indicated in the black box (left) and the range utilized by the Model 9000 between ≥8µ - ≤9µ in the black box (right).

7UnknownAuthor(s),“EvaluationofBreathAlcoholTestingInstrumentstoReplacetheIntoxilyzer5000”,GeorgiaBureauofInvestigationCrimeLaboratory,Sept2012.


19

Theresolutionof the filters isalso important. IR filtersareeithernarrow-bandwidthorwide-bandwidth.Thinkofthisasnarrowversuswideresolution.Thewiderafilter,themoreIRlightitabsorbs. The narrow a filter, the more specific and precise it is at absorbing an IR energybandwidth.Thisis important,asitspeakstotheunit’sspecificitytowardsethanol.TheModel8000apparentlyhadatolerancetothefilterof+/-.5micronfromtarget.Thisistoolarge,impliesinherentmeasurement uncertainty, and can lead to false-positive readingswhen interferentchemicalsarepresent.HowdoestheIntoxilyzer9000compareinthisregard?Measurement of interfering chemicals Methodology & findings Duetotimeconstraints,wetestedacetoneandisopropanolisvarioussmallmeasurestosimulatetheeffectsofadiabetictestsubject,orapersonwhowasfastingoronseveredietaryrestrictions.Methanolandd-limonenearealsowell-establishedinterferingsubstancesusedinoccupationalsettings,solowlevelsofthesechemicalswereintroducedaswell.InordertoassesstheabilityoftheIntoxilyzer9000todeterminethepresenceandconcentrationofethanol,anditsabilitytoidentifyanddiscernthepresenceofaninterferingchemical,weusedthefollowingmethodology:Asimulator,heatedto34.0°C,containinga500-mLsolutionofethanolindistilledwater,haditsvaporintroducedintotheIntoxilyzer9000throughtheexternalsamplehose.Thesolutionwasallowedtocometoequilibriumthroughagitationpriortobeingintroduced.AbaselinereadingwasobtainedthatindicatedanequivalentBrACreadingingramsofethanolper100mLofblood(210Lofbreath).Tothisbaselinesolution,interferingchemicalswereaddedinsmallaliquots8,andalsoallowedtocometoequilibriumthroughagitationandmixing. Laboratory-grade isopropanol,acetone,methanol andd-Limonenewereutilized, in combinationwithone another and fresh ethanolmixtures. This compound solution of ethanol and the interfering chemicals had their vaporintroducedintotheIntoxilyzer9000,againthroughtheexternalsamplehose.Thereadingproducedbythecombinationofethanolandinterferingcompoundwerecomparedtothetruevalueofthebaselinesolutiononthepreliminaryresultsdisplayedontheinstrument.Additionally, the results of any error or statusmessage were recorded, along with the finaldisplayedapparentBrACreading.

8Analiquotisaportionofalargerwhole,especiallyasampletakenforchemicalanalysisorothertreatment.


20

Data obtained Thefollowingtablesummarizesthedataobtained:

Baselineethanolsolution(g/dL)

Interferentchemicalsadded

Errormessageorfinaldisplay

.094 0.25mLacetone INTERFERENT0.50mLacetone INTERFERENT

.096 1.0mLacetone INTERFERENT

.090 0.125mLacetone0.125mLisopropanol

INTERFERENT

0.125mLacetone INTERFERENT0.125mLacetone0.250mLisopropanol

INTERFERENT

.045 0.5mLisopropanol INTERFERENT1.0mLisopropanol INTERFERENT

.032 0.5mLmethanol INTERFERENT1.0mLmethanol INTERFERENT

0.0 d-limonenevapor 0readingd-limonenevapor 0reading

Figure 15 – Data obtained through the introduction of infrared interfering chemicals into an ethanol solution with a known concentration.

Discussion PreliminaryresultsindicatethattheIntoxilyzerModel9000iscapableofidentifyingthepresenceofevenextremelysmalllevelsofisopropanol,acetone(andvariouscombinationsofthesetwochemicals),andmethanol,allinthepresenceofethanolatdifferentconcentrations.Theintroductionofd-limonenewasuniqueinthatitdidNOTprovideanumericalBrACreadingotherthanZero,butalsodidNOTindicateitspresenceasaninfraredinterferingcompound.ItshouldbetestedinthefuturewithacorrespondingBrACethanolreading.Ihaveperformedsimilartestingonotherinstruments,includingtheIntoxilyzer5000,5000EN,8000, and the DataMaster DMT. Only the DataMaster DMT has been equally successful inidentifying interfering chemicals and aborting the BrAC testing process. The older Intoxilyzer5000and5000ENoftenproducedfalse-positivereadings,asdidearlierversionsoftheIntoxilyzer8000.Laterversionsofthe8000morecorrectlyidentifiedthesespecificinterferentchemicals.Inshort,specificityofreadingsseemstobeincreasingintheIntoxilyzerlineofevidentiarybreathtestproducts.


