COVID-19: Development of a portable detection device for SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater

From: Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada

The Public Health Agency of Canada and the National Research Council of Canada are seeking to facilitate the development of a field portable SARS-CoV-2 wastewater detection device that incorporates sampling, analysis, data storage and date transmission.

.

Challenge sponsor:
National Research Council (NRC)

Funding mechanism:
Grant

Opening date:
May 13, 2021

Closing date:
June 10, 2021, 14:00 Eastern Standard Time

Log in to view your submissions

Prospective applicants should refer to the Innovative Solutions Canada Grant Instructions and Procedures document.

Challenge

Problem statement

SARS-CoV-2, the causative agent of COVID-19, can be detected in wastewater either by detection of the virus, its breakdown products, antibodies produced in response to the virus or other compounds produced in response to the virus. Wastewater based detection of SARS-CoV-2 provides early warning to the emergence of outbreaks and can monitor community infection trends. Wastewater signals can inform more efficient public health action and help mitigate the social and economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. For wastewater monitoring of SARS-CoV-2 to be successful in providing actionable public health intelligence these signals must be detected quickly, and directly at the point of sampling.  Ideally a portable detection device would be compatible with multiple types of wastewater including raw wastewater, primary influent, mixed liquor, and secondary effluent (before disinfection).

Current wastewater surveillance is hampered by delays along the axis of sample collection, sample transportation, laboratory processing and data reporting. Sampling upstream in the sewershed requires laborious and costly sampling to be useful. There is a need for a portable end-to-end SARS-CoV-2 wastewater detection device that can expedite this process. Such a device will provide rapid public health intelligence at both the city and neighbourhood scale.

Desired outcomes and considerations

Essential (mandatory) outcomes

Phase 1

Proposed solutions must:

  1. Operate in the field without laboratory support.
  2. Be simple to operate with minimal training.
  3. Operate in a simple and straight-forward manner. The operator's role should only be to insert a wastewater sample for analysis and then request analysis, or the device should have the capability to autonomously sample wastewater (see additional outcomes).
  4. Specifically detect and report SARS-CoV-2 concentration in wastewater. The concentration must be reported as a numeric value (viral copies/mL or another acceptable method of reporting concentration) or within defined concentration ranges.
  5. Specifically detect and report the concentration of at least one fecal indicator (e.g. Pepper Mild Mottle Virus, crAsshpage, etc.). The concentration must be reported as a numeric value (viral copies/mL or another acceptable method of reporting concentration) or within defined concentration ranges.
  6. Ensure any hazardous and non-hazardous waste produced during sampling or analysis is stored safely for later disposal and firm must arrange for disposal.

The firm must ensure that:

  1. It has access to wastewater for sampling/analysis in one or more locations that are highly likely to have detectable concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 and locations that are highly likely to not have detectable concentrations of SARS-CoV-2.

Phase 2 

Proposed solutions must:

  1. Be capable of analyzing multiple forms of wastewater, i.e. raw wastewater, primary influent, mixed liquor, and secondary effluent (before disinfection)
  2. Operate in multiple types of field situations, e.g.:
    • At a sewage treatment plant sampling from the influent main or the primary clarifier or an installed sampling port.
    • At a sewer main with person access either by sampling with an extendable sampling device or by sampling personnel entering the access hole to descend to the flowing wastewater.
    • At a sewer line with an access port at ground level.
    • Inside a building at a sewer line/pipe with an access port.
    • At a lagoon or septic tank.
  3. Utilize an internal process control to monitor assay performance.
  4. Have a lower limit of detection of 30 viral copies / mL in wastewater, with a sensitivity of 95% (As compared to laboratory developed RT-qPCR tests).
  5. Have analytical processes that are robust against interference from wastewater constituents, and any incompatibility with wastewater constituents must be well defined to the user.
  6. Be resilient to clogging from particulates and debris within the wastewater during the operation of device, with minimal pretreatment in the field required.
  7. Store data on-board. The device should be able to store at least 7 days worth of data assuming that up to 30 samples per day could be analyzed. Alternatively relay data in real-time or in near real-time batches to a related field device and contain a system for relaying data to a central repository via internet or cell network.
  8. Have security measures in place to reasonably protect any stored or transmitted data.
  9. Have the option to password protect both the operation of the machine and retrieval of the data.
  10. Be able to operate in all weather conditions expected to be encountered in Canada.
  11. Operate on internal or external battery power, and be able to operate for 24 hours in the field without the need to recharge power supply.
  12. Possess a unique identifier (e.g. serial code, QR or bar code) for each unit.
  13. Be intrinsically safe for all situations including confined spaces if it is intended to be used in confined spaces or sites with fire/explosion hazards.
  14. By the end of Phase two, must have a set of Standard Operating Procedures to accompany it.
  15. Field demonstrate, in the last 4-6 weeks of Phase 2, a performance comparable to the current PHAC test, which minimally consists of molecular detection by a qPCR test using two gene targets (e.g. N1 and N2 genes) from a minimum processed volume of 30 ml. Gold standard testing can be performed by the National Microbiology Laboratory or an accredited lab provided the samples are submitted in a blinded and anonymized fashion. Multiple municipalities, facilities or locations may be required in Phase 2 demonstration. PHAC and/or NRC staff may accompany the firm in the field and may assist in arranging for sampling sites.