21

However, thereareawidevarietyofotherchemicals (MEK,ormethylethylketone; toluene;diethylether;dimethyl sulfone;xylene,etc.) thathavebeenshownbyvarious researchers toprovide false-positive readings on different evidentiary breath test devices. Each of these, incombinationwithdifferentethanolreadings,shouldalsobetestedtodeterminetheirresponse,ifany,ontheIntoxilyzer9000.IthasbeenlongestablishedamongOSHA(OccupationalHealth&Safety)professionalsthatlong-term,chronicexposuretovariouschemicalspresentsahealthhazard.Simplyput,alow-levelofexposuretoaspecificsubstancecanbuildupintheworker’stissuesovertime,developingfairlyhigh levels, often well beyond what a non-exposed person can develop. Simulating chronicexposure to chemicals in combinationwith ethanol becomes problematic, as it is often verydifficult,orevenimpossible,todeterminewhatthebaselineinterferentlevelsarepresent.Theideaofplumberswiththeirheadsunderthesinkcabinet,gluingpipestogetheralldaylong,thenstoppingonthewayhomeforabeerortwoisnotoutoftheordinary.Similarly,ahairstylistwhoworkslonghoursdealingwithstraightening,coloring,bleachingchemicals,andhairspray9candevelopsignificantchronicexposure levels to these inhaledchemicals.Whateffect thesechemicalshave,inconcertwithalowlevelofethanol,needstobeexaminedintheIntoxilyzer9000,andindeed,allotherevidentiaryinfraredbreathtestingdevices.Conclusion regarding ethanol specificity in the Intoxilyzer 9000 InALLinstances,theIntoxilyzer9000correctlyidentifiedthepresenceoftheinterferingchemicalandproducedtheerrormessage“INTERFERENTDETECTED”.InnoinstancedidthepreliminarydigitaldisplayindicateaBrACreadingbeyondthetruebaselinevalue.Ourtestingindicatedthatthe Intoxilyzer9000performedbetter thanmostotherdevices in this regard, identifying thepresence of interferent chemicals on par with the DataMaster DMT. Later versions of theIntoxilyzer8000alsocorrectlyidentifiedinterferentchemicalsthemajorityoftimes.However,awidevarietyofotherknownorpotentialinfraredinterferingchemicalsshouldbetestedintheIntoxilyzerModel9000todeterminewhat,ifany,effectstheyhaveonatrueethanolreading,andtodiscovertheabilityoftheIntoxilyzer9000toidentifytheirpresence.

9Hairsprayproductsareoftenablendofindustrialpolymerstoprovidestructuralsupportforthehair.Thesefrequentlyincludechemicalsusedtoachievethedesiredphysicalproperties(adhesivestrength,foaming,etc.),oftenusingplasticizers,surfactants,andotheragents.Theseactiveingredientsmakeuponlyasmallportionofahairspray(aerosolcan).Themajorityofacanisterisfilledwithvolatilesolventsnecessarytosolubilizeandaerosolizethecopolymermixture.Theseincludesimplealcoholslikeethanolortert-butanoltosolubilizetheactiveingredients,anddimethyletherormixedhydrocarbonsaspropellants.


22

The effect of Radio Frequency Interference on the Intoxilyzer 9000 What is Radio Frequency Interference (RFI)? RadioFrequencyInterference(RFI),alsocalledElectromagneticInterference(EMI),occurswhenanelectricaldisturbanceisgeneratedonanelectronicdevicebyanexternalelectricalsource.Thissourcemayaffectelectronicorelectricalcircuitry,anddegradeorotherwise impedetheperformanceofthecircuitaffected.Theeffectscanincludedatacorruption,anincreaseinerrorrate, total or partial data loss, andmay even go so far as to stop the affected device fromfunctioningaltogether10.Inourmodernand increasinglyconnectedworld, theuseof radio transmissionandreceivingdevicesisubiquitous,andtodaycertainlymoresothanjustafewyearsago.Whenmodernpolicebreathalcoholtestingdeviceswereinvented,nooneconceivedofhighspeed,Wi-Fienabled,5GdevicesusedregularlytoaccessacontinuousstreamofInternetdata,textmessagesandvoicecommunications.Fewcouldhaveforeseenaworldwherepowerful,interconnectedelectronicdevicesweresosmall,thatnotonlydotheyeasilyfitinthepalmofyourhand,butwelosetheminourownhomes(alongwithourcarkeys).Aquickpeekat theWi-Fi networks available locally tomy computer indicates that about20differentsignalsourcesareinmyimmediatevicinity.Additionally,cellularphones,smartdevicessuchastabletsorotherWi-Fienableddevices(nowincludingeverythingfromBlu-Rayplayersto“smart”refrigerators),andotherBluetoothdevicesareallemanatingtheirdigitaltransmissions,regardlessofwhethertheyareonanactivecallornot.Thisbackground“noise”cancreatethesituationgenerallyassociatedwithRFIandEMIemissions.To compound theproblem inpolice evidentiarybreath testing,wehave such sources as thecellphones of the people in the vicinity, police portable radios, and now, police body-worncameras and wireless laptop computers, all transmitting notification signals back to theirrespectivesources,tellingtheelectronicinfrastructure(andlocalintranet)world,“Iamhere…” A problematic means of assessing the Radio Frequency Interference Detect circuitry IhavefrequentlyheardforensiccriminalistsandstatecrimelabchemistsortechniciansdescribeincourthowtheyassessthereliabilityoftheRFIdetectduringroutineannualmaintenanceofbreathalcoholtestingdevices.Typically,apoliceradio,orsimilartransmitter,isplacednearthe

10Inanextremeexample,EMIpulsesareusedinelectronicwarfaretointerruptcommunicationsandcomputertechnologyofenemycombatants.


23

deviceinquestionduringits“activephase”11ofbreathsampling.Theradioisthen“keyed”intotheactivetransmissionmode,andtheresponseofthebreathtestdevicerecorded.However,thisassessmentisdifferentfromtheInternet,cellphone,Wi-Fi,BluetoothenabledworldI’vejustdescribed.TheproblemwithassessingtheimpactofRFIisthatitisgeneratedinanintermittentfashion,producingrandomandpotentiallyirreproducibleresults.Indeed,thesimpleactofdetectingthepresenceofRFIisaconsiderablechallenge.Assuch,ithasbeenfrequentlysuggestedthattheprudent course of action is to limit exposure of RFI to devices that must deliver precisemeasurementswithahighdegreeofreliability,orincritical-applicationsituations.Thatiswhywearerequiredtoturnourcellphonesoff,orinto“airplane”mode,whenweboardacommercialflight,entertheICUtovisitasickrelative,orareinthevicinityofsensitivemedicalmonitorsandscientificmeasuringdevices.ItshouldbenotedthattheRFIdetectorbuiltintotheIntoxilyzer5000and8000seriesofbreathalcoholtestingdevicesisbasedontechnologyofcirca1980-2000.AlthoughtheIntoxilyzerlineitselfhasundergonevariousupgradesintheircapabilities,theRFIdetectorcircuitrytheyemployhaveremainedessentially thesame for theseearlierdevicessince theircreationabout thirtyyears ago. They were designed to detect the presence of radio frequencies in the 10-300Megahertz(MHz)range,aswascommonlyfoundinpoliceradiosofthatera.Duetotheincreasedperformanceofnewercommunicationtechnologies,mostofthoseradiodeviceshavelongbeenabandoned.

The detectors have not recognized thepresence of either upper-band analog ormoremoderndigitaltransmissionsthatmaybepresentandinterferingwiththeinternalcircuitryoftheIntoxilyzers.Aswell,thetypeof RCA plug used to connect therudimentary antennae of the Intoxilyzer5000and8000isonlysuitablefordetectingradio frequencies in the much lower 5-6MHz range. Simply put, the detectorsutilized by the Intoxilyzers are “blind” tomodernportabletransceivers,usedbybothciviliansandpoliceagencies.

11I’mseparatingheretheideaofanactivemodeinthebreathtestingdevice(itisreadytoreceive,orhasbeenactivatedtoreceivebreathsamples)asopposedtoitspassivemode(whereitisinthe“stand-by”position,waitingforsomeactivitytooccur–i.e.;PushtheSTARTbutton).