Note: Applicants are reminded that under Question 1a (Scope) proposals must describe how solutions clearly meet all 22 of the Essential (Mandatory) Outcomes listed in this section. Applicants should focus their Phase 1 project plan on demonstrating the feasibility of Essential Criteria 1-7. Applicants can focus on Essential Criteria 8 to 22 during Phase 2 work.

Additional outcomes

Proposed solutions should:

  1. Run continuously for a period of three days on battery power, and without the need to resupply reagents.
  2. In addition to operating on battery power, operate on electricity provided by the electrical grid or a generator or a portable stand-alone battery.
  3. Have a built-in error indicator for all scenarios including sampling process, equipment/battery failure, and internal quality control failure. Ability to remotely transmit errors over cellular or local wireless data networks.
  4. Have built-in memory and analytical functions to record and perform basic analysis to notify the operator any alarming trend or anomaly.
  5. Store and transmit its GPS coordinates over a remote data network.
  6. Provide physiochemical analysis of the wastewater, including turbidity/total suspended solids, temperature of incoming wastewater.
  7. Have the ability to be easily modified or configured to add or change to detect other known or unknown pathogens found in either the soluble or insoluble wastewater factions.
  8. Have compatibility with sludge as an alternate sample input.
  9. Have capabilities of autonomous wastewater sampling with the following parameters:
    • A variable integration time for the analytic pipeline as selected by the users (e.g. 2 hours to 24 hours).
    • Capability to draw subsamples of wastewater with at a time resolution of 5 minutes or less.
    • Concurrently sample wastewater while simultaneously analyzing a previously collected sample.
    • Store multiple (120) refrigerated aliquots of sample for later retrieval of at least 100 mL each, or a single large aliquot of at least 18 L.
    • Have the ability for operational parameters (e.g. sampling rate) to be controlled remotely over cellular data or local wireless networks.
  10. Accommodate a large process volume (e.g. >100 mL) to minimize sampling biases.
  11. Monitor and record flow parameters in the wastewater.
  12. Lift wastewater from a height of at least 28 ft.
  13. Accommodate both low (e.g. institutional) and high flow (e.g. wastewater treatment plant) wastewater streams.
  14. Have positive and negative control materials available that can be used to monitor device performance.

Background and context

Currently, COVID-19 wastewater testing is being performed by molecular detection using RT-PCR technology. This is occurring in public health, industrial and academic laboratories and introduces several challenges, including sample routing (from sampling point to lab) that result in delays in reporting. Mobile testing at the point of sampling would mitigate these delays and improve the usability of wastewater surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 and allow for real time data collection.

PHAC will:

  • Assist in arranging for split samples to be analyzed at a NML site.
  • Cover costs related to NML sample analysis.

Maximum grant value and travel

Multiple grants could result from this Challenge.