Figure 16 - The antennae circuitry on the 9000 employs a 3-lead flexible circuit that connects to the physical antennae located under the CMI label on the exterior of the instrument.


24

Modernpoliceradioscommonlytransmitandreceivewithinfrequenciesbetween400MHzto3Gigahertz (GHz). Cellular telephonevoiceanddata technologyused in theUnited States andCanadautilizesradiofrequenciesinthe800MHzthrough1.9GHzrange.Additionally,voiceanddatatransceiversutilizingtechnologycommonlyknownas“Bluetoothdevices”operateinthe2.4GHzrange.Moderncommerciallyavailable“walkie-talkies”operatingintheFCCLicensedFamilyRadioServicebandsoperateinthe462-467MHzrange.Theeffectoftheseradiofrequenciesontheinternaloperationofbreathtestdevicesthatuseelectroniccircuitrysimilartothatofearlycomputersisindebate.Accordingly,standardpoliceprocedures have been established in most jurisdictions in North America that prohibit thepresenceofactivepoliceradios,cellulartelephones,andsimilardevicesinbreathtestfacilities.Thisprohibitionamongstpoliceagenciesisnotunique.Mosthospitalshavepoliciesprohibitingthe use of similar radio or other electronic devices in patient care areas, where critical life-supportorpatientmonitoringequipmentisinoperation12.RFIinterferencetodevicessuchasventilators, patient monitors, pacemakers, neonatal incubators, motorized wheelchairs, andanesthesiadeliveryequipmenthasbeenreportedanddocumented.Additionally,althoughtherehasonlybeenonereportedcaseofanaircrashwheretheuseofcellulartelephoneshasbeenalternatelypurportedasresponsible13,theUnitedStatesFederalCommunicationCommissionbanstheuseofcellularphonesinaircraftentirely(per47C.F.R.§22.925).Similarbansareenforcedinmanyotherjurisdictionsworldwide.Itshouldbenotedthatnewercellulartelephonestransmitintermittentdigitalidentificationsignals,whetheranactivecallisinprogressornot,sothatlocalcellulartransceiversitesrecognizethemerepresenceofthephoneforreceptionofincomingcalls.Asthisfunctionisbeyondthecontroloftheoperatorofthedevice,deactivatingthedevicetotheoffpositionor“airplane”modeiswarranted.ShortlyaftertheintroductionofthetypesoftechnologyusedbytheIntoxilyzerandsimilarbreathtest devices into general police service, theNational Bureauof Standards conducted a study(“EffectsofElectromagneticFieldsonEvidentialBreathTesters”,1983)andconcludedthatthepossibilityoferroneousBloodAlcoholConcentration(BAC)readings,influencedbyvariousradiofrequencies, was “severe”. There are numerous reported, albeit anecdotal, instances whereelevatedBACreadingshavebeenobservedduetothepresenceofknownradiotransmissions.Theproblem,frankly,inextrapolatingfromtheseobservedinstances,istheunpredictabilityand12IhaveservedasbothaPoliceConstableandEmergencyMedicalTechnicianinmycommunityinthelast35years.Underbothpolice and ambulanceprotocols, Iwas required to turnmyportable radiooff before entering localemergencydepartments,asaproactivemeasureagainsttheunintentionalinterferencewithcriticalpatientcareandmonitoringequipment.13CrossairFlightLX498,January10,2000(flightfromSwitzerlandtoGermany).Theofficialcrashreportdoesnotmention cell phoneactivity as aprimary causeof the crash, and insteadattributes it to pilot error.However, aseparateinvestigationintothecauseofthecrashdocumentedthattheautopilotsystemmalfunctionedatthesametimethatapassenger'scellphoneonboardtheplanereceivedanSMSmessageandanothercellularphonereceivedacall.Afterthisinformationwasmadepublic,anumberofcountriesthathadpreviouslybeenreluctanttodosooutlawedcellphonesonflights.Thebansremainineffecttothisday.


25

lackofreproducibilityofthecircumstancesthatapparentlygaverisetoelevatedBrACreadings.As such, the cautious and prudent approach is to absolutely eliminate the possibility of RFIaltogether.So,ultimately,thequestionis,“HowdoestheIntoxilyzer9000radiofrequencydetectioncircuitryidentifythepresence,ifany,ofinterferingelectromagneticsignals?”Testing RFI on the Intoxilyzer® 9000 Testing protocol Inordertotesttheeffects,ifany,ofradiofrequencyinterferencefromcellularphonecallsduringanactivebreathtest,weutilizedtwocellphones,callingoneanotherinthegeneralvicinityoftheIntoxilyzer9000,tocreateanactivecellulartransmissioninprogress.BothwereAppleiPhone6phones,oneoperatingontheVerizonnetwork,theotherroamingontheAT&Tnetwork.BreathtestswereconductedwithazeroBrACtestsubject,andtestsonatestsubjectwithaknownBrACof0.012grams/dL.Results obtained Theresultsareasfollows:

“True”BAC ReportedBrAC ErrorMessage0.0 0.0 RFIDETECTED0.0 0.0 -0.0 0.0 -0.0 0.0 RFIDETECTED0.0 0.0 -

0.012 0.0 -0.012 0.026 -

Figure 17 – Data obtained through the introduction of radio frequency interferences into a known solution with a measured ethanol concentration.

WithazeroBACtestsubject,the9000correctlyreportedazeroBrACreading,butonlyidentifiedthepresenceoftheactivecellularcallson2/5occasions.InordertogeneratetheRFImessage,oneof the cellular phones, on an active call, had tobeplacedwithin 2 inches (6 cm)of theexternalantennae.Anydistancefurtherthan2”wouldnotgenerateanRFIDETECTEDmessage.In thenext tests, theactivecellularphonewasplacedwithina5-inchradiusof theantennaewhileatestsubjectwitha“true”BrACof0.012grams/dLprovidedbreathsamples.TheBrAClevel was measured, initially from the Intoxilyzer 9000 itself, and verified using a recentlycalibratedhandhelddevice (an IntoximeterFST).With theactivecellularcallsunderway, the


26

9000 provided two back-to-back readings of Zero and 0.026 g/dL, all without indicating thepresenceofanyRFI.Limitedtimepreventedusfromobtainingfurtherresults. Overall impression on the Intoxilyzer 9000’s RFI detection Obtaining proper samples & operational implications Relyingupon theRFIdetectcircuitry todetermine thepresenceof stray radiowavesmaybeinsufficient.Itappearsthatthesourceofanypotentialinterferencehadtobewithinaradiusofabouttwoinchesfromtheexternalantennaetobedetected.ItalsoappearsthatwithanactualBrACmeasurement (0.012g/dL), the readingsobtainedmayhavebeenaffectedbyRFI,bothgeneratingfalse-negativeandfalse-positivereadings,withoutreportingthedetectionofanyRFIpresent.Aspreviouslystated,thisassessmentontheIntoxilyzer9000wasdoneundercircumstancesofcompleteaccess,butwastimelimited.Simplyput,wedidnothavethetimenecessarytorunexhaustivetestingonthedevicetogeneratetherawdatanecessarytomakeaproperstatisticalanalysis.Weneedfurtherinquirytodrawmeaningfulconclusions.Withalbeitlimitedtests(seven)weseepreliminaryindicationsthattheIntoxilyzer9000doesnotadequatelydetectthepresenceofRFI,andadditionally,thattheRFImayadverselyaffectthereportedBrACresults.Therefore,theonlyprudentcourseofactionistoeliminateallpotentialsourcesofRFI.Thismeansturningoffpoliceradios,cellphonesofbothofficersandtestsubjects,policebody cams, laptops that are transmitting, andanyWi-Fi devices, etc. The intermittentnatureofRFI,anditspotentialeffects,dictatestheneedtoremoveanypotentialsourceofEMIandRFIaltogether.Furthermore,aproperdeprivationandobservationperiod,bothbeforeandbetween the breath samples, coupled with the use of replicate testing (with close sampleagreement)willhelptoestablishthereliabilityofbreathalcoholtestingresults.

Contact information: Theauthormaybecontacted:

E-mail: [email protected] Phone: 1-888-470-6620(Toll-freeinNorthAmerica) 306-343-3372 (Local)Web: www.counterpoint-journal.com

Go to the IAFS page: counterpoint-journal.com


27

The IAFS Poster:

Figure 18 - The poster presented at the IAFS 2017 Conference. Reprints available upon request.


28

References Bailey,D,Detectionof Isopropanol inAcetonemicPatientsNotExposedto Isopropanol,ClinicalToxicology,28(4),1990,Pages459-466.Dubowski, K.M.Absorption,DistributionandEliminationofAlcohol:Highway SafetyAspects, 10 J. Stud.AlcoholSuppl.(1985).Dubowski, K.M.,Acceptable Practices for Evidential Breath-Alcohol Testing, Center for Studies of Law in Action,BorkensteinCourseMaterials,IndianaUniversity,May2008.Dubowski,K.M.,StagesofAcuteAlcoholic Influence/Intoxication, IndianaUniversityCenter forStudiesof Law inAction,TheBorkensteinCourse(coursematerial),2006.Dubowski,K.M.,AlcoholDeterminationintheClinicalLaboratory,AmericanJournalofClinicalPathologists,Volume74,No.5,Pages747-750,1980.Gullberg,R.G.,CommonLegalChallengesandResponsesinForensicBreathAlcoholDetermination,2004,IndianaUniversityCenterforStudiesofLawinAction,“BorkensteinCourse”.Gullberg,R.G.,BreathAlcoholMeasurementVariabilityAssociatedwithDifferent InstrumentationandProtocols,ForensicScienceInternational131(2003)30-35Gullberg, R.G., The Inadequacy of Instrumental “Mouth Alcohol” Detection Systems in Forensic Breath AlcoholMeasurement,NorthwestAssociationofForensicSciences,Oct.,2000.Hlastala,M.,Lam,W.,andNesci,J.,TheSlopeDetectorDoesNotAlwaysDetectthePresenceofMouthAlcohol,FortheDefense,March2006.Jones,A.W.,ConcerningAccuracyandPrecisionofBreath-AlcoholMeasurements,ClinicalChemistry,33/10,1701-1706(1987)Jones,A.W.,Andersson,L.,BiotransformationofAcetonetoIsopropanolObservedinaMotoristInvolvedinaSobrietyCheck,JournalofForensicSciences,JFSVA,Vol.40,No.4July1995,Pages686-687.Jones,A.W.&Summer,R.,Detectionof IsopropylAlcohol inaPatientwithDiabeticKetoacidosis,The JournalofEmergencyMedicine,Vol.19,No.2,2000,Pages165-168.Jones,A.W.&Rossner,S.,False-PositiveBreathAlcoholTestAfteraKetogenicDiet,InternationalJournalofObesity,(2007)31,Pages559-561.Jones,A.W., InterferingSubstances Identified in theBreathofDrinkingDriverswith Intoxilyzer5000S, JournalofAnalyticalToxicology,Vol.20,November/December1996,Pages523-527.Jones,A.W.,ObservationontheSpecificityofBreathAlcoholAnalyzersUsedforClinicalandMedicolegalPurposes,JournalofForensicSciences,JFSCA,Vol.34,No.4,July1989,Pages842-847.Laasko, O., Pennanem, T., et al,Effect of Eight Solvents on Ethanol Analysis by Draeger 7110 Evidential BreathAnalyzer,JournalofForensicScience,Sept2004,Vol49,No.5.Labianca, D. A., The Flawed Nature of the Calibration Factor in Breath-Alcohol Analysis, Journal of ChemicalEducation,Vol.79,No.10,October2002


29

Norfold, G. & Quartly, C., Volatile Substances and their Potential to Interfere with Breath Alcohol ReadingInstruments,JournalofClinicalForensicMedicine(1997)4,Pages21-23.Palmentier, J-P., Woodall, K., and Savoia, C., Radio Frequency Interference Messages During Breath Testing ofSuspected Impaired Drivers Using the Intoxilyzer® 5000C: A 13-Year Retrospective Analysis, Canadian Society ofForensicScienceJournal,2016,Vol.49,No.3,127-137.Simpson,G.,AccuracyandPrecisionofBreathAlcoholMeasurementsforSubjectsintheAbsorptiveState,ClinicalChemistry,33/6,753-756(1987)Sterling,Kari,TheRateofDissipationofMouthAlcoholinAlcoholPositiveSubjects,TheJournalofForensicScience,2011.UnknownAuthor(s),“EffectsofElectromagneticFieldsonEvidentialBreathTesters”,NationalBureauofStandards,1983.UnknownAuthor(s),“EvaluationofBreathAlcoholTesting Instruments toReplace the Intoxilyzer5000”,GeorgiaBureauofInvestigationCrimeLaboratory,Sept2012.

counterpoint-journal.com

Counterpointisapublicationof:

performance characteristics of the ... - counterpoint · counterpoint article: author: reference:...

Documents