Phase 1:

  • The maximum funding available for any Phase 1 Grant resulting from this Challenge is : $150,000.00 CAD
  • The maximum duration for any Phase 1 Grant resulting from this Challenge is : 4 months
  • Estimated number of Phase 1 grants: 2

Phase 2:

  • The maximum funding available for any Phase 2 Grant resulting from this Challenge is : $350,000.00 CAD
  • The maximum duration for any Phase 2 Grant resulting from this Challenge is : 6 months
    • Note: Only eligible businesses that have completed Phase 1 could be considered for Phase 2.
  • Estimated number of Phase 2 grants: 1

This disclosure is made in good faith and does not commit Canada to award any grant for the total approximate funding. Final decisions on the number of Phase 1 and Phase 2 awards will be made by Canada on the basis of factors such as evaluation results, departmental priorities and availability of funds. Canada reserves the right to make partial awards and to negotiate project scope changes.

Travel

The firm will have to travel to the sampling sites in both phases and perhaps to one of the National Microbiology Laboratory sites in Phase 2 (Lethbridge, Winnipeg, Guelph, St. Hyacinthe).

Kick-off meeting

Via videoconference or teleconference.

Progress review meeting(s)

Any progress review meetings will be conducted by videoconference or teleconference.

Final review meeting

All communication can take place by telephone, videoconference, and WebEx.

Eligibility

Solution proposals can only be submitted by a small business that meets all of the following criteria:

  • for profit
  • incorporated in Canada (federally or provincially)
  • 499 or fewer full-time equivalent (FTE) employeesFootnote *
  • research and development activities that take place in Canada
  • 50% or more of its annual wages, salaries and fees are currently paid to employees and contractors who spend the majority of their time working in CanadaFootnote *
  • 50% or more of its FTE employees have Canada as their ordinary place of workFootnote *
  • 50% or more of its senior executives (Vice President and above) have Canada as their principal residenceFootnote *

Evaluation criteria

The applicant must complete the Challenge Stream Electronic Submission Form with a degree of information sufficient to enable Canada's assessment of the proposal against the criteria and the Evaluation Schema. The information must demonstrate how the proposal meets the criterion.

Part 1: Mandatory Criteria

Proposals must meet all mandatory criteria identified by achieving a "Pass" in order to proceed to Part 2. Proposals that do not meet all mandatory criteria will be deemed non-responsive and given no further consideration.

Mandatory Criteria

(Applicant's proposal must address)

Question 1 a: Scope

Describe the proposed solution and demonstrate how it responds to the challenge. Include in your description the scientific and technological basis upon which the solution is proposed and clearly demonstrate how the solution meets all of the Essential (Mandatory) Outcomes (if identified) in the Desired Outcomes section in the Challenge Notice.

Evaluation Schema (Mandatory – Pass/Fail)

Pass

The Applicant's proposed solution is clearly articulated, within the scope for the challenge and addresses all Essential (Mandatory) Outcomes (if identified) in the Challenge Notice.

Fail

The proposed solution is articulated as out of scope for the challenge.
OR
The proposal does not clearly demonstrate how the proposed solution addresses all Essential Outcomes listed in the challenge.
OR
The proposed solution is poorly described and does not permit concrete analysis.
OR
There is little to no scientific and/or technological evidence that the proposed solution is likely to meet the challenge.

Question 2: Current Technology Readiness Level (TRL)
  • Indicate the current TRL of the proposed solution. (Drop Down Menu of the Challenge Stream Electronic Submission Form)
  • Describe the research and development activities that have taken place to bring the proposed solution to the stated TRL.
Evaluation Schema (Mandatory – Pass/Fail)

Pass: The Applicant has demonstrated that the proposed solution is currently between TRLs 1 and 6 (inclusive), and provided justification by explaining the research and development (R&D) that has taken place to bring the solution to the stated TRL.

Fail: The Applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the current TRL is between 1 to 6 (inclusive) including:

  • There is insufficient/no evidence provided for TRL judgment.
  • The solution involves the development of basic or fundamental research.
  • The solution is demonstrated at TRL 7 or higher.
  • Insufficient/unclear/no justification explaining the R&D that took place to bring the solution to the stated TRL.
  • The explanation simply paraphrases the description of a given TRL level.
Question 3a: Innovation

Demonstrate how the proposed solution meets one or more of the ISC definitions of innovation below:

  • An inventionFootnote *, new technology or new process that is not currently available in the marketplace.
  • Significant modifications to the application of existing technologies/components/processes that are applied in a setting or condition for which current applications are not possible or feasible.
  • An improvement in functionality, cost or performance over an existing technology/process that is considered state-of-the-art or the current industry best practice.
Evaluation Schema (Mandatory – Pass/Fail)

Pass:

The Applicant has demonstrated that the proposed solution meets one or more of the ISC definitions of innovation.

Fail:

  • Applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the proposed solution meets any of the ISC definitions of innovation; OR
  • Applicant has demonstrated that the proposed solution is an incremental improvement, "good engineering", or a technology that would go ahead in the normal course of product development (i.e. the next version or release).
Question 3b: Advance on State of the Art

Describe in detail the competitive advantages and level of advancement over existing technologies. Where appropriate, name existing technologies as well as potential substitutes or competitors.

To demonstrate this, proposals should include the following information:

  • Improvements (minor or major) over existing technologies or substitutes. Use direct comparison.
  • How the proposed innovation will create competitive advantages in existing market niches or market spaces.
Evaluation Schema (Mandatory Criteria – Pass/Fail + Points)

0 points/Fail:

  • The Applicant has not demonstrated that the proposed solution advances the state-of-the-art over existing technologies, including available competing solutions; OR
  • The proposed solution improves minimally upon the current state of the art, though not sufficiently enough to create competitive advantages in existing market niches; OR
  • The stated advancements are described in general terms but are not substantiated with specific, measurable evidence.

5 points/Pass:

  • The Applicant has demonstrated that the proposed solution offers one or two minor improvements to existing technologies, including available competing solutions, that have potential to create competitive advantages in existing market niches.

12 points/Pass:

  • The Applicant has demonstrated that the proposed solution offers three or more minor improvements to existing technologies, including available competing solutions, that together are likely to create competitive advantages in existing market niches; OR
  • The Applicant has demonstrated that the proposed solution offers one significant improvement to existing technologies that is likely to create competitive advantages in existing market niches

20 points/Pass:

  • The Applicant has demonstrated that the proposed solution offers two or more significant improvements to existing technologies, including available competing solutions that are likely to create competitive advantages in existing market niches and could define new market spaces; OR
  • The Applicant has demonstrated that the proposed solution can be considered a new benchmark of state of the art that is clearly ahead of competitors and that is likely to define new market spaces

Part 2: Point-Rated Criteria

Proposals must meet the overall minimum pass mark of 50% to be deemed responsive. Proposals that do not achieve the minimum pass mark will be declared non-responsive and given no further consideration.

Point-Rated Criteria

(Applicant's proposal to address)

Question 1b: Scope

Demonstrate the scientific and technological basis of how the proposed solution addresses the Additional Outcomes(if identified) in the Desired Outcomes section in the Challenge Notice. If no Additional Outcomes are identified in the Challenge Notice, text entered in this section will not be considered.

If no Additional Outcomes are identified in the Challenge Notice, Applicants will receive 10 points.

Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the solution will address any of the Additional Outcomes. 0 points
  2. Information provided clearly demonstrates that the solution will address some (<50%) of the Additional Outcomes. 3 points
  3. Information provided clearly demonstrates that the solution will address most (50% or more) of the Additional Outcomes. 6 points
  4. Information provided clearly demonstrates that the solution will address all (100%) of the Additional Outcomes. 10 points
Question 4: Phase 1 Science and Technology (S&T) Risks

Describe potential scientific and/or technological risks to the successful development of the proof of feasibility and how they will be mitigated in Phase 1.

Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the Applicant has considered potential risks and mitigation strategies and/or information provided contains significant gaps. 0 points
  2. Information provided demonstrates that the Applicant has considered some potential risks and associated mitigation strategies but there are minor gaps in risks and/or associated mitigation strategies. 5 points
  3. Information provided clearly demonstrates that the Applicant has sufficiently considered the risks and defined associated mitigation strategies. 10 points
Question 5: Phase 1 Project Plan

Demonstrate a feasible Phase 1 project plan by completing the table.

  • Indicate if any milestones and activities will be completed concurrently
  • Indicate the estimated exit TRL at the completion of Phase 1. (Drop Down Menu of the Challenge Stream Electronic Submission Form)
Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate a feasible project plan for Phase 1 and/or the project plan exceeds the maximum duration indicated in the Challenge Notice. 0 points
  2. Project plan for Phase 1 is conceivably feasible but not clearly demonstrated and/or includes gaps. 10 points
  3. Information provided clearly demonstrates a feasible project plan for Phase 1. 20 points
Question 6: Phase 1 Project Risks

Describe potential project risks to the successful development of the proof of feasibility and how they will be mitigated in Phase 1.

Applicants should address the following risks, as applicable:

  • Human Resources
  • Financial
  • Project Management
  • Intellectual Property
  • Other project-related risks

Note to Applicants: S&T risks should not be included in this section. Question 4 addresses S&T risks.

Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the Applicant has considered potential risks and mitigation strategies and/or information provided contains significant gaps. 0 points
  2. Information provided demonstrates that the Applicant has considered some potential risks and associated mitigation strategies but there are minor gaps in risks and/or associated mitigation strategies. 5 points
  3. Information provided clearly demonstrates that the Applicant has sufficiently considered the risks and defined associated mitigation strategies. 10 points
Question 7: Phase 1 Implementation Team

Demonstrate how the project implementation team has the required management and technological skill sets and experience to deliver the project plan for Phase 1 by completing the table. A member of the implementation team can have more than one role.

Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the project team has the required management and technological skill sets and experience to deliver the Phase 1 project plan. 0 points
  2. Information is provided but there are minor gaps in required management and/or technological skill sets and/or experience to deliver the Phase 1 project plan. 10 points
  3. Information provided clearly demonstrates that the project team has the required management and technological skill sets and experience to deliver the Phase 1 project plan. 20 points
Question 8: Inclusivity

If your business were to receive funding from Innovative Solutions Canada, describe what actions (e.g., recruitment strategy, internships, co-op placements, etc.) might be taken in Phase 1 to support the participation of under-represented groups (e.g., women, youth, persons with disabilities, Indigenous people, visible minorities) in the research and development of the proposed solution. Each Applicant in their response to this question must focus only on describing relevant programs, policies, or initiatives that it currently has in place or would put in place to support the R&D effort in Phase 1.

Note: Do not provide any personal information of individuals employed by your company or that of your subcontractors in the response.

Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. No description and/or concrete examples of actions provided that would be taken to encourage greater participation of under-represented groups. 0 points
  2. A description and concrete examples of actions to encourage greater participation of under-represented groups provided.5 points
Question 9: Phase 1 Financial Proposal

Demonstrate a realistic financial proposal for the Phase 1 project plan by completing the table.

Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Insufficient information provided and/or information provided significantly lack credibility. Does not demonstrate a realistic financial proposal for the Phase 1 project plan. 0 points
  2. Information is provided but some costs lack credibility and/or are unclear for the Phase 1 project plan. 7.5 points
  3. Information provided contains credible elements to clearly demonstrate a realistic financial proposal for the Phase 1 project plan. 15 points
Question 10: Phase 1 Financial Controls, Tracking and Oversight

Describe the financial controls, tracking and oversight that will be used to manage the public funds throughout Phase 1. Applicants should indicate if an individual or firm will be managing the public funds and provide their credentials and/or relevant experience.

Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate the Applicant's ability to manage public funds in Phase 1. 0 points
  2. Information provided is vague and/or contains gaps. The Applicant has some controls, tracking and/or oversight in place to manage the public funds in Phase 1. 5 points
  3. Information provided clearly demonstrates that the Applicant has strong financial controls, tracking and oversight to manage public funds in Phase 1. 10 points
Question 11: Phase 2 Overview

Demonstrate a realistic overview for the prototype development plan if selected to participate in Phase 2.

Responses should include:

  • key tasks
  • estimated cost for materials
  • human resources
  • project risks and mitigation strategies

Note: A more detailed proposal will be requested if selected to participate in Phase 2.

Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the Applicant has contemplated a realistic overview for the Phase 2 prototype development. 0 points
  2. Information provided demonstrates a conceivably realistic overview for Phase 2 prototype development, however there are gaps and/or the strategy is vague. 6 points
  3. Information provided demonstrates that the Applicant has a clear and realistic overview. 12 points
Question 12: Commercialization Approach

Demonstrate a realistic overall commercialization approach/business model that can successfully take the technology/service to market, and how the technology/service will help you develop and sell other products.

Responses should include:

  • Target markets (excluding Government of Canada)
  • Non-ISC funding sources
  • Transition to a commercially-ready product or service
  • Any other indicators of commercial potential and commercial feasibility

Note: A more detailed proposal will be requested if selected to participate in Phase 2.

Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)
  1. Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the proposed solution has commercial potential. 0 points
  2. Some information provided to demonstrate that the proposed solution has commercial potential, however there are gaps in the commercialization approach. 6 points
  3. A realistic commercialization approach is provided that demonstrates that the proposed solution has commercial potential. 12 points
Question 13: Resulting Benefits to Canada

Describe the benefits that could result from the commercialization of the proposed solution. Applicants should consider the potential benefits using the following three categories and provide justification for each claim:

  • Innovation Benefits: Expected contribution towards the enhancement or development of new industrial or technological innovations within your firm. Responses could include: potential spillover benefits, creation of intellectual property, impact on productivity of the new technology, etc.
  • Economic Benefits: Forecasted impact on the growth of Canadian firms, clusters and supply chains, as well as its expected benefits for Canada's workforce. Responses could include: number of jobs created, number of high-paying jobs, investment in Canada's economy, etc.
  • Public Benefits: Expected contribution to the broader public to the degree that the solution is expected to generate social, environmental, health, security or other benefits to Canada. Responses could include: solution-related environmental benefits, solution-related accessibility benefits, and solution-related impact on Indigenous communities.
Evaluation Schema (Point-Rated)

  1. Innovation Benefits

    Benefit not identified or insufficient claim of benefit. 0 points

    Benefit has marginal increment or limited justification. 1 point

    Benefit is significant and well justified. 2 points

  2. Economic Benefits

    Benefit not identified or insufficient claim of benefit. 0 points

    Benefit has marginal increment or limited justification. 1 point

    Benefit is significant and well justified. 2 points

  3. Public Benefits.

    Benefit not identified or insufficient claim of benefit. 0 points

    Benefit has marginal increment or limited justification. 1 point

    Benefit is significant and well justified. 2 points

Questions and answers

All incoming questions regarding this specific challenge should be addressed to solutions@canada.ca.

All enquiries must be submitted in writing no later than ten calendar days before the Challenge Notice closing date. Enquiries received after that time may not be answered.

You can also consult the Frequently asked questions about the Innovative Solutions Canada Program.

A glossary is also available.

Would NRC/ISC provide samples or access to sample collection sites for phase 1 or phase 2 tests?

PHAC will have samples that will be available to successful bidders for use in the Challenge.

Are there any certification requirements, especially concerning the on-board battery and power systems for phase 1 or phase 2 development?

Applicants must state what certifications will ultimately be necessary for their technology and how certification will be achieved. Certifications do not have to be in place to start Phase 1 or Phase 2. Certification could be part of Phase 2 work but certification could also follow after the end of Phase 2 work.

Regarding fecal indicators (in Outcome #5), would e-coli (specifically the 0157 strain or any e-coli strain) be acceptable as an indicator?

The aim of this objective is to have a fecal indicator that is relatively constant and could be used to normalize the concentrations of SARS-CoV-2 virus in the wastewater.

Outcome #7 states that our project should have access to COVID-19 positive and negative wastewater. What kind(s) of wastewater is/are acceptable? (e.g. raw wastewater, primary influent, mixed liquor, and secondary effluent)

For Phase 1 work any type of wastewater may be used or multiple types may be used. For Phase 2 work it is required to show that the device works in most of the field situation so this implies that testing of a variety of wastewater types (raw in the collection system, raw at the entry to a wastewater plant/lagoon/etc., primary influent, lagoon/septic tank contents, WWTP mixed liquor, secondary effluent) is required. The actual types of wastewater and locations will be negotiated and confirmed before a Phase 2 project starts.

What is the target substance for the determination of SARS-CoV-2 concentration, the COVID-19 virus or antibodies to the virus?

The aim is to detect the SARS-CoV-2 in wastewater. The technology proposed can use any method or any target to detect the virus. Bidders should describe their methodology in enough detail to show that the proposed method is scientifically valid.

 Report a problem
Date modified: