EPA/600/R-12/664 | October 2012 | www.epa.gov/ord
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Compatibility of Material and
Electronic Equipment
with Methyl Bromide and
Chlorine Dioxide Fumigation
Assessment and Evaluation Report
•e® -.'
Office of Research and Development
National Homeland Security Research Center
-------
E PA 600-R-12-664
Compatibility of Material and Electronic Equipment
with Methyl Bromide and Chlorine Dioxide Fumigation
Assessment and Evaluation Report
National Homeland Security Research Center
Office of Research and Development
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
-------
Disclaimer
The United States Environmental Protection Agency, through its Office of Research and Development's
National Homeland Security Research Center, funded and managed this investigation through EP-C-09-
027 WA 2-58 with ARCADIS U.S., Inc. This report has been peer and administratively reviewed and has
been approved for publication as an Environmental Protection Agency document. It does not necessarily
reflect the views of the Environmental Protection Agency. No official endorsement should be inferred.
This report includes photographs of commercially available products. The photographs are included for
purposes of illustration only and are not intended to imply that EPA approves or endorses the product or
its manufacturer. Environmental Protection Agency does not endorse the purchase or sale of any
commercial products or services.
Questions concerning this document or its application should be addressed to:
Shannon Serre, Ph.D.
National Homeland Security Research Center
Office of Research and Development (E-343-06)
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
109 T.W.Alexander Dr.
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711
(919)541-3817
Serre.shannon@epa.gov
-------
Acknowledgments
Contributions of the following individuals and organizations to the development of this document are
gratefully acknowledged.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Mario lerardi
Leroy Mickelsen
Dave Mickunas
Shawn Ryan
Joseph Wood
U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Lance Brooks (formerly with DHS)
Chris Russell (formerly with DHS)
Alcatel-Lucent
Arcadis U.S., Inc.
Lockheed Martin
IV
-------
Table of Contents
Disclaimer iii
Acknowledgments iv
Table of Contents v
List of Figures vi
List of Tables vii
List of Appendices viii
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ix
List of Units xi
Executive Summary xii
1.0 Project Description and Objectives 1
1.1 Purpose 1
1.2 Process 1
1.2.1 Overview of the MeBr Fumigation Process 1
1.2.2 Overview of the CIO2 Fumigation Process 2
1.2.3 Material/Equipment Compatibility (MEC) Chambers 2
1.2.4 Laboratory Facility Description 5
1.2.4.1 MeBr Facility 5
1.2.4.2 CI02 Facility 5
1.3 Project Objectives 6
1.3.1 Category 2 Materials 6
1.3.2 Category 3 Materials 8
1.3.3 Category 4 Equipment 9
2.0 Experimental Approach 12
2.1 DTRL MeBr Analytical Capabilities 12
2.2 DTRL CIO2 Analytical Capabilities 12
2.3 General Approach 13
2.4 Sampling Strategy 13
2.4.1 MeBr Fumigation 13
2.4.2 CIO2 Fumigation 14
2.5 Sampling/Monitoring Points 15
2.6 Frequency of Sampling/Monitoring Events 15
2.7 Fumigation Event Sequence 16
3.0 Testing and Measurement Protocols 18
3.1 Methods 18
3.1.1 Electrochemical Sensor for MeBr Concentration Measurement 18
3.1.2 MeBr in Air Concentration Measurement 18
3.1.3 Photometric Monitors 19
3.1.4 Modified Standard Method 4500-CI02 E 19
3.1.5 Temperature and RH Measurement 20
3.1.6 Biological Indicators (Bis) 21
3.1.6.1 Bl Handling and Analysis Procedures 22
3.1.7 Visual Inspection 22
3.1.8 Functionality Testing 22
3.1.9 Detailed Functionality Analysis (Subset of Category 4) 23
-------
3.2 Cross-Contamination 23
3.3 Representative Sample 23
3.4 Sample Preservation Methods 24
3.5 Material/Equipment Identification 25
3.6 Sample Shipping Procedures 34
3.7 Chain of Custody (COC) 34
3.8 Test Conditions 34
4.0 Visual Inspection 37
4.1 Category 2 Materials 37
4.2 Category 3 Materials 39
4.3 Category 4 Equipment 41
5.0 Data Analysis/Functionality Tests 47
5.1 Category 2 Materials 47
5.2 Category 3 Materials 47
5.3 Category 4 Equipment 48
6.0 Fumigation Effectiveness and Fumigation Safety 58
6.1 Fumigation Effectiveness 58
6.2 Health and Safety Effects of Fumigation 60
7.0 Quality Assurance 64
7.1 Data Quality 64
7.1.1 Data Quality Indicator Goals for Critical Measurements 64
7.1.2 Data Quality Indicators Results 65
7.1.2.1 98-2 MeBr Fumigations 65
7.1.2.2 CIO2 Fumigations 66
7.2 Quantitative Acceptance Criteria 67
7.3 Audits 69
8.0 Conclusions 70
9.0 Recommendations 71
9.1 Corrective Actions 71
9.2 Listing of "At Risk" Material and Electronic Components 71
9.3 Further Research 71
List of Figures
Figure 1-1. Schematic Diagram of the MEC Chambers 3
Figure 1-2. Photograph of the MEC Test Chamber 4
Figure 1-3. Open Computer in MeBr MEC Chamber 4
Figure 1-4. Location of NOMAD®, Metal Coupons, IPC Board, and Bis within the (a) CPU and
(b) Panel 11
Figure 2-1. Experimental Setup for the 98-2 MeBr Fumigations 14
Figure 2-2. Experimental Setup forCIO2 Fumigations 15
Figure 2-3. Material and Equipment Exposure Time Sequence 17
Figure 3-1. Metal Coupons Used in the Compatibility Testing (photos prior to fumigation): (a)
3003 Aluminum; (b) 101 Copper; (c) Low Carbon Steel; (d) Painted Low Carbon
VI
-------
Steel; (e) 410 Stainless Steel; (f) 430 Stainless Steel; (g) 304 Stainless Steel; (h)
316 Stainless Steel; and (i) 309 Stainless Steel 27
Figure 3-2. (a) Stranded Wire, DSL Conditioner, Steel Outlet/Switch Box with Sealant (Caulk),
Gasket and (b) Drywall Screws and Nails used in the Compatibility Testing 28
Figure 3-3. (a, c) Copper Services, (b, d) Aluminum Services, and (e) Circuit Breakers used in
the Compatibility Testing 29
Figure 3-4. (a,b) Smoke Detector and (c,d) Lamp Switch used in the Compatibility Testing 30
Figure 3-5. (a) Laser and (b) InkJet Printed Color Papers, and (c) Photograph used in the
Compatibility Testing 31
Figure 3-6. (a,b) PDA and Cell Phone and (c) Fax Machine used in the Compatibility Testing 32
Figure 3-7. (a) Front of DVD (b) Back of DVD (c) Front of CD, and (d) Back of CD used in the
Compatibility Testing 33
Figure 3-8. Desktop Computer and Monitor, Keyboard, Power Cord, and Mouse used in the
Compatibility Testing 34
Figure 4-1. (a) Category 2 Metals 12 Months after 98-2 MeBr Fumigation; (b) Low Carbon
Steel before and (c) after Fumigation Showing Significant Corrosion 38
Figure 4-2. (a) Steel Outlet/Switch Box before and (b) after Fumigation; and (c) Smoke
Detector and (d) Exposed Stranded Wire after Fumigation 39
Figure 4-3. Internal View of Fax Machine 12 Months after 98-2 MeBr Exposure 40
Figure 4-4. (a) Cell Phone and (b) PDA Powered On 12 Months after Exposure 41
Figure 4-5. Comparison of the metal grids on the back of tested computers: (a) control PC at
test conditions, no exposure; (b) exposed to 3000 ppm CIO2; (c) exposed to
74,000 ppm 98-2 MeBr; and (d) was likely exposed to a much higher concentration
of 98-2 MeBr 43
Figure 4-6. Internal (a) and external (b) corrosion of PCI slots in CIO2 exposed computers.
Internal (c) and external (d) corrosion of PCI slots in 98-2 MeBr exposed
computers. Internal (e) and external (f) corrosion of PCI slots in 98-2 MeBr
computers likely exposed to much high concentrations, (g) Internal view of control
PCI slots 44
Figure 5-1. Average PC-Doctor® Score per Exposure Type, score listed is based on a
cumulative score of failures. A lower composite score means fewer component
failures 49
Figure 6-1. Location of two of the five Bis inside the computer side cover 58
Figure 6-2. Location of the remaining three Bis in both high and low airflow locations inside
the computer 59
Figure 6-3. MeBr Outgassing Chambers 60
Figure 6-4. Outgassing MeBr Concentration over Time from decon209 Computer Fumigated
with 98-2 MeBr 61
Figure 6-5. Possible Corrosion-Susceptible Materials Inside the Dell Optiplex 760 Mini Tower
Computers 62
List of Tables
Table ES-1. Category 2 Materials xii
Table ES-2. Category 4 Components xiii
VII
-------
Table 1-1. Category 2 Material Information and Functionality Testing Description 7
Table 1-2. Category 3 Materials 8
Table 1-3. Post-Fumigation Testing Procedures for Category 3 Materials 8
Table 1-4. Category 4 Tested Materials 9
Table 2-1. DTRL MeBr Detection Methods 12
Table 2-2. CIO2 Analyses 12
Table 2-3. Monitoring Methods 16
Table 3-1. ClorDiSys EMS/MiniDoxs Photometric Monitor Characteristics 19
Table 3-2. RH and Temperature Sensor Specifications 21
Table 3-3. Sample Coding 26
Table 3-4. Test Conditions for Category 2 and 3 Materials 35
Table 3-5. Test Conditions for Category 4 Equipment 36
Table 4-1. Documented Visual Changes in Category 4 Equipment 41
Table 4-2. Summary of Visual Changes Noted in Category 4 Equipment 42
Table 5-1. PC-Doctor® Tests That Failed Twice for all Computer Fumigation Scenarios
(Colored numbers are DVD-related components) 50
Table 5-2. PC-Doctor® Failed Test Correlation to PC Subsystem Components 55
Table 5-3. Average "Fail" Results Per Test over Year-Long Observation and Testing Period 56
Table 6-1. Bl Survival in the Chamber and Computers for each Fumigation Scenario 59
Table 7-1. DQIs for Critical Measurements 65
Table 7-2. DQIs for Critical Measurements for 98-2 MeBr Fumigations 66
Table 7-3. DQIs for Critical Measurements forCIO2 Fumigations 66
Table 7-4. System Control Accuracy Results for Critical Measurements 67
Table 7-5. Precision Criteria for 98-2 MeBr Fumigations 68
Table 7-6. Precision (RSD %) Criteria for CIO2 Fumigation 68
List of Appendices
Appendix A: Category 2 & 3 Materials
Appendix B: Computer Specifications for Category 4 Testing
Appendix C: Parts List of Copper and Aluminum Service Panels
Appendix D: Subsystems of Category 4 Computers
Appendix E: PC-Doctor® Service Center™ 7.5 Tests
VIM
-------
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Ag
Al
APPCD
AVI
AWWA
B.
Bl(s)
BIOS
BIT
BW(s)
CD
CD/DVD
CD-ROM
CI2
CIO2
CMOS
COC
CODEC
CPU
CRBTA
CT
Cu
CW(s)
DAS
DCMD
DHS
DIMM
DQI(s)
DQO(s)
DSL
DTRL
DVD
EMS
EPA
ESD
FIFRA
GFCI
H202
HCI
HPV
HSPD
IA&E
IPC
silver
aluminum
Air Pollution Prevention and Control Division
audio visual interleave
American Water Works Association
Bacillus
biological indicator(s)
basic input/output system
burn-in test
biological weapon(s)
compact disk
compact disk/digital video disk
Compact Disk - Read Only Memory
chlorine
chlorine dioxide
complementary metal-oxide semiconductor
Chain of Custody
compression decompression module
central processing unit
Chemical, Biological, and Radiological Technology Alliance
The product of multiplying the factors Concentration and Time.
Has the units of mass*time/volume
copper
chemical weapon(s)
data acquisition system
Decontamination and Consequence Management Division
Department of Homeland Security
Dual In-Line Memory Module
Data Quality Indicator(s)
Data Quality Objective(s)
digital subscriber line
Decontamination Technologies Research Laboratory
digital video disk
ClorDiSys Solutions, Inc. Environmental Monitoring System
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
electrostatic discharge
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
Ground Fault Circuit Interrupter
hydrogen peroxide
hydrochloric acid
Hydrogen peroxide vapor
Homeland Security Presidential Directive
Independent Assessment and Evaluation
industrial printed circuit (boards)
IX
-------
Kl
KIPB
LCD
MeBr
MEC
MFGB
MSDS
N
N/A
NA
NB
NGA
NHSRC
NIST
NOMAD8
OSHA
PC
PCI
PDA
PDAQ
PEL
PVC
QA
QAPP
RAM
RH
RSD
S&T
SCA
SD
Sn
SPI
SVGA
T/RH
TAGA
TIC(s)
TLV
ISA
UV-VIS
potassium iodide
phosphate buffered potassium iodide solution
liquid crystal display
methyl bromide
material/equipment compatibility
Midget Fritted Glass Bubbler
Material Safety Data Sheet
Normal(ity)
not available
not applicable
nutrient broth
National Geospatial-lntelligence Agency
National Homeland Security Research Center
National Institute for Standards and Technology
Omega Engineering, Inc. RH and T data loggers
Occupational Safety and Health Administration
personal computer
peripheral component interconnect
Personal Digital Assistant
personal data acquisition (system)
permissible exposure limit
polyvinyl chloride
Quality Assurance
Quality Assurance Project Plan
random-access memory
relative humidity
Relative Standard Deviation
Department of Homeland Security, Directorate for Science &
Technology
system control accuracy
Standard Deviation
tin
Serial Peripheral Interface
Super Video Graphics Array
temperature/relative humidity (sensor)
trace atmospheric gas analyzer
toxic industrial chemical(s)
Threshold Limit Value
tryptic soy agar
ultraviolet-visible
-------
List of Units
°F degree Fahrenheit
°C degree Celsius
ft3 cubic feet
hr hour
L/min liters per minute
mg/L milligrams per liter
ml milliliter
oz/ft3 ounce per cubic foot
ppb parts per billion
ppm parts per million
ppmv parts per million by volume
scfm standard cubic feet per minute
XI
-------
Executive Summary
In response to Homeland Security Presidential Directive 10 (HSPD-10), the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), through its National Homeland
Security Research Center (NHSRC), coordinated to develop a comprehensive program to provide
scientific expertise and evaluation of actual and future decontamination technologies that could potentially
be used to recover and restore buildings and sensitive equipment contaminated by biological warfare
agents.
Building decontamination following a possible terrorist attack using chemical weapons (CWs), biological
weapons (BWs), or toxic industrial chemicals (TICs) can be performed using different decontamination
techniques, such as fumigation of the building with chlorine dioxide (CIO2), vaporous hydrogen peroxide
(H2O2), or methyl bromide (MeBr). Unlike H2O2and CIO2, MeBr is not an oxidizing agent and is much
less reactive. However, information on the compatibility of materials and equipment with typical MeBr
fumigation conditions effective against anthrax spores has not been determined in a reproducible way. As
part of an ongoing evaluation of the MeBr decontamination method, this study was initiated by NHSRC
and DHS and conducted at EPA's Decontamination Technology Research Laboratory (DTRL) in
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. The goal was to provide information on the effects of MeBr on
sensitive electronic components and materials, which substituted for the types of components also found
in high-end (high cost) military and commercial equipment such as medical devices and airport scanners.
CIO2 fumigation has been used successfully for the remediation of several federal buildings contaminated
by 8. anthracis spores contained in letters (Canter, 2003). To tie in the results of this study with previous
research (US EPA, 2010) on this alternative fumigation technique, CIO2 fumigation was used on some
materials (e.g., desktop computers and monitors) in this study.
Four categories of materials were defined for use in this program. Not included in this study were
Category 1 materials, which are structural materials with a large surface area inside a typical building.
While the field experience and subsequent NHSRC laboratory testing have clearly demonstrated that
these materials in the building can have a significant effect on the ability to achieve and maintain the
required concentration of fumigant, fumigation has not been shown to affect their functionality (LGS,
2010). The three categories examined in this study were:
• Category 2 materials included low surface area structural materials that were expected to have
minimal impact on the maintenance of fumigation conditions during the decontamination event;
however, their functionality and use may be affected by the fumigation. The materials that were
tested are listed in Table ES-1
Table ES-1. Category 2 Materials
Type 3003 Aluminum
Alloy 101 Copper
Low Carbon Steel
Type 304 Stainless Steel
Type 309 Stainless Steel
Type 316 Stainless Steel
Type 410 Stainless Steel
Type 430 Stainless Steel
Yellow VAC Service Cord
Steel Outlet/Switch Box
Silicone Caulk
Gasket
Incandescent Light
DSL Conditioner
Drywall Screw
Drywall Nail
Copper Services
Aluminum Services
Circuit Breaker
Smoke Detector
Laser Printed Paper
Ink Jet Colored Paper
Color Photograph
XII
-------
• Category 3 materials included small, personal electronic equipment such as a personal digital
assistant (PDA), cell phone, fax machine, data DVD, and data CD.
• Category 4 materials included desktop computers and monitors. A list of the components is
shown in Table ES-2.
Table ES-2. Category 4 Components
Computer Component
Dell™ OptiPlex™ 760
Dell™ E1910H flat panel monitor
USB keyboard and mouse
Super Video Graphics Array (SVGA)
Metal coupons for fumigations
Cables
Industrial printed circuit board (IPC)
Description
Desktop computer
Desktop monitor
Desktop keyboard and mouse
Computer display standard.
Copper (Cu)
Aluminum (Al)
Silver (Ag)
Tin (Sn)
Computer power cord
Monitor power cord
Analog video cable
Circuit board
By using visual inspection and tests of equipment function, this study documented the effects of MeBr
fumigation on all three categories of materials and equipment and of CIO2 fumigation on Category 4
materials, commonly found inside large buildings and offices. The target MeBr fumigation conditions were
300 mg/L MeBr at 75 percent relative humidity (RH) and 37 °C (99 °F) for nine hours. The determination
of these conditions is based upon ongoing NHSRC testing of the efficacy of MeBr for inactivation of 8.
anthracis spores on building materials (USEPA, 2010; USEPA, 2011).
Additionally, exposure to 75 percent RH without MeBr was performed to determine the effect of the initial
higher RH alone.
To allow for comparison of the effects of using MeBr and CIO2 fumigants on Category 4 materials (high-
end equipment substitutes), the following tests were conducted:
• CIO2 fumigation at 3000 ppmv CIO2 at 75% RH and 75 °F (24 °C) with a total concentration-time
(CT) of 9000 ppmv-hr (the basis for remediating sites contaminated with 8. anthracis spores).
• Different power states (on and off) for the Category 4 equipment for MeBr and CIO2 fumigated
computers, as well as for controls.
MeBr is available as a compressed gas. MeBr is toxic to humans but colorless and odorless, so it is
frequently mixed with 2 percent chloropicrin (tear gas) to warn users of exposure (hereafter referred to as
XIII
-------
"98-2 MeBr"). In a wide area fumigation the decision of whether to add chloropicrin would be made by the
site safety person. Without extensive monitoring, chloropicrin provides a warning of the presence of
MeBr. Chloropicrin, unlike MeBr itself, could be a mild oxidant.
The results of this study indicate that there were no physical or functional effects on any of the Category 2
or 3 materials tested following 98-2 MeBr exposure, with two exceptions. Rusted edges were observed
on the steel outlet/switch box. The surface of the low carbon steel coupons showed severe corrosion
following exposure.
The only adverse effect of the 98-2 MeBr fumigations on the Category 4 computers and equipment was
slight corrosion on metal edges on the interior and exterior of the computer chassis. One run - aborted
due to a power failure and likely reaching a much higher 98-2 MeBr concentration - showed heavy
interior and exterior corrosion, internal powder, and yellow liquid residue on the motherboard and chassis.
Detailed analysis by Alcatel-Lucent (LGS, 2010) indicated that it was the chlorine (chloropicrin)
component of the 98-2 MeBr that actually caused the corrosion.
The light corrosion and powder seen in the CIO2-fumigated computers agrees with previous research
conducted on this fumigant (US EPA, 2010).
The power state of the computers did not make any difference with respect to the effects of fumigation.
Any changes observed were present immediately after fumigation and did not appear to progress over
the 12 month period of equipment observation and testing, with the exception of one floppy drive failure at
the two month mark.
The biological indicator (Bl) data support the theory that the fumigant concentration was much higher
during the third 98-2 MeBr fumigation. The Bis inside the computers were at the lowest location in the
Material Equipment Compatibility (MEC) chamber and may have been subject to higher concentrations
due to gravimetric settling of the 98-2 MeBr gas, resulting in total kill. Biological Indicators have been
shown not to correlate directly with achieving target fumigation conditions for inactivating B. anthracis
spores on common building surfaces (Rastogi, 2010).
No corrosion was observed on either the central processing unit (CPU) or the graphics processing unit
(GPU) heat sinks of the 98-2 MeBr or CIO2 fumigated computers (thought to be the primary, if not sole,
source of corrosion in the previous CIO2 study (US EPA, 2010)). Alactel-Lucent (LGS, 2010) determined
that, in this new generation of computers, the heat sinks were made from a single aluminum alloy. They
found no evidence of chlorine or bromine on the surface of the fins on either heat sink, which means that
native aluminum oxide on the CPU surface is sufficiently robust to resist attack by both MeBr and
chloropicrin. As no visible corrosion could be seen on the computers exposed to CIO2, these surfaces
now appear to be sufficiently robust to also resist attack by CIO2 under standard conditions.
All computers exposed to 98-2 MeBr exhibited problems with their power supply, some catastrophically.
For instance, one computer began failing a few days after fumigation by tripping ground fault circuits and
exhibited a burning odor. These same effects were eventually detected in all 98-2 MeBr fumigated
computers, and all power supplies were replaced. Alcatel-Lucent (LGS, 2010) traced these failures to
exposure to the chloropicrin component of the fumigant.
Effects of fumigation for each category of material/equipment are summarized below.
XIV
-------
Category 2:
No visual or functional changes were noted for Category 2 materials throughout the 12 month observation
period following the 98-2 MeBr fumigation, with two exceptions.
The surface of the low carbon steel coupons showed a drastic transformation from smooth and metallic to
severe corrosion following 98-2 MeBr exposure. The effects on low carbon steel were comparable to
those observed with CIO2 fumigations at high RH (US EPA, 2010). Because of this corrosion, a
resistance reading could not be obtained from these corroded coupons.
Rusted edges were observed on the steel outlet/switch box.
Each of the remaining sets of metal remained tarnish free, with no signs of rust or corrosion.
Color pigments do not appear to be adversely affected by the 98-2 MeBr exposure, in marked contrast to
the color pigment fading observed with CIO2 fumigations.
Each exposed smoke detector remained fully operational throughout the year after exposure; the battery
terminals, resistors, and other components showed no signs of physical damage.
Exposed stranded wires remained tarnish-free 12 months after exposure.
None of the breakers or services from any test fell outside of the acceptable testing range.
Category 3:
No visual or functional changes were noted for Category 3 materials throughout the 12 month observation
period following the 98-2 MeBr fumigation.
The CDs and DVDs were all unaffected by 98-2 MeBr exposure.
There were no signs of damage to any of the mechanical parts of the fax machine, and the same level of
operation was maintained throughout the year.
No visual or functional changes were noted for the cell phones. Screen quality and operational
parameters were unaffected.
There were no visual or functional changes noted for the Personal Digital Assistants (PDAs).
Category 4:
The 98-2 MeBr fumigation resulted in slight corrosion on metal edges on the interior and exterior of the
computer chassis. In a previous study with CIO2, the aluminum heat sink oxidized and resulted in a light
powder which coated the motherboard and chassis (USEPA, 2010). In this work, there was no visible
powder on the motherboard from corrosion of the aluminum heat sink as had been seen in earlier work
with CIO2.
xv
-------
The third fumigation, suspected to be at a much higher concentration of MeBr, showed heavy interior and
exterior corrosion, internal powder, and yellow liquid residue on the motherboard and chassis.
Parts affected by the 98-2 MeBr and CIO2 fumigations included external and internal stamped metal grids,
external metal slot covers, and any internal cut metal edges.
The CPUs of these computers were not impacted by either fumigant. The new generation of computer
Heat sinks are being made from a single aluminum alloy which is sufficiently robust to resist attack by
MeBr, chloropicrin, and CIO2.
The power state of the computer did not seem to have an effect on the material compatibility.
The vast majority of failed components (83.7%) were related to the CD/DVD drive. A significant number
of the remaining failures were related to the floppy drive, and many were an intermittent network loopback
failure which seems to be an issue with all computers, even controls. Analysis shows that the CD/DVD
subsystem is not reliable, with one of three failing in two of the control condition computer sets. Exposure
to fumigants clearly reduced the reliability of the CD/DVD systems.
Materials with the potential for damage include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Power supplies
• Metal bearings
• CD/DVD drives
XVI
-------
1.0 Project Description and Objectives
Building decontamination following a possible terrorist attack using chemical weapons (CWs), biological
weapons (BWs), or toxic industrial chemicals (TICs), can be performed using different decontamination
techniques, e.g., fumigation of the building with chlorine dioxide (CIO2), hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) vapor,
or methyl bromide (MeBr).
Unlike H2O2 and CIO2, MeBr is not an oxidizing agent and is much less reactive. However, information on
the compatibility of materials and equipment with typical MeBr fumigation conditions effective against
anthrax spores has not been determined in a precise way. Future guidance on selection and operation of
decontamination technologies is dependent upon such information. This work determined the impact of
fumigation with MeBr (with 2% chloropicrin) under sporicidal conditions on materials and electronic
equipment.
1.1 Purpose
The main purpose of this work was to provide information to decision makers about the potential impact, if
any, of the MeBr decontamination process on materials and electronic equipment. This effort examined
the impact on the physical appearance, properties, and functionality of certain types of materials and
equipment. While the impact on specific items was addressed, the purpose was to also consider some
items - particularly the computer systems and electronic components - as substitutes for high-end
equipment such as medical devices and airport scanners.
To provide comparative information and to tie this research into a previous study using CIO2 as the
potential decontamination technique (US EPA, 2010), desktop computers and monitors (Category 4
materials) were also fumigated with CIO2. This fumigation allowed for 1) comparison of the effects of each
technique on these high-end equipment substitutes, and 2) provide additional CIO2 data for "identical"
computers manufactured one year later, with subsequent industry substitutions of less-costly
components. In the original research with CIO2, inexpensive plastic compact disc (CD) and digital video
disk (DVD) components were found to experience the most frequent and serious failures.
1.2 Process
To investigate the impact of 98-2 MeBr and CIO2 gases on materials and equipment under specific
fumigation conditions, material was divided into four categories. Category 1 materials were not addressed
in this study. Materials in Categories 2 and 3 (low surface area structural materials and small personal
electronic equipment, respectively) were evaluated on-site before and for one year after the date of
exposure. Category 4 materials (desktop computers and monitors) were evaluated on-site before and
immediately after fumigation. The sample set was then divided with one of the samples being sent to
Alcatel-Lucent for in-depth analysis. The other samples remained on-site for evaluation over the course of
a year.
1.2.1 Overview of the MeBr Fumigation Process
MeBr is a broad spectrum pesticide registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA) as a fumigant for termites, insects, and rodents in buildings and as a fumigant for agricultural
applications. While not registered as a sporicide, laboratory (Kolb, 1950; USEPA, 2010; USEPA, 2011)
-------
and field research (Scheffrahn, 2003) has shown MeBrto be effective against Bacillus spores, including
8. anthracis. As an alkylating agent, MeBr could be effective against chemical warfare agents as well,
though more research needs to be done in this area to determine dosing.
MeBr is available as a compressed gas. MeBr is toxic to humans, but is colorless and odorless, so it is
frequently mixed with 2 percent chloropicrin (tear gas) to warn users of exposure. For the remainder of
this report, this MeBr mixture - which was used for the MeBr fumigations - will be referred to as "98-2
MeBr". Chloropicrin, unlike MeBr itself, could be a mild oxidant.
The target fumigation conditions for this work were 300 mg/L MeBr at 75 percent relative humidity (RH)
and 37 °C (99 °F) for 9 hours. The determination of these conditions is based upon on-going National
Homeland Security Research Center (NHSRC) testing of the efficacy of MeBr for inactivation of 8.
anthracis spores on building materials (Ryan, 2010).
1.2.2 Overview of the CIO2 Fumigation Process
Fumigation with CIO2 was added to the test matrix to relate results of the 98-2 MeBr compatibility tests to
previous research (US EPA, 2010). Fumigation with CIO2 has been shown in other efforts to be effective
for the decontamination of biological threats on building material surfaces (Rastogi, 2007), (Ryan, 2007).
In past fumigation events for 8. anthracis decontamination, the conditions set by FIFRA crisis exemptions
required that a minimum concentration of 750 ppmv be maintained in the fumigation space for 12 hours
until a minimum multiplication product of concentration and time (CT) of 9,000 ppmv-hours was achieved.
Other important process parameters included a minimum temperature of 24 C (75 °F) and a minimum
RH of 75 percent.
While the minimum effective CT has been maintained in subsequent events, substantial improvement in
the CIO2 fumigation process technology allowed for higher concentrations to be achieved in large
buildings. The baseline fumigation with CIO2 for Bacillus spores for the previous research was 3,000
ppmv within the volume for three hours to achieve the CT of 9,000 ppmv-hr (Ryan, 2010). During this
present study, this condition was repeated for Category 4 materials.
CIO2 is generated commercially by two methods: wet and dry. The wet method, such as the one used by
Sabre Technical Services, LLC. (Slingerlands, N.Y), generates the gas by stripping CIO2from an aqueous
solution using emitters. The dry method, such as that used by ClorDiSys Solutions, Inc. (Lebanon, N.J.),
passes a dilute chlorine gas (i.e., 2% in nitrogen) over solid hydrated sodium chlorite to generate CIO2
gas. No differences in the effectiveness of either of the two generation techniques to inactivate 8.
anthracis spores on building materials have been observed in laboratory-scale investigations (Rastogi,
2007). Note that the wet technology is potentially "self-humidifying", while the dry technique requires a
secondary system to maintain RH. The ClorDiSys method was used in this study to be consistent with
the previous research with CIO2,
1.2.3 Material/Equipment Compatibility (MEC) Chambers
This task required that materials (computers and other potentially sensitive equipment) be exposed to 98-2
MeBr and CIO2 - under conditions shown to be effective for decontamination of biological and chemical
agents on building materials and/or in facilities - to assess the impact (hence, compatibility) of the
-------
fumigation process with the material/equipment. Two identical isolation chambers (material/equipment
compatibility (MEC) chambers) were used for these compatibility tests.
The MeBrMEC chamber served as the isolation chamber for the MeBr-exposed material/equipment. The
CIO2 MEC chamber served as the isolation chamber for the CIO2-exposed material/equipment. Figure 1-1
shows the dimensions of the MEC chambers; a photograph of the MEC test chamber is shown in Figure 1-
2. The three computer installation setup used for CIO2 fumigations can be seen in Figure 1-1. For the 98-2
MeBr fumigations, only two computers were inside the chamber at a time, one open (OFF power; see
Figure 1-3) and one closed (ON power).
Power is supplied within the chambers by the inclusion of two seven-outlet surge protectors (BELKIN seven-
outlet home/office surge protector with six-foot cord, Part# BE107200-06; Belkin International, Inc.;
Compton, CA) inside each chamber (not shown in Figure 1-1). The power cord from each surge protector
penetrated the polyvinyl chloride (PVC) chamber material on the bottom back wall of the chamber and was
sealed to the chamber to prevent the fumigant from leaking out.
24"x40"C!ear
acrvlic door \vhh
gadceT seal
Figure 1-1. Schematic Diagram of the MEC Chambers
-------
i
Figure 1-2. Photograph of the MEC Test Chamber
Figure 1-3. Open Computer in MeBr MEC Chamber
-------
1.2.4 Laboratory Facility Description
The material compatibility testing was performed in the EPA's NHSRC Decontamination Technologies
Research Laboratory (DTRL) located in Research Triangle Park, NC. This facility is equipped with
multiple fumigation generation systems; the MeBr and CIO2 facilities are described below.
Measurement capabilities within DTRL include Dra'ger Polytron 7000 remote electrochemical sensors
(CIO2/chlorine (CI2)), a HACH AutoCAT 9000 Amperometric Titrator (to facilitate wet chemical analysis for
CIO2 concentration measurements via a modification of American Waterworks Association (AWWA) SM-
4500-CIO2-E), an InterScan Corporation LD223 dual range CIO2 monitor (0-200 ppb; 0-20 ppm), and an
Ion Chromatograph for use with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) ID-202
Method.
The chambers are made of opaque polyvinyl chloride (PVC) with a clear acrylic door, which is fastened
with a bolted flange. The door is covered with an opaque material during tests to prevent light-catalyzed
reactions from taking place during exposure. The three removable shelves within the chamber are made
of perforated PVC. Grounded woven wire mesh (Type 304 Stainless steel, 0.011" gauge wire) was placed
on each shelf to dissipate any potential static electricity. The ground wire penetrated the chamber wall
and was attached to the electrical service ground. Three fans were placed in each chamber to facilitate
mixing.
1.2.4.1 MeBr Facility
The 98-2 MeBr was provided by a compressed gas cylinder from Great Lakes Chemical Corp. The
concentration was monitored in real time with a Key Equipment Fumiscope 5.0 thermal conductivity
analyzer, calibrated to MeBr. When the MeBr concentration fell below the set-point, a valve to the
compressed gas cylinder was opened to inject more 98-2 MeBr. Injection was automated through a data
acquisition system (DAS). The DAS was also used to control the temperature (37 °C; 99 °F) and RH
(75%) during exposure.
A PureAire Monitoring Systems, Inc. Methyl Bromide Monitor was used during the aeration phase. Once
the bulk concentration fell below 10 ppm, the PureAire monitor began sampling.
1.2.4.2 CIO2 Facility
This facility is equipped with a ClorDiSys Solutions, Inc., MiniDox CIO2 gas generation system (and
ancillary sampling/monitoring equipment, test chambers, and support equipment). This system
automatically maintains a constant target CIO2 concentration in an isolation chamber (e.g., MEC
Chamber) and injects CIO2 (20 L/min of ideally 40,000 ppmv CIO2 in nitrogen) when the concentration
inside the chamber falls below a pre-set condition. The MEC chamber is maintained at a set CIO2
concentration, temperature, and RH. The CIO2 concentration inside the chamber is measured by a
ClorDiSys Solutions, Inc., photometric monitor located in the MiniDox unit, providing feedback to the
generation system. A similar ClorDiSys Solutions, Inc. Environmental Monitoring System (EMS)
photometric detector is used to confirm CIO2 concentrations.
-------
1.3 Project Objectives
The primary objective of this study was to assess the impact of fumigation on materials, electrical circuits,
and electronic equipment. Specifically, the fumigation conditions of interest use 98-2 MeBr or CIO2 at
conditions thought to be effective for decontamination of materials and/or facilities contaminated with
specific biological or chemical threats. Visual appearance of all items was documented before and after
fumigation exposure. Most materials were not tested for complete functionality due to the multiplicity of
potential uses. Specifically, this study focused on:
• 98-2 MeBr and CIO2 fumigation technologies,
• Fumigation conditions, and
• State of operation of the equipment (OFF, ON and idle, and ON and active).
Three categories of material and equipment were tested under the different fumigation conditions
discussed in detail in Section 3.8; the categories are separated based upon the conditions of testing and
analysis to be performed to assess the impacts. Category 1 materials are structural materials with a large
surface area inside a typical building. While the field experience and subsequent NHSRC laboratory
testing have clearly demonstrated that these materials in a building can have a significant effect on the
ability to achieve and maintain the required concentration, fumigation has not been shown to affect their
functionality (Bartram, 2008). This type of material was not included in this study. The three categories of
materials that were investigated are described below.
1.3.1 Category 2 Materials
Category 2 materials include low surface area structural materials expected to have minimal impact on
the maintenance of fumigation conditions within the volume. However, the functionality and use of
Category 2 materials may be impacted by the fumigation event. The objective for this category of
materials was to assess the visual and/or functional (as appropriate) impact of the fumigation process on
the materials. The impact was evaluated in two ways:
1. Through visual inspections under each fumigant condition (concentration, temperature, RH, and
time). These inspections were directed toward the locations thought to be most susceptible to
corrosion and possible material defects due to the fumigation process.
2. Functionality was assessed, as appropriate, for the material. Resistance was measured for metal
coupons and stranded wires; circuit breakers and copper and aluminum services were
overloaded to determine the time prior to tripping the breaker; sealants were checked for leaks;
gasket elasticity was tested with a simple stress test; lamps were tested to see if the bulb would
light; the digital subscriber line (DSL) conditioner was tested for transmission on a telephone or
fax; and the smoke detector batteries and lights were checked and put through a smoke test.
Printed documents and pictures were inspected for possible alteration of their content.
The visual inspections were documented in writing and by digital photography for each material prior to
and after exposure in each fumigation event. Visual inspections were not conducted on a monthy basis
as the functional tests were. Functional testing of materials was assessed before and after 98-2 MeBr
treatment, then periodically after exposure, and again at year's end. Table 1-1 lists specifics of these
-------
materials and details the post-test procedures, where applicable. Appendix A includes the part number
and vendor information for each of the materials used. Items not tested for functionality after exposure
are shown as "not tested" in the Functionality Testing Description column.
Table 1-1. Category 2 Material Information and Functionality Testing Description
Material Name
Type 3003 Aluminum
Alloy 101 Copper
Low Carbon Steel
Type 304 Stainless Steel
Type 309 Stainless Steel
Type 316 Stainless Steel
Type 410 Stainless Steel
Type 430 Stainless Steel
Yellow SJTO 300 VAC
Service Cord1
Steel Outlet/Switch Box
Silicone Caulk
Gasket
Incandescent Light
DSL Conditioner
Drywall Screw
Drywall Nail
Copper Services
Aluminum Services
Circuit Breaker
Smoke Detector
Laser Printed Paper2
InkJet Colored Paper2
Color Photograph
Sample Dimension /
Quantity
2" x 2" x 0.0625" / 3 pieces
2" x 2" x 0.64" / 3 pieces
1. 5" x 2" x 0.0625" / 3 pieces
2" x 2" x 0.0625" / 3 pieces
1. 5" x 2" / 3 pieces
2" x 2" x 0.0625" / 3 pieces
2" x 2" x 0.0625" / 3 pieces
1" x 2" x 0.012" / 3 pieces
12" long, 16 gauge, 3
conductor/ 3 pieces
2" x 3" x 1 .5" / 1 piece
Approximately 1 " long bead
on the inside of a
rectangular steel
outlet/switch box
0. 1 25" thick flange foam
rubber / 3 pieces
60 Watt bulb/ 3 pieces
NA/1 piece
1 " fine thread, coated / 3
pieces
1 .375" coated / 3 pieces
NA / 3 pieces
NA / 3 pieces
NA/ 10 pieces
NA / 1 piece
8. 5" x 11" (15 pages)
8. 5" x 11" (15 pages)
4" x 6" / 3 pieces
Description
Metal Coupon
Stranded Wire
Steel box
Sealant
Gasket
Switch
-
-
_
Copper and
Aluminum Services
-
9 Volt Smoke
Detector
-
_
-
Functionality Testing Description
Triplicate coupons were stacked and the resistance
was measured between the top and bottom coupon
using an ohmmeter.
The resistance of each wire was measured and
recorded.
Functionality was not tested.
Water was run into the corner of the outlet box with
the sealant and the box was observed for leaks.
Gasket was folded in half and examined for cracks.
A halogen light bulb was placed into the socket and
the lamp was turned on. If the lamp failed to light the
bulb, a new bulb was tested to verify that the switch
was inoperable.
Simple connectivity was tested using a laboratory
telephone through the conditioner.
Not tested.
Not tested.
Services were tested at 15 amps (150% capacity)
and timed to failure.
Breakers were tested at 20 amps (200% capacity)
and timed to failure.
Battery was tested by pressing the button on the
detector. In the hood, the alarm was tested by
spraying the "Smoke Check-Smoke Alarm Tester"
directly at the alarm. The light was checked to see if
it was functioning.
Visually assessed for legibility.
Visually assessed for legibility.
Visually assessed for content.
Notes:"-" indicates "Material Name" and "General Description" are the same.
1 The outside of the cord served as Housing Wire Insulation, and the three-stranded
2 Test page can be found in Appendix E of the EPA Quality Assurance Project Plan
NA = not applicable.
interior wires served as the Stranded Wires.
(QAPP) entitled, "Compatibility of Material and
-------
Electronic Equipment with Chlorine Dioxide Fumigation," dated July 2007.
1.3.2 Category 3 Materials
Category 3 Materials include small personal electronic equipment. The objectives for this category were
to determine aesthetic (visual) and functionality impacts on the equipment as a function of time post-
fumigation. The assessment of the impact was visual inspection for aesthetic effects and evaluation of
functionality post-fumigation. Inspection occurred immediately after fumigation and then again at the one-
year period, with the equipment stored at room temperature ambient conditions throughout that time
period. Visual inspections of the equipment were documented in writing and by digital photographs. Any
indications of odor emissions were also documented. The functionality of each piece of equipment was
assessed comparatively with similar equipment that was not subjected to the fumigant exposure.
Category 3 materials are listed in Table 1-2, with Table 1-3 detailing the post-test procedures. Appendix A
includes the part number and vendor information for each of the materials used.
Table 1-2. Category 3 Materials
Materials
Personal Digital
Assistant (PDA)
Cell Phone
Fax/Phone/ Copier
Machine
Data DVD
Data CD
Description
Handheld
Pay-as-you-go Super thin flip
superphonic ringtones full color
screen
Plain-paper fax and copier with
10-page auto document feeder
and up to 50-sheet paper
capacity. 512KB memory stores
up to 25 pages for out-of-paper
fax reception
Standard 21331 DVD Video
Standard Audio CD
Manufacturer
Palm
Virgin
(Kyocera)
Brother
Warner
Brothers
CURB
Records
Model Number
Z22
Marbl
Fax 575
DVDL-582270B1
DIDP-101042
Sample Size
1 piece
1 piece
1 piece
1 piece
1 piece
Table 1-3. Post-Fumigation Testing Procedures for Category 3 Materials
Material
PDAs
Cell Phones
Fax Machines
DVD
CD
Description of Testing Procedure
The import and export capabilities were tested, and the screen condition was
noted. Keypad and screen conditions were noted.
Incoming and outgoing call capabilities were tested by ring and audio functions.
Keypad and screen conditions were noted.
Incoming and outgoing fax capabilities were tested, as were incoming and
outgoing call functions.
The audio and visual functions were tested.
The audio functions were tested by playing the first 10 seconds of each song.
-------
1.3.3 Category 4 Equipment
Category 4 equipment includes desktop computers and monitors. The objective of testing for this
category of equipment (and materials) was to assess the impact of the fumigation conditions using a two-
tiered approach: (1) visual inspection and functionality testing using a personal computer (PC) software
diagnostic tool, and (2) detailed analysis for a sub-set of the tested equipment in conjunction with Alcatel-
Lucent. This detailed analysis was performed through LGS Innovations, Inc., and was funded by EPA and
the Department of Homeland Security's Directorate of Science & Technology (S&T) .
One computer system of each test set (chosen by Alcatel-Lucent as potentially the worst performing) was
sent to LGS for the independent assessment and evaluation (IA&E). The other systems remained at the
EPA facility and were put through a burn-in test (BIT) sequence five days a week, for eight hours a day, to
simulate normal working conditions. All computer systems were evaluated using PC-Doctor® Service
Center™ 7.5 (PC-Doctor, Inc.; Reno, NV) as the PC software diagnostic tool. The BIT sequence and PC-
Doctor® Service Center™ 7.5 protocols were developed by Alcatel-Lucent specifically for this testing.
While the impact on computer systems was being assessed directly in this effort, the purpose of the
testing was to consider the systems as surrogates for many of the components common to high-end
equipment (e.g., medical devices, airport scanners). The objective was to identify components and
specific parts of components that may be susceptible to corrosion because of the fumigation process.
This information can then be used to make informed decisions about the compatibility of other equipment
that may have similar components or materials and can reduce further testing or uncertainty in the field
application. The Category 4 equipment and materials listed in Table 1-4 were selected by Alcatel-Lucent
as appropriate test vehicle sets to meet the objectives of this study.
Table 1-4. Category 4 Tested Materials
Computer Component
Dell™ OptiPlex™ 760
Dell™ E1910H flat panel monitor
USB keyboard and mouse
Super Video Graphics Array (SVGA)
Metal coupons for fumigations
Cables
Industrial printed circuit board (IPC)
Description
Desktop computer
Desktop monitor
Desktop keyboard and mouse
Computer display standard.
Copper (Cu)
Aluminum (Al)
Silver (Ag)
Tin (Sn)
Computer power cord
Monitor power cord
Analog video cable
Circuit board
Additional Details
See Appendix B for specifications.
See Appendix B for specifications.
See Appendix B for specifications.
See Appendix B for specifications.
These metals are used extensively in
fabricating desktop computers. Provided
by Alcatel-Lucent
Standard cables
Provided by Alcatel-Lucent
Further objectives in this study for Category 4 equipment and materials were to (1) provide an indication if
localized conditions in an operating computer may be different from the bulk of the chamber and (2)
-------
obtain an indication of the potential impact the local conditions may have on the effectiveness of the 98-2
MeBr and CIO2 fumigation processes to inactivate B. anthracis spores potentially located within the
computer. For the first part of this objective, process parameter measurements in the bulk chamber and
within the computers were compared. For the second part, biological indicators (Bis) were used to
provide an indication of the effectiveness of the fumigation in the bulk chamber and within each computer.
Bis have been shown not to correlate directly with achieving target fumigation conditions for B. anthracis
spores or inactivating B. anthracis spores on common building surfaces (LGS, 2009). While Bis do not
necessary indicate achievement, they will sufficiently indicate a failure to achieve successful conditions.
The locations of the NOMAD®RH monitor, metal coupons (on the FR4 Board provided by Alcatel-Lucent),
IPC board, and Bis within each computer are shown in Figure 1-4(a) and (b). The NOMAD® (OM-
NOMAD-RH, Omega Engineering, Inc., Stamford, NC) is an RH and temperature monitor with a built-in
data logger. The placement of these items within the computers was decided based upon the airflow
within the chamber and the desire not to affect the operation of the computer. The items were affixed to
the inside of the side panel of the computer case using self-adhesive hook-and-loop dots (P/Ns 9736K44
and 9736K45, McMaster-Carr, Atlanta, GA).
10
-------
Figure 1-4. Location of NOMAD, Metal Coupons, IPC Board, and Bis within the (a) CPU and (b)
Panel
11
-------
2.0 Experimental Approach
2.1 DTRL MeBr Analytical Capabilities
Table 2-1 lists the analytical techniques used to quantify MeBr concentrations. These methods are
discussed in Section 3.1.
Table 2-1. DTRL MeBr Detection Methods
Manufacturer/
Organization
Key
Instruments
PureAire
MeBr in air
Method
Thermal conductivity
detector
Electrochemical
detection
MeBr in air
Equipment
Fumiscope 5.0
Air Check Advantage Methyl Bromide
detector
Midget Fritted Glass Bubbler (MFGB)
containing alcoholic potassium
hydroxide
2.2 DTRL CIO2 Analytical Capabilities
The CIO2 measurement capabilities used in this study include the four analytical techniques that were
assessed separately or on a one-to-one basis depending on the type of measurement needed
(continuous versus extractive). The techniques are listed in Table 2-2.
Table 2-2. CIO2 Analyses
Manufacturer/
Organization
ClorDiSys
Solutions, Inc.
ClorDiSys
Solutions, Inc.
AWWA
Dra'ger
Method
UV-VIS adsorption
UV-VIS adsorption
Standard Method
4500-CI02 B Modified
Electrochemical
Detection
Equipment
MiniDox photometric monitor
EMS photometric monitor
Collection in midget impingers filled with
buffered potassium iodide (Kl) solution
Polytron 7000 transmitter
UV-VIS Ultraviolet-visible
The ClorDiSys photometric monitors were used for real-time analysis and control. The modified Standard
Method 4500-CIO2 E was used to confirm the real-time analyses. The Dra'ger Polytron 7000 sensors were
12
-------
used only for safety (i.e., room monitor). Additional details on the photometric monitors and modified
Standard Method 4500-CIO2 E can be found in Sections 3.1.3 and 3.1.4.
2.3 General Approach
The impact of the fumigant on the material and electronic equipment was investigated under different
fumigation conditions (concentration, temperature, RH, and exposure time). The sampling strategy for
each fumigation approach (98-2 MeBr and CIO2) is detailed in Section 2.4.
The effect of the fumigation process on materials and electronic equipment was investigated using visual
inspection and an assessment of functionality. All visual inspections were documented in writing and with
digital photographs. Functionality testing was documented in writing (and by digital photography, where
appropriate). Additionally, a subset of Category 4 test sets was subjected to a detailed IA&E by Alcatel-
Lucent and was detailed in their final report, "Assessment and Evaluation of the Impact of Fumigation with
Methyl Bromide Technologies on Electronic Equipment," (LGS, 2010). The results of the detailed IA&E on
the original Category 4 test sets fumigated by CIO2 are detailed, "Assessment and Evaluation of the Impact
of Chlorine Dioxide Gas on Electronic Equipment," (US EPA, 2010).
2.4 Sampling Strategy
2.4.1 MeBr Fumigation
Figure 2-1 shows the general schematic for the 98-2 MeBr fumigation experimental setup. A pressurized
gas cylinder containing 98 percent MeBr/2 percent chloropicrin (i.e., 98-2 MeBr) was connected to the
MEC chamber. The chamber was heated to 37 °C using hot water radiators. A data acquisition and
control system (Labview® platform) maintained the target RH (75%) by injecting humid air from a gas
humidity bottle when the measured RH fell below the target RH. The control system also maintained a
slight negative pressure inside the MEC chamber to prevent fumigant from leaking into the laboratory.
Once RH and temperature target conditions had been met, the Fumiscope was zeroed on the humid
chamber air and injection of the 98-2 MeBr began. The injection was automated by the control system
until the target concentration (300 mg/L) was reached. Fine adjustments were made during the
fumigation to maintain the target concentration. The pressure of the gas cylinder was monitored and
logged in real time to determine the total amount injected into the chamber. The sorbent trap for 98-2
MeBr was 10 percent alcoholic potassium hydroxide. Two additional tests (computers OFF and ON) were
used as a control with no fumigant added but exposed to the high temperature of 37 °C and 75 percent
RH.
13
-------
Wet
Chemistry
Sample
vent
Sorbent Tra
Fumigant
Monitor
Isolation
Chamber
RH/T
Meter
M
A
Humidity Injector
MeBr Gas
Cylinder
Data Acquisition System
Air Exchange
Blower
Thermocouple
Digital/Control Signal
Heated Sample Lines
Figure 2-1. Experimental Setup for the 98-2 MeBr Fumigations
2.4.2 CIO2 Fumigation
The CIO2 fumigations were performed at 3000 ppmv. Figure 2-2 shows the generic schematic for the
fumigation experimental setup. The CIO2 concentration in the test chamber was controlled directly with
the MiniDox. The secondary fumigant monitor was the EMS. The wet chemistry samples, analyzed by
modified Standard Method SM 4500-E, were taken every 30 minutes during the decontamination phase
to confirm the concentration of CIO2 in the MEC chamber. The RH of the MEC chamber was controlled by
a feedback loop with LabView and a Vaisala temperature/RH (T/RH) sensor. When the RH reading fell
below the desired setpoint, the DAS injected hot humid air into the MEC chamber.
Cooling was done by circulating cooling water just above the dew point (to prevent condensation) through
small radiators equipped with fans. The temperature of the cooling water was raised or lowered to
achieve the desired heat transfer. If necessary, the air exchange rate was also increased to aid in cooling:
a blower removed the warm air from the chamber and replaced it with cooler air. The blower was also
operated to prevent overpressurization of the isolation chamber.
14
-------
Wet
Chemistry
train
RH/T
Meter
Fumigant
Generator
I
Humidity Injector
Data Acquisition System
Air Exchange
Blower
Thermocouple
Digital/Control Signal
2-way Heated Sample Lines
Figure 2-2. Experimental Setup for CIO2 Fumigations
2.5 Sampling/Monitoring Points
Local variations in temperature were expected, especially due to the heat output of electronic devices
while operating. This variation in temperature also affected RH. Because RH was a critical parameter in
the effectiveness of the fumigant, the RH was checked by placing multiple NOMAD® T/RH sensors in and
near fumigated equipment. The location of the sensor within the computers was shown in Figure 1-4. The
monitor points within the computers allowed for determination of any temperature and RH gradients that
might exist between the inside of the computers and the bulk chamber. The NOMAD® sensors logged RH
and temperature in real time.
2.6 Frequency of Sampling/Monitoring Events
Table 2-3 provides information on the monitoring method, test locations, sampling flow rates,
concentration ranges, and frequency/duration for the measurement techniques used.
15
-------
Table 2-3. Monitoring Methods
Monitoring
Method
MiniDoxCIO2
Monitor
EMS Monitor
Modified
Standard Method
4500-CIO2 E
Vaisala T/RH
sensor
NOMAD®
Key Chemical
and Equipment
Fumiscope 5.0
MeBr in air
Test Location
MEC test chamber
MEC test chamber
MEC test chamber
MEC test chamber; MiniDox Box
MEC test chamber, Inside Category 4
chassis
MEC test chamber during fumigation
MEC test chamber
Sampling
Flow Rate
5 L/min
nominal
5 L/min
nominal
0.5 L/min
NA
NA
1 L/min
0.5 L/min
Range
50-10,000 ppmvCIO2
50-10,000 ppmvCIO2
36-10,000 ppmv
CIO2
0-100%RH
-40 to 60 °C
5-95% RH
-20 to 70 °C
0-3000 oz/ft3
0-22% at 37 °C
1.5-10,000 ppm
MeBr
Frequency and
Duration
Real-time; 4 per
minute
Real-time; 6 per
minute
Every 60
minutes; 4
minutes each
Real-time; 6 per
minute
Real-time; 6 per
minute
Real-time; 6 per
minute
Every 2 hours,
4 minutes each
NA - not applicable
2.7 Fumigation Event Sequence
For the fumigations, the decontamination cycle proceeds through three phases: Pre-conditioning phase,
Exposure Phase, and Aeration Phase.
• Pre-conditioning Phase. During this phase, the MEC chamber was conditioned to maintain a
constant, predetermined temperature and RH.
• Exposure Phase. The exposure phase in the test chamber is divided into two sequences:
1) Fumigant Charging Phase. The fumigant charging phase corresponds to the time required to
reach the target concentration of fumigant. The MiniDox or MeBr injection system directly
feeds the test chamber to reach the desired fumigant concentration within the shortest time.
The CT (ppmv-hours) of the charging phase was approximately one percent of the total CT
accumulated in the overall exposure phase.
2) Exposure Phase: The exposure phase corresponds to the set concentration time exposure
(CT). Time zero was set as the time when the MEC test chamber reached the desired
concentration (±10% standard deviation).
• Aeration phase. The aeration phase started when the exposure phase was completed (i.e., when
the target CT had been achieved), proceeded overnight, and stopped when the concentration
inside the chamber was below the OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) of 20 ppm for MeBr
and 0.1 ppm forCIO2.
16
-------
The phases of a fumigation event are graphically depicted in Figure 2-3. The times and demand rates for
each phase shown are presented for illustration purposes only.
Target Concentration
Chamber Concentration
Time (arb. scale)
Figure 2-3. Material and Equipment Exposure Time Sequence
17
-------
3.0 Testing and Measurement Protocols
Two separate isolation test chambers were used: the MeBr MEC chamber for the 98-2 MeBr exposure
and the high temperature/RH control exposures, and the CIO2 MEC chamber for the CIO2 test conditions.
No test chamber was used for the ambient control tests (no fumigant). Tested materials and equipment
were photographed before and after exposure and any visual changes noted, including color, legibility,
and contrast.
3.1 Methods
The MeBr concentration within the MEC chamber was measured using a Key Chemical and Equipment
Fumiscope 5.0 thermal conductivity sensor as well as an MeBr in air wet chemistry method (see Table
2-1). The photometric monitors (MiniDox monitor and EMS) and the extractive modified Standard Method
4500-CIO2 E were used for monitoring CIO2 concentrations in the CIO2 MEC chamber. Table 2-2
specifies where these methods were used within the experimental setups.
In addition to MeBrand CIO2 measurements, other critical parameters measured were temperature and
RH. Before each test, the Vaisala T/RH sensor used for control during testing was compared against a
Vaisala T/RH sensor used as a reference (never exposed to fumigant). Secondary measurements in
different locations within the chamber were measured by NOMAD® data loggers.
Bis were also included in the testing of Category 4 equipment. The use of Bis provided an indication of
whether or not acceptable decontamination conditions were achieved due to variations in local conditions
within the computers. The measurement equipment used in this project is described below.
3.1.1 Electrochemical Sensor for MeBr Concentration Measurement
MeBr vapor concentration within the chamber was monitored using a Key Chemicals and Equipment
Fumiscope 5.0. This instrument, while not specific for MeBr, was calibrated daily with a certified
calibration gas of 7.97 percent (309 mg/L) from Scott Gas.
3.1.2 MeBr in Air Concentration Measurement
The method used to verify the MeBr in air concentration was not a validated method, but was based on a
paper published in Analytical Chemistry (Blinn, 1949). This paper describes the method as follows:
A 2-liter sample of air containing methyl bromide was drawn by aspiration at
controlled rates through two series-connected Fisher gas-absorbing scrubbers
each containing 100 ml of 5% alcoholic potassium hydroxide. After the solutions
from the absorbers were combined, they were allowed to stand for 2 hours at
room temperature to complete hydrolysis. The resulting potassium bromide was
completely dissolved by the addition of 300 ml. of water and 150 ml. of 10%
acetic acid solution, then titrated with standard 0.1 N silver nitrate solution with
sodium eosin as the indicator.
As performed for this study, modified Greenburg-Smith Method 5 impingers were used as the scrubbers,
and a Method 5 meter box was used to quantify the amount of gas pulled through the sample train.
18
-------
3.1.3 Photometric Monitors
The ClorDiSys EMS monitor is identical to the photometric monitor built into the ClorDiSys generator
(MiniDox), which was used to generate the CIO2 in this study. Comparisons of the two instruments
performed in a separate study indicated that the two instruments read within 3 percent of one another
with an R2 value of 0.99 (ClorDiSys, 2002)
The monitors are photometric systems operating in absorbance mode with a fixed path cell. An internal
pump in the EMS and MiniDox provides flow of the test gas from the sample point to the analytical cell.
The maxima and minima of an unspecified and proprietary CIO2-specific absorbance band are monitored.
These numbers are then used to calculate the absorbance at this analytical band. Before delivery,
calibration was performed with National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST)-traceable
transmission band pass optical filters (385/0.9CU; optek-Danulat, Inc., Essen, Germany). The photometric
systems include a photometer zero function to correct for detector aging and accumulated dirt on the
lenses. Daily operation of the photometers includes moments when clean, CIO2-free air is being cycled
through the photometers. If the photometer reads above 0.1 milligrams per liter (mg/L) during these zero
air purges, then the photometer is re-zeroed. Problems arising from condensation when sampling under
high temperature or high RH conditions have been addressed by heating the sample lines and the
photometer cell. Table 3-1 provides instrument specifications (ClorDiSys, 2002).
Table 3-1. ClorDiSys EMS/MiniDoxs Photometric Monitor Characteristics
Parameter
Precision (SD)
Range
Accuracy (SD)
Resolution
Value
mg/L
±0.1
0.1-30
±0.2 from 0.5-50
0.1
ppm
±36
50-10,900
±72 from 181-18,100
36
SD = Standard Deviation
3.1.4 Modified Standard Method 4500-CIO2 E
Standard Method 4500-CIO2 E (Eaton, 2005) is an iodometric titration suitable for aqueous CIO2
concentrations between 0.1 to 100 mg/L. This method does not address gas-phase sampling. The full
method is quite complex in that a multi-titration scheme is used to differentiate several chlorine-containing
analytes. A modification of this method to incorporate gas-phase sampling uses a buffered potassium
iodide bubbler sample collection and restricts the official method to a single titration based upon
Procedure Step 4.b (Eaton, 2005). This step analyzes the combined CI2, CIO2, and chlorite as a single
value and can be applied only where CI2 and chlorite are not present. Since the modified method
(modified Standard Method 4500-CIO2 E) described below is applied to gas-phase samples, the
presumption of the absence of chlorite and chlorate is quite valid. Titration results higher than photometric
methods indicate that CI2 may be present.
The modified Standard Method 4500-CIO2 E is performed as described below.
19
-------
1. Add 20 ml of phosphate buffer solution, pH 7.2 with Kl (25 g Kl/ 500 ml of buffer phosphate)
(KIPB solution) to two impingers. A third impinger is left empty.
2. Route CIO2 gas from the chamber into the KIPB solution in the impingers in series at a flow rate
of 0.5 L/min for four minutes. Note if there is any liquid in the third impinger, or if the second
impinger is yellow.
3. Combine the 20 ml of KIPB solution from each impinger into a 200 ml volumetric flask and rinse
the impingers thoroughly with de-ionized water. Fill the flask to 150 -200 ml.
4. Add 1 ml of 6 N HCI to the solution.
5. Place solution in dark for five minutes.
6. Titrate the solution with O.I N sodium thiosulfate (N = 0.1) to a clear endpoint.
7. Record the volume of sodium thiosulfate used in the titration. Conversion calculations from titrant
volume to CIO2 concentration are based on Standard Method 4500-CIO2 B, where N = Normality:
CIO2 (mg/L) = Volume of sodium thiosulfate (ml) x N x 13.490 •*• Volume of gas impinged (L)
This method removes many of the possible interferences listed in Standard Method 4500-CIO2 E (Eaton,
2005). The initial presence of Kl in excess prevents iodate formation, which can occur in the absence of
Kl and leads to a negative bias. The presence of the pH 7 buffer during impinging prevents oxidation of
iodide by oxygen which occurs in strongly acidic solutions. Other interferences are unlikely to be a
problem in this application, as the presence of manganese, copper, and nitrate is unlikely in a gaseous
sample.
The second impinger filled with buffered Kl solution is added in series to reduce the likelihood of
breakthrough. The second impinger was not analyzed independently but was combined with the first
impinger for analysis. System blanks were analyzed on a daily basis by titration of the KIPB sample.
When titration yielded a volume of titrant greater than 0.5 percent of the expected value of the impinged
sample, a new KIPB solution was mixed to provide a lower blank value.
3.1.5 Temperature and RH Measurement
Temperature and RH measurements were performed with two types of sensors, the Vaisala HMP50
transmitter and the NOMAD® logger. The Vaisala transmitter was used for the real-time control of
humidity and was placed at a point distant from the steam injector. The NOMAD® loggers were put in
various places within the MEC chambers and within computers (Category 4) to provide a map of humidity
and temperature conditions. The specifications of both instruments are shown in Table 3-2.
20
-------
Table 3-2. RH and Temperature Sensor Specifications
Instrument
RH Range
RH Accuracy - 0 to 90%
RH Accuracy - 90 to 98%
RH Resolution
Temperature Range
Temperature Accuracy
Temperature Resolution
Vaisala
0 to 98%
±3%
±5%
0.001 %a
-10to60°C
±0.6°C@20°C
0.001 °C a
NOMAD®
20 to 90%
±5% at 60% RH and 25 °C
Unknown
Unknown
0 to 50 °C
±1.8°C
<1 °C
a Vaisala resolution estimated from 22-bit resolution of personal data acquisition system (PDAQ).
Repeated exposure to fumigation conditions degrades both instruments. In the case of the Vaisala, the
RH sensor becomes corroded and the higher resistance results in inaccurate RH readings. Corroded
sensors were detected and replaced during the RH sensor comparisons before each test (see below). In
the case of the NOMAD®, the fumigant probably corrodes the circuit board so that download of the logged
data is sometimes impossible. To help prevent this reaction, the NOMAD® T/RH sensors were used only
once.
A separate calibrated Vaisala HMP50, never exposed to fumigation, was used as an independent
reference. Before each test, each Vaisala sensor was compared to the reference sensor at ambient
(~40% RH) and at 75 % RH. If the Vaisala differed from the reference by more than 4 percent, then the
removable RH sensors were replaced (independent of the rest of the transmitter).
3.1.6 Biological Indicators (Bis)
Biological indicators are intended to mimic the response of difficult-to-kill spores such as Bacillus
anthracis. Each fumigation method, therefore has a recommended or preferred Bl. The following sections
describe the Bis for the 98-2 MeBr and CIO2 fumigations.
The Bis were Bacillus atrophaeus (B. atrophaeus) spores, nominally 1x106 CPU, on stainless steel disks
in Dupont™ Tyvek® envelopes. These Bis have been used extensively in NHSRC-related CIO2 fumigation
efficacy testing for B. anthracis spores deposited onto building materials. While it is easier for CIO2 to
inactivate the spores on the Bis than on most materials, Bis can provide a suitable indication of failure of
the inactivation of B. anthracis on surfaces. Thus, failure of CIO2 to inactivate the Bis suggests that
conditions required to inactivate spores on environmental surfaces were not achieved (Rastogi, 2007).
Further, the inactivation of B. anthracis spores on building materials and B. atrophaeus spores on the
stainless steel Bis is highly sensitive to RH. For inactivation with CIO2, spores typically require a minimum
of 75 percent RH for effective kill conditions (Ryan, 2008). Inversely, B. atrophaeus is more resistant to
MeBr fumigation than B. anthracis (Weinberg, 2003). Inactivation of these Bis by MeBr suggests
conditions were far and above what would be necessary to inactivate anthrax spores; however, the
exposure conditions (300 mg/l for 9 hours) were based on efficacy results obtained with B. anthracis
spores (Ryan, 2010).
21
-------
3.1.6.1 Bl Handling and Analysis Procedures
Within operational computers, the higher local temperatures expected would cause a localized area to
have lower RH than the bulk of the chamber. Bis were, therefore, placed in the bulk chamber and within
each computer in order to assess a difference in the failure to achieve the appropriate decontamination
conditions. Five Bis were located in each computer (see Figure 1-4) and in the MEC test and control
chambers. After removal from the chambers and computers following testing, the Bis were transferred to
the on-site Biocontaminant Laboratory for analysis. The transfer was accompanied by a Chain of Custody
(COC) form for each group of five Bis.
In the Biocontaminant Laboratory, the Bis were transferred aseptically from their envelopes to a sterile
conical tube (Fisherbrand, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., Waltham, MA) containing at least 25 mL of
nutrient broth (NB) (BBL Dehydrated Nutrient Broth, BD Diagnostics Systems, East Rutherford, NJ). Each
Bl was placed in an individual sample tube; both positive and negative controls were analyzed in
conjunction with each test group for quality assurance. The tubes were incubated for seven to nine days
(at 32 °C for Bacillus atrophaeus), then recorded as either "growth" or "no growth" based upon visual
inspection. Tubes with growth turned the NB very cloudy and the consistency of the NB was changed. All
tubes were plated on tryptic soy agar (TSA) (Remel Inc., Lenexa, KS) to confirm that any growth in the
tube was indeed 8. atrophaeus and not another organism that had contaminated the samples. Using
aseptic techniques, the TSA plates were incubated overnight at 32 °C, depending on organism. A visual
inspection of the plates was performed the following day to determine if the 8. atrophaeus had grown; 8.
atrophaeus produces a reddish tint on the agar. Both positive and negative controls were used to confirm
that 8. atrophaeus growth on TSA was consistent.
3.1.7 Visual Inspection
Visual inspection focused mainly on the expected effects of fumigation: any changes in color and any
occurrence of corrosion. Color change could also affect legibility of printed paper materials. Digital
photographs of each coupon or material were taken prior to fumigation. After fumigation, digital
photographs were taken to document the condition of the materials/equipment. Category 4 equipment
(computers) was photographed monthly to document changes over time. Smoke alarms were partially
dismantled in order to take digital photographs of the equipment inside the casing. The cover of computer
CPU casing was also removed so photographs of the internal parts could be taken. This dismantling was
done at an approved electrostatic discharge (ESD) station. Changes in color or observed corrosion or
corrosion products (i.e., powder inside a casing) were noted. Any changes in legibility or contrast of
materials after fumigation were recorded as well.
3.1.8 Functionality Testing
All electronic equipment in Categories 3 and 4 underwent functionality testing prior to and after
fumigation, as did selected materials from Category 2, as appropriate. These tests were detailed in
Tables 1-1 and 1-3 for the Category 2 and 3 materials, respectively. For the Category 4 equipment, the
protocols for the computer setup and analysis were developed by Alcatel-Lucent for the specific
equipment being tested (US EPA, 2010).
22
-------
All Category 2 and 3 materials were analyzed before and immediately after fumigation, at six months, and
at one year following fumigation. During the one year period, all equipment was stored in an indoor
office/laboratory environment with logged temperature and RH.
Category 4 equipment was tested in triplicate. After the post-fumigation functionality test, one of the three
computers fumigated with MeBr and one of the three computers fumigated with CIO2 was sent to Alcatel-
Lucent for in-depth failure analysis. The remaining computers remained at EPA for continued
functionality testing for one year. During the one year period, the computers and monitors were stored in
an indoor office/laboratory environment with logged temperature and RH. The post-fumigation analysis
continued monthly for these pieces of Category 4 equipment, when possible.
The computer systems were maintained in the operational (ON) state and, if operational, were put
through a BIT sequence five days a week, for eight hours a day, to simulate normal working conditions.
Functionality testing was done by running a predefined routine specific to each of the items. These
routines were documented for each item and maintained in the item's log book or on test report sheets.
For the computer systems, PC-Doctor® Service Center™ 7.5 was run to complete a hardware and
software diagnostic investigation. The results of the diagnostic protocol were maintained in the
appropriate log book.
3.1.9 Detailed Functionality Analysis (Subset of Category 4)
The assessment of the impact of fumigation on Category 4 equipment was performed in conjunction with
Alcatel-Lucent through LGS Innovations, Inc. Four computers - one computer and monitor from each of
the test conditions (control, and 98-2 MeBr and CIO2 fumigations) - were sent to Alcatel-Lucent for
detailed functionality testing. The worst-performing computer from each of the triplicate test sets was
chosen for this in-depth testing. These computers and monitors, after undergoing the initial pre-/post-
fumigation visual inspection and functionality screening, were preserved and shipped as detailed in
Section 3.6. The order of increasing level of analysis was (1) aesthetic and functionality evaluation
(energize, run diagnostic protocol), (2) visual inspection and more advanced diagnostics to identify
affected components, (3) modular investigation, and (4) cross-section and failure mode analysis. The
metal coupons and IPC boards were also analyzed by Alcatel-Lucent for weight gain, corrosion products,
visual impacts and changes in conductivity (i.e., IPC boards).
3.2 Cross-Contamination
The two isolation chambers, MeBr MEC and CIO2 MEC, were set up in two different laboratories at the
EPA. There was no contact between the two chambers to eliminate any potential exposure of either MEC
chamber to the other fumigant. Protocols provided by Alcatel-Lucent prohibited cross-contamination of
corrosion particles by limiting the use of each test device to a single computer. Bis and wet chemistry
samples are not expected to be affected by cross-contamination.
3.3 Representative Sample
Category 4 materials are as identical as possible to materials tested under a previous study using CIO2 as
the fumigant (US EPA, 2010). Materials and equipment were chosen as representative of, or as
surrogates for, typical indoor construction materials or modern electronic devices. Each material or piece
of equipment was tested in triplicate for representativeness. After initial inspection to confirm the
representativeness of the Category 4 equipment post-treatment under the test conditions, the set that
23
-------
fared the worst from each test condition was sent for the detailed analysis performed by Alcatel-Lucent.
The initial inspection was an ass
Center™ 7.5 (PC Doctor, 2011).
The initial inspection was an assessment for visual changes and PC diagnostic using PC-Doctor® Service
3.4 Sample Preservation Methods
Test samples (i.e., materials and equipment) were stored under temperature- and RH-controlled indoor
ambient laboratory conditions until testing was performed. All samples, both test and control, were stored
under the same conditions prior to and after the fumigation event.
The Category 4 items, specifically the computers and monitors, were treated differently from the items
included in the other categories. The computers and monitors were removed from their original
packaging, labeled with a designated sample number (see Section 3.5), and set up according to the
protocol provided by Alcatel-Lucent. After the pre-test analysis, the computers were dismantled, placed
into individual anti-static and anti-corrosion bags (Corrosion Intercept Technology; http://www.
staticintercept.com/index.htm), sealed and stored until reassembly and preparation for the fumigation
event. The computers were also dismantled and bagged during transport to and from the MEC chambers.
After exposure to the test conditions, the equipment underwent visual inspection and initial diagnostics
with PC-Doctor® Service Center™ 7.5. The Category 4 items not shipped to Alcatel-Lucent for detailed
analysis and all Category 2 and 3 items were transferred to an appropriate area (ESD work station,
E-288, see below) in which the computers and monitors could remain energized and operated over the
course of a year to continually assess delayed effects due to the test conditions under which they were
treated. The temperature and RH in the area were monitored and logged.
Before fumigation of the computers, the systems were opened to insert a T/RH monitor (NOMAD®) and
Bis in each desktop case. The Category 4 metal coupons and IPC board were also placed in each
computer case. The location and method of fastening the equipment inside the case were specified by
Alcatel-Lucent. The insides of the desktop computers were digitally photographed. To maintain the
integrity of the computer by avoiding static electricity, an ESD Station was established for work on the
computers. An ESD station was set up in E-288 (EPA Facility, Research Triangle Park, NC) and a second
sub-station (smaller) next to the MEC test chambers in H-224 and H-130 (EPA Facility, Research Triangle
Park, NC). Training on this work station in E-288 was provided by Alcatel-Lucent on July 18, 2007, prior
to the start of the original CIO2 fumigation testing. In general, the station consisted of an electrostatic
discharge work mat, an electrostatic monitor, and electrostatic discharge wrist bands. All computers were
inspected and operated (i.e., diagnostic testing, long-term operation of computers for analysis of residual
effects) on the ESD workstations. During operation of the computers, all computers were energized using
surge protectors (BELKIN seven-outlet home/office surge protector with six-foot cord, Part # BE1 07200-
06; Belkin International, Inc.; Compton, CA).
All Bis were maintained in their sterile Dupont™ Tyvek® envelopes, refrigerated, until ready for use. The
Bis were allowed to come to the test temperature before being placed in the MEC test chamber. The Bis
were maintained in their protective Dupont™ Tyvek® envelopes until transferred to the on-site
Biocontaminant Laboratory for analysis.
24
-------
3.5 Material/Equipment Identification
Each material and piece of equipment was given an identifying code number unique to that test sample
material/equipment. The codes and code sequence were explained to the laboratory personnel to prevent
sample mislabeling. Proper application of the code simplified sample tracking throughout the collection,
handling, analysis, and reporting processes. All COC documentation for the test sample material/
equipment was labeled with the identifying code number. Table 3-3 shows the sample coding used in this
study, with Figures 3-1 through 3-8 showing pictures of all of the materials that were tested. The Category
4 equipment was labeled as Decon###, where ### refers to a three-digit sequential number. A total of 21
computers and liquid crystal display (LCD) monitors were purchased for this project. The numbers,
therefore, ranged from 202 to 222. However, 218 would not power on and was removed from the study;
number 223 was added.
25
-------
Table 3-3. Sample Coding
Sample Code
2AL
2CU
2CS
2PC
2S1
2S3
2S4
2S6
2S9
2HW/2SW
2LC
2EB
2SE
2GA
2DS
AAA 2DN
2CUS
2ALS
2CB
2SD
2SW
2LP
2IP
2PH
3PD
3CE
3FA
3DV
3CD
XXX
NN 02,
TXX T01 or T02
RXX R01 - R02
Figure
3-1 a
3-1 b
3-1 c
3-1 d
3-1 e
3-1 f
3-1 g
3-1 h
3-1 i
3-2a
3-2a
3-2a
3-2a
3-2a
3-2b
3-2b
3-3a,d
3-3b,c
3-3e
3-4a,b
3-4c,d
3-5a
3-5b
3-5c
3-6a,b
3-6a,b
3-6c
3-7a
3-7b
3-9
AAA-NN-TXX-RXX
Sample Type
3003 Aluminum coupons
101 Copper coupons
Low carbon steel coupons
Painted low carbon steel coupons
410 Stainless steel coupons
430 Stainless steel coupons
304 Stainless steel coupons
316 Stainless steel coupons
309 Stainless steel coupons
Housing wires (casing) and stranded wires
DSL conditioner
Steel outlet/Switch box
Sealants (caulk)
Gaskets
Drywall screw
Drywall nail
Copper services *
Aluminum services *
Circuit breaker
Smoke detector
Switches (lamps)
Laser printed colored papers (stack of 15 pages)
InkJet printed colored papers (stack of 15 pages)
Photographs
PDAs
Cell phones
Fax machines (with telephones)
DVDs
CDs
Biological Indicator (XXX=computer ID (if inside computer) or,
XXX="MEC" for inside bulk chamber)
Replicate number (01, 02, 03, 04,05)
Test Matrix (Category 2 and 3 = T01 ; Category 4 = T02)
Run Number (R01-R02) for Category 2 and 3 materials
See Appendix C for parts list of Cu and Al service panels.
26
-------
Figure 3-1. Metal Coupons Used in the Compatibility Testing (photos prior to fumigation): (a)
3003 Aluminum; (b) 101 Copper; (c) Low Carbon Steel; (d) Painted Low Carbon Steel;
(e) 410 Stainless Steel; (f) 430 Stainless Steel; (g) 304 Stainless Steel; (h) 316
Stainless Steel; and (i) 309 Stainless Steel.
27
-------
(a)
(b)
Figure 3-2. (a) Stranded Wire, DSL Conditioner, Steel Outlet/Switch Box with Sealant (Caulk),
Gasket and (b) Drywall Screws and Nails used in the Compatibility Testing
28
-------
Figure 3-3. (a, c) Copper Services, (b, d) Aluminum Services, and (e) Circuit Breakers used in the
Compatibility Testing
29
-------
(C) I •((])
Figure 3-4. (a,b) Smoke Detector and (c,d) Lamp Switch used in the Compatibility Testing
30
-------
(c)
Figure 3-5. (a) Laser and (b) InkJet Printed Color Papers, and (c) Photograph used in the
Compatibility Testing
31
-------
(a)
Figure 3-6. (a,b) PDA and Cell Phone and (c) Fax Machine used in the Compatibility Testing
32
-------
Figure 3-7. (a) Front of DVD (b) Back of DVD (c) Front of CD, and (d) Back of CD used in the
Compatibility Testing
33
-------
Figure 3-8. Desktop Computer and Monitor, Keyboard, Power Cord, and Mouse used in the
Compatibility Testing
3.6 Sample Shipping Procedures
The computer, monitor, and ancillary equipment shipped to Alcatel-Lucent were packaged inside
Corrosion Intercept Technology bags (http://www.staticintercept.com/index.htm'). The bagged equipment
was shipped to Alcatel-Lucent using the original packaging (i.e., boxes and foam) after post-fumigation
tests. The shipping and handling protocols were provided by Alcatel-Lucent.
3.7 Chain of Custody (COC)
Each material/piece of equipment sent to Alcatel-Lucent had a COC record describing the
material/equipment and analysis to be performed. Similarly, all the Bl samples sent for analysis by the
Biocontaminant Laboratory had a COC.
3.8 Test Conditions
Two test matrices were used for the testing. Test Matrix T01 (Table 3-4) was used for Category 2 and 3
materials (combined), and Test Matrix T02 (Table 3-5) was used for Category 4 materials. The test
matrices were built around the main objective of this project: to assess the damages, if any, to materials
and electronic equipment functionality after remediation of a contaminated space using the 98-2 MeBror
34
-------
CIO2 technology under various fumigation environment scenarios, and equipment state of operation. The
list of parameters that were investigated is:
1. Effect of fumigation with 300 mg/L MeBr at 75% RH and 37 °C for 9 hours.
2. Effect of fumigation conditions without MeBr at 75% RH and 37 °C for 9 hours.
3. Effect of fumigation at high CIO2 concentration (3000 ppmv) at standard conditions (75% RH,
75 °F) with a total CT of 9000 ppmv-hr. (Category 4 only).
4. Power state of Category 4 materials.
Table 3-4. Test Conditions for Category 2 and 3 Materials
Run Name
R01
R02
Treatment Conditions1
300 mg/L MeBr, 75% RH, 37 °C for 9 hours
0 mg/L MeBr, 75% RH, 37 °C for 9 hours
Purpose of Test
Determine the effect of MeBr on
materials
Determine the effect of RH on
materials
1 Dwell phase parameters are listed for each run's Test Condition.
35
-------
Table 3-5. Test Conditions for Category 4 Equipment
Test
Condition
Equipment Power
State During
Fumigation
Treatment Conditions1
Description
Group 1
1
2
3
ON and Active
ON and Active
OFF
Ambient
75% RH, 37 °C for 9 hours
75% RH, 37 °C for 9 hours
Control test set
Control test set
Control test set
Group 2
4
ON and Idle
Standard fumigation conditions
(3000 ppmv CIO2, 75 % RH, 75 °F, 3 hrs)
Tie in to past matrix with CIO2
Group 3
5
6
ON and Active
OFF
300 mg/L MeBr, 75% RH, 37 °C for 9
hours
300 mg/L MeBr, 75% RH, 37 °C for 9
hours
Effect of power state
Effect of power state
1 37°C = 99°F. 75°F = 24°C.
36
-------
4.0 Visual Inspection
Photographs were taken as part of the scheduled functionality testing. The purpose of this physical
documentation was to make comparisons overtime, looking for changes such as discoloration of wire
insulation, corrosion, residue, and decrease in the quality or readability of documents and photographs.
Where changes were noted, all visual files and written documentation were reviewed to provide a detailed
understanding of the effects of fumigation overtime on that material/component. Functional effects are
presented and discussed in Section 5.
4.1 Category 2 Materials
Category 2 materials had varying physical responses throughout the 12 month observation period
following the 98-2 MeBr fumigation (Run R01 in Table 3-4) but seemed to maintain their pre-exposure
functional characteristics with two exceptions as noted below. The low carbon steel and the steel
outlet/switch box were affected by the fumigation; these effects are discussed below. The remaining
Category 2 materials showed no signs of physical deterioration during the 12 month post-test observation
period.
Figure 4-1 (a) shows that, with the exception of low carbon steel, each set of metals remained tarnish free,
with no signs of rust or corrosion. Figures 4-1 (b) and (c), respectively, show the drastic transformation of
the surface of the low carbon steel coupons from smooth and metallic to severely rusted following
exposure. The effects of the 98-2 MeBr fumigation on low carbon steel were comparable to those
observed with CIO2 fumigations at high RH.
Figures 4-2(a) and (b), respectively, show the clean edges of the steel outlet/switch box before fumigation
compared to the rusted edges observed after exposure. The exposed smoke detector remained fully
operational throughout the year after exposure; the battery terminals, resistors, and other components
showed no signs of physical damage as shown in Figure 4-1 (c). Figure 4-1 (d) shows that the exposed
stranded wires remained tarnish free 12 months after exposure.
37
-------
(a)
Figure 4-1. (a) Category 2 Metals 12 Months after 98-2 MeBr Fumigation; (b) Low Carbon Steel
before and (c) after Fumigation Showing Significant Corrosion.
38
-------
Figure 4-2. (a) Steel Outlet/Switch Box before and (b) after Fumigation; and (c) Smoke Detector
and (d) Exposed Stranded Wire after Fumigation.
InkJet printed paper, laser printed paper, and color printed photographs remained visibly unchanged
throughout the 12 month post-fumigation observation period. Color pigments do not appear to be
adversely affected by exposure to MeBr with 2 percent chloropicrin, in marked contrast to the color
pigment fading observed with CIO2 fumigations.
The only Category 2 materials showing signs of physical effects following 98-2 MeBr exposure were low
carbon steel and the steel outlet/switch box. There were no physical or functional effects to any of the
other Category 2 materials tested.
4.2 Category 3 Materials
Category 3 Materials included small personal electronic equipment: fax machines, cell phones, PDAs,
CDs, and DVDs. The physical appearance of these materials was observed and photo-documented
before fumigation, then over a one-year observation period following the 98-2 MeBr fumigation.
39
-------
The CDs and DVDs were all unaffected by the 98-2 MeBr fumigation. The disks maintained their pre-
exposure appearance and showed no signs of damage during the 12 month observation period. Figure
4-3 shows the internal features of a representative fax machine. There were no signs of damage to any of
the mechanical parts, and all exposed metal maintained pretest appearances and showed no signs of
deterioration.
Figure 4-3. Internal View of Fax Machine 12 Months after 98-2 MeBr Exposure
Figure 4-4(a) shows the cell phone one year following the 98-2 MeBr fumigation. During the 12-month
observation period, no visual changes were noted. The cell phone screen indicated no signs of dimming
of the back light or detectable color alterations. The cell phone ring and voice transmitting and receiving
ability maintained their initial quality throughout the one-year observation period. Figure 4-4(b) shows the
PDA one year following the 98-2 MeBr fumigation. The screen maintained its pre-exposure physical
appearance and the outer casing appeared unchanged. An internal physical evaluation of the PDA was
not possible without damaging the device.
There was no visual impact seen in any of the Category 3 items following the 98-2 MeBr fumigation.
40
-------
(a) I I (b)
Figure 4-4. (a) Cell Phone and (b) PDA Powered On 12 Months after Exposure
4.3 Category 4 Equipment
Category 4 equipment included desktop computers and monitors. Unlike the Category 2 and 3 materials
that were fumigated only with 98-2 MeBr, additional sets of the Category 4 materials were fumigated with
CIO2. Table 4-1 summarizes the visual changes noted for both fumigants.
Table 4-1. Documented Visual Changes in Category 4 Equipment
Equipment
Desktop computer
Computer monitor
Computer keyboard
Computer power cord
Computer mouse
Visual Changes Due to
CIO2 Exposure
Corrosion (inside and
outside) and visible powder
None
None
None
None
Visual Changes Due to
98-2 MeBr Exposure
Corrosion on metal edges,
no visible powder
None
None
None
None
41
-------
CIO2 had some visually observed effects on the desktop computers, but no changes were noted for other
equipment. These changes resulting from CIO2 exposure agree with previous research conducted on this
fumigant (US, EPA, 2010). Desktop computers exposed to 98-2 MeBr were slightly corroded on metal
edges on the interior and exterior of the computer chassis. A summary of the noted visual changes as
related to run conditions for both fumigants as well as control conditions is shown in Table 4-2. Any
changes observed were present immediately after fumigation and did not appear to strengthen over the
12-month period of equipment observation and testing. The MeBr Fumigation C was aborted due to an
electrical ground fault shutting down mixing fans inside the MEC chamber, it is believed the MeBr
concentration exceeded 15% in the chamber.
Table 4-2. Summary of Visual Changes Noted in Category 4 Equipment
Temp, °C
RH, %
ppmv
ppmv- hours
Computer IDs
Computer Status
Visual Impacts
Ambient
Controls
Lab conditions
Lab conditions
N/A
N/A
217,219,220
On and Active
No visual
changes
Conditioned
Controls
37.2
71.2
N/A
N/A
202,203
202 - On and
Active
203 -Off and
open
No visual
changes
Conditioned
Controls
36.9
78.6
N/A
N/A
206,208
206 -Off and
open
208 - On and
Active
No visual
changes
Conditioned
Controls
36.3
74.7
N/A
N/A
204,205
204 -Off and
closed
205- Off and
open
No visual
changes
Fumigant
Temp, °C
RH, %
ppmv
Computer
IDs
Computer
Status
Visual
Impacts
98-2 MeBr
37.2
76.1
-74,000
(300 mg/L)
207,209
207 - On and
Active
209 -Off and
open
Minimal
corrosion on
back panel,
some metal
edges
98-2 MeBr
37.9
75.4
-74,000
(300 mg/L)
210,211
210 -Off and
open
211 -On and
Active
Minimal
corrosion on
back panel,
some metal
edges
98-2 MeBr
37.3
67.3
-74,000
ameasured
(300 mg/L)
212,213
21 2- Off and
open
21 3- On and
Active
Heavy interior
and exterior
corrosion
Internal powder
Yellow liquid
residue on
motherboard
and chassis
CIO2
25.8
75.2
-3,300
221-223
On and idle
Light interior
and exterior
corrosion
Light internal
powder
N/A Not available.
B The third MeBr test was exposed to higher concentrations of 98-2 MeBr due to poor mixing caused by a Gound Fault Circuit
Interrupter (GFCI) fault during fumigation. The exact concentration is unknown but is expected to be greater than 150,000 ppmv.
42
-------
Corrosion of external metal parts was evident on the backs of some computers exposed to 98-2 MeBrand
CIO2. Figure 4-5(a) shows the absence of corrosion on the control PCs. Figure 4-5(b) shows corrosion on
the same grid which occurred at 3000 ppmv CIO2, and Figure 4-5(c) shows corrosion on the central grid
which occurred at 74,000 ppmv 98-2 MeBr. Figure 4-5 (d) shows significant corrosion and a white powder on
the central grid which occurred during 98-2 MeBr fumigation at an unknown, but suspected to be, much
higher MeBr concentration. Rust-like powder was frequently seen on the lower peripheral component
interconnect (PCI) slot covers on the lower rear of the CIO2 and 98-2 MeBr exposed computers. This is
evident in Figure 4-6.
(a)
mmm^mum
smmLmmmm
(d)
Figure 4-5. Comparison of the metal grids on the back of tested computers: (a) control PC at
test conditions, no exposure; (b) exposed to 3000 ppm CIO2; (c) exposed to 74,000
ppm 98-2 MeBr; and (d) was likely exposed to a much higher concentration of 98-2
MeBr.
43
-------
(a)
Figure 4-6. Internal (a) and external (b) corrosion of PCI slots in CIO2 exposed computers.
Internal (c) and external (d) corrosion of PCI slots in 98-2 MeBr exposed computers.
Internal (e) and external (f) corrosion of PCI slots in 98-2 MeBr computers likely
exposed to much high concentrations, (g) Internal view of control PCI slots.
44
-------
Similar corrosion was observed on these computers internally and was found mostly on any cut metal
edges. Figure 4-7 shows the difference between an unexposed (a) CD-ROM drive casing, corrosion on a
CIO2 casing at high RH (b), corrosion on a CIO2 casing at lower RH (c), and corrosion on a 98-2 MeBr
fumigated PC at suspected high concentration (d). For all visual corrosion effects, there is a notable
difference between CIO2 tests conducted at different RH setpoints. This comparison can clearly be seen
between Figures 4-7 (b) and (c).
(a)
(c)
Figure 4-7.
An unexposed (a) CD-ROM drive casing, corrosion on a CIO2 casing at high RH (b),
corrosion on a CIO2 casing at lower RH (c), and corrosion on the 98-2 MeBr
fumigated PC at suspected high concentration (d).
45
-------
In the previous study with CIO2 (US EPA, 2010) the CPU (aluminum alloy with a nickel-phosphorus
coating) was thought to be the primary, if not sole, source of the corrosion products. The GPU heat sink
remained unaffected (single aluminum alloy). In the current study, no corrosion was observed on either
the CPU or the GPU heat sinks of the 98-2 MeBr or CIO2 fumigated computers. Alactel-Lucent (US EPA,
2010) determined that, in this new generation of computers (higher heat producing CPUs), the heat sinks
were made from a single aluminum alloy. Alactel-Lucent found no evidence of chlorine or bromine on the
surface of the fins on either heat sink, which means that native aluminum oxide on the CPU surface is
sufficiently robust to resist attack by both MeBr and chloropicrin . As no visible corrosion could be seen
on the computers exposed to CIO2, it appears that these surfaces are now sufficiently robust to also resist
attack by CIO2 under standard conditions.
In summary, visible changes occurred to computers that were exposed to both CIO2and 98-2 MeBr,
including external and internal corrosion of metal parts for both test sets. The formation of powders inside
the computer casing was observed primarily after CIO2 fumigations but was also observed as an effect of
the suspected high concentration exposure to 98-2 MeBr. Parts affected included external and internal
stamped metal grids, external metal slot covers, and any internal cut metal edges. Higher RH conditions
increased the severity of all CIO2 effects.
46
-------
5.0 Data Analysis/Functionality Tests
The results of functionality tests were reviewed for each material pre-exposure, immediately post-
exposure, and then up to monthly thereafter for a period of one year looking for instances of intermittent
or repeated failures. These tests ranged from simple stress tests performed on gaskets to the highly
detailed PC-Doctor® Service Center™ 7.5 testing conducted on the Category 4 computers. Where
changes were noted, all visual files and written documentation were reviewed to provide a detailed
understanding of the effects of fumigation and the different run conditions on that material/component.
For the Category 4 computers, failures are identified by the component parts themselves (such as CDs
and DVDs) as well as the sub-component parts that are most likely to lead to failure of that component.
5.1 Category 2 Materials
Functionality tests were performed on Category 2 materials before and after 98-2 MeBr exposure, then
periodically after exposure, and again at year's end. The breakers used in the Cu and Al services were
the same 10 amp breakers that were tested alone. Because of the large number of breakers requiring
testing, the breakers (10 per run condition) and services were tested at 20 amps (or 200 percent). The
minimum to maximum time range to failure under these conditions is from 10 to 100 seconds. None of
the beakers or services from any test fell outside the acceptable testing range. The resistance
measurements over one year have an average standard deviation of 36 percent and range between 0
and 4.1 ohms. A resistance reading could not be obtained from the corroded low carbon steel coupons;
contact could not be made between the coupon surface and the ohm meter terminals. There were no
other functionality changes reported for any Category 2 materials exposed to 98-2 MeBr.
5.2 Category 3 Materials
Functionality tests were performed on Category 3 materials before and after 98-2 MeBr exposure, six
months after, and then again at the one-year period. Category 3 materials consisted of PDAs, cell
phones, fax machines, CDs, and DVDs. The results from these functionality tests show that no changes
occurred during the one year observation period.
The PDA remained in the original working condition, able to synchronize with software installed on a
desktop computer. The touch screen capability of the PDA was not compromised.
There was no evidence that 98-2 MeBr had any harmful effects on the operation of the cell phone. The
cell phone was able to send and receive calls, provide clear audio on both ends of the call, and maintain
the same clear ringtone for incoming calls as it had done prior to exposure. The keypad for the phone
remained fully operational. The battery maintained its capability to charge fully and showed no physical
signs of damage.
The fax machine maintained the same level of operation throughout the year. The quality of the sent and
received facsimiles was comparable at year end to that before exposure. The telephone component of
the fax machine also remained in good working condition.
The same computer was used to test the CD and DVD before and during the 12-month observation
period following exposure. No problems were encountered reading the disks at anytime. The sound
47
-------
quality of the CD after exposure was comparable to the quality before exposure. Similarly, the sound and
picture quality of the DVD showed no signs of degradation.
5.3 Category 4 Equipment
PC-Doctor® Service Center™ 7.5 is commercially available software designed to diagnose and detect
computer component failures. While the exact number and type of tests depends on the system being
tested (see Appendix D), for the case of the Category 4 equipment, a total of 93 tests were run. A
complete list of the PC-Doctor® Service Center™ 7.5 tests is shown in Appendix E.
The PC-Doctor® Service Center™ 7.5 protocol was developed and provided by Alcatel-Lucent for this
effort. Alcatel-Lucent chose PC-Doctor® in order to have an industry-accepted standard method of
determining pass versus failure of the computer subsystems. PC-Doctor® Service Center™ 7.5
functionality testing was conducted pre-fumigation, one day post-fumigation, then monthly on all
functional computers for the next year with exceptions due to budget constraints. This testing provided
valuable information about the extent and time dependence of the degradation of these computers
following the various fumigation scenarios. All computers were kept under ambient laboratory conditions,
in which humidity was not strictly controlled.
Standard protocol called for each test to be performed once. If any particular test failed the first time, the
computer was tested a second time to correct for possible human error. A test that failed the second time
was labeled "Fail". If the test failed the first time but passed the second time, it was labeled "Pass2". For
tabulation, a score of 1,000 was assigned to each "Fail", while a "Pass2" received a score of 1. During
each pre- and post-fumigation testing period, a total PC-Doctor® score was assigned to each computer
based upon the number of tests that failed on the first or second attempt.
Table 5-1 shows this score for each month for each computer, while Figure 5-1 is a graphical
representation of the average score. For months and computers where tests received a "Fail", the specific
tests that failed are listed by test number for the month in adjacent columns.
The test numbers are described in Table 5-2, and a full listing is included in Appendix E. Numbers of
DVD-ROM and DVD-RW drives, which are typically failing systems, have been color coded for ease of
reference. Table 5-3 provides the average number of failures for each monthly test of PC-Doctor® Service
Center™ 7.5 tests that received a "Fail" over the course of a year. For each test condition, the results are
shown for each of the computers that underwent year-long testing. Three computers (Decon214,
Decon215, and Decon216) were part of an aborted fumigation and are not included in this study.
Computer Decon204 was sent to Alcatel Lucent for in-depth analysis. The power supply for Decon210
and Decon212 failed, and the computers could not be booted on replacement power supplies.
48
-------
Average Score generated from PC-
Doctor Tests
16000
14000
g 12000
£ 10000
o
+-•
O
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
0
McBrOn
iMeBrOff
CIO2
Control
45 6 7 8 9 10 13 14
Months After Fumigation
Figure 5-1. Average PC-Doctor Score per Exposure Type, score listed is based on a cumulative
score of failures. A lower composite score means fewer component failures.
49
-------
Table 5-1. PC-Doctor Tests That Failed Twice for all Computer Fumigation Scenarios
(Colored numbers are DVD-related components)
Controls: On and Active
Computer
ID
Decon 202
Decon 208
Day
0
1
38
65
101
135
169
199
231
263
295
0
1
42
69
134
166
203
235
267
299
329
361
405
Score
1001
1001
2001
2000
1000
1000
1001
0
1001
0
0
1000
0
1000
1000
1001
1000
0
2001
1000
4000
0
1000
1000
Failed Tests
2
47,
47,71,
47,71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
51,
71,
71,
71,
71,
2,47,
94,
38,39,40,41,
71,
71,
50
-------
Controls: Off
Computer
ID
Decon 203
Decon 204
Day
0
1
37
65
101
135
164
190
225
260
290
322
354
413
0
1
34
63
98
132
161
187
217
257
287
319
351
Score
0
0
1000
0
0
1000
1001
2000
2000
0
1000
1000
1
0
0
0
0
1000
0
1000
1000
0
0
1000
0
1000
2000
Failed
Tests
71,
71,
71,
46,47,
71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
59,71,
Computer
ID
Decon 205
Decon 206
Day
0
1
34
63
98
133
161
187
217
257
287
319
351
404
0
1
41
70
134
166
194
224
264
299
329
361
405
Score
0
0
1
0
1
1001
1000
0
2000
1
1000
1000
0
22
0
0
1002
1000
1000
1000
0
1000
1000
0
0
1000
0
Failed
Tests
71,
71,
2,71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
0
0
71,
51
-------
98-2 MeBr, Computers On and Active
Computer ID
Decon 207
Decon213a
Day
0
7
36
0
2
40
118
152
182
212
245
278
308
377
405
0
11
Score
0
14000
15000
0
9000
10000
9000
10000
9001
9000
9000
10000
10001
10000
10000
0
29001
Failed Tests
33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,
33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,71 ,
38,39,40,41,48,49,50,51,52,
38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,71 ,
38,39,40,41,48,49,50,51,52,
38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,71 ,
38,39,40,41,48,49,50,51,52,
38,39,40,41,48,49,50,51,52,
38,39,40,41,48,49,50,51,52,
38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,71 ,
38,39,40,41,48,49,50,51,52,71,
38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,71 ,
38,39,40,41,48,49,50,51,52,71,
0
7,12,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,4
8, 49,50,51 ,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
a This computer was subjected to the aborted (suspected higher concentration) 98-2 MeBr fumigation.
98-2 MeBr, Computers Off
Computer ID
Decon 209
Decon 210
Decon 21 2a
Day
0
6
35
106
153
183
201
233
265
295
327
383
0
1
39
0
11
Score
0
9001
10000
14000
14000
14000
14000
15000
14000
14000
15000
15000
1
9002
10000
0
115000
Failed Tests
0
38,39,40,41,48,49,50,51,52,
38,39,40,41,48,49,50,51,52,71,
33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,
33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,
33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,
33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,
33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,94,
33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,
33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,
33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,71 ,
33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,71 ,
0
38,39,40,41,48,49,50,51,52,
38,39,40,41,48,49,50,51,52,71,
0
Complete Failure
' This computer was subjected to the aborted (suspected higher concentration) 98-2 MeBr fumigation
52
-------
CIO2, Computers On and Idle
Computer
ID
Decon 221
Decon 222
Decon 223
Day
0
1
35
60
91
124
159
188
260
286
315
351
370
0
1
36
60
91
124
159
188
260
286
315
351
370
0
1
36
60
91
124
159
188
260
286
315
351
370
Score
0
14004
13001
14001
14000
13000
14000
13000
14000
14000
14000
13000
14000
0
13000
13000
14000
13000
13000
14000
13000
14000
14000
14000
14000
13000
1
13000
13000
13000
14000
13000
13000
13000
14000
14000
14000
14000
14000
Failed Tests
0
34,42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
0
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
0
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
42,43,44,45,46,47,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,71,
53
-------
Ambient Controls, Computers On and Active
Computer
ID
Decon 217
Decon 219
Decon 220
Day
0
1
63
92
133
152
186
216
246
281
355
365
0
1
63
92
133
153
186
216
246
281
355
365
0
1
55
89
119
151
186
216
246
281
355
365
Score
0
0
1000
1000
2
3
1000
1000
0
1000
1000
0
0
0
1000
0
1000
1
1000
1000
0
2000
0
1000
0
0
0
0
0
0
1000
10000
9000
11000
9000
10000
Failed Tests
71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
71,
71,94,
71,
71,
38,39,40,41,48,49,50,51,52,71,
38,39,40,41,48,49,50,51,52,
38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,71 ,94,
38,39,40,41,48,49,50,51,52,
38,39,40,41 ,48,49,50,51 ,52,71 ,
54
-------
Table 5-2. PC-Doctor Failed Test Correlation to PC Subsystem Components
Failed PC-
Doctor® Test
2
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
71
94
Subsystems
SoundMAX Integrated
Digital High Definition
Audio
Floppy disk drive
PLDS DVD-ROM DH-
16D5S
PLDS DVD+-RW DH-
16AAS
PLDS DVD-ROM DH-
16D5S
PLDS DVD+-RW DH-
16AAS
Intel(R) 82567LM-3
Gigabit Network
Connection
USB Port
Test Description
Rough Audio Test
Linear Seek Test
Random Seek Test
Funnel Seek Test
Surface Scan Test
Pattern Test
DVD Linear Seek Test
DVD Random Seek Test
DVD Funnel Seek Test
DVD Linear Read Compare Test
DVD Linear Seek Test
DVD Random Seek Test
DVD Funnel Seek Test
DVD Linear Read Compare Test
DVD-RW Read Write Test
DVD+R Read Write Test
CD Linear Seek Test
CD Random Seek Test
CD Funnel Seek Test
CD Linear Read Compare Test
CD Audio Test
CD Linear Seek Test
CD Random Seek Test
CD Funnel Seek Test
CD Linear Read Compare Test
CD Audio Test
CD-R Read Write Test
CD-RW Read Write Test
External loopback
USB Port Test
55
-------
Table 5-3. Average "Fail" Results Per Test over Year-Long Observation and Testing Period
Fumigation
Technology
Test
Condition
Computer A
Computer B
Computer C
None
Computer
Off
0.5
0.6
4.5
3000 ppmv
CIO2, 3 hr.
Computer
On and Idle
13.6
13.5
13.5
Hot humid
control (no
fumigation)
Computer
On
1.1
0.9
0.6 2
Hot humid
control (no
fumigation)
Computer
Off
0.6
0.7
4.6
74,000
ppmv
98-2 MeBr
Computer
On
14.5 1
9.5
Does not
remain
powered 3
74,000
ppmv
98-2 MeBr
Computer
Off
13.4
9.5 1
Does not
boot3
1 These computers had only 2 post-test evaluations.
2This computer shut down early in the test and so was not "on" the entire duration.
3This computer was present during the uncontrolled high concentration of fumigant due to a loss in power.
As an example, Table 5-1 shows Decon202 with a score of 2,000 for Day 65 (after fumigation) and 2,001
for Day 38. These numbers mean that during Day 65 testing, two specific tests received a "Fail" during
testing (2 x 1,000), while during Day 38, one test received a "Pass2" (1 x 1) and two tests received a "Fail"
(2 x 1,000). The column to the right shows the ID of the test(s) that failed. By cross-referencing these
Failed Test numbers (47 and 71) with Table 5-2, one can find that the failed tests were the DVD +R
Read/Write test and the network loopback test. Because the DVD/CD drive is a frequent cause of failure,
these subsystem failure codes have been color coded.
As the failed tests in Table 5-1 are examined, the vast majority (83.7%) were found to be related to the
CD/DVD drive. A significant amount of the remaining failures were related to the floppy drive, and many
were an intermittent network loopback failure which seems to be an issue with all computers, even
controls. The intermittent "Pass 2" results also point to vulnerabilities in the same subsystems (DVD and
floppy drives).
Analysis shows that the CD/DVD subsystem is not reliable, with one out of three failing in two of the
control condition computer sets. Exposure to fumigants clearly reduced reliability of the CD/DVD systems.
Table 5-1 shows that, with the exception of Decon209, failures of fumigated computers were immediately
identified and did not develop over time. Decon209 did develop floppy drive failures at the two month
mark. Analysis by Alcatel-Lucent (LGS, 2010) showed the presence of significant corrosion as a result of
chlorine exposure, both in CIO2 fumigations and from the chloropicrin component of the MeBr
fumigations. This corrosion seems to have affected bearings and other moving parts of both the floppy
drives and the CD/DVD drives.
The most significant compatibility finding is not a result of PC-Doctor® analysis. All computers exposed to
98-2 MeBr exhibited problems with the power supply, some catastrophically. The power supply to
Decon213, for instance, began failing a few days after fumigation by tripping ground fault circuits and with
burning smells. The same type of failure during the fumigation could have been the cause of the power
failure inside the fumigation chamber. These same effects were eventually detected in all 98-2 MeBr
56
-------
fumigated computers, and all power supplies were replaced. Alcatel-Lucent (LGS, 2010) traced these
failures to exposure to the chloropicrin component of the fumigant.
57
-------
6.0 Fumigation Effectiveness and Fumigation Safety
6.1 Fumigation Effectiveness
Bis were used to obtain an indication of the potential impact of local conditions on the effectiveness of the
fumigation process to inactivate spores potentially located within the computer. Specifically, the 8.
atrophaeus Bis were used to investigate CIO2 and 98-2 MeBr sporicidal effectiveness, both in the bulk
chamber and for localized hot spots inside the computers where the RH may be lower because of the
heat generated by the computer electronics during operation. The Bis provided a qualitative result of
growth or no growth after an incubation period of seven days. Bis have been shown not to correlate
directly with achieving target fumigation conditions for 8. atrophaeus spores or inactivation of 8.
atrophaeus spores on common building surfaces (Ryan, 2006). While Bis do not necessary indicate
achievement, they provide a sufficient indication of a failure to achieve successful fumigation conditions
(Ryan, 2006). 8. atrophaeus Bis were used for historical reasons, even though 8. atrophaeus has been
shown to be more resistant to MeBr fumigation than other Bacillus species, including anthracis
(Scheffrahn, 2003).
Figures 6-1 and 6-2 show the locations of the Bis within each computer. These locations were chosen
based on the available mounting surfaces that afforded relatively unrestricted airflow. Two Bis were
placed on the side cover (Figure 6-1) in areas of high airflow. Three more Bis (Figure 6-2) were placed
inside the computer to capture both high and low airflow locations. Bis were also present in the MEC
chamber, one on top of each Category 4 computer case and two between the keyboards and monitors on
the top shelf of the MEC chamber.
Figure 6-1. Location of two of the five Bis inside the computer side cover
58
-------
Figure 6-2. Location of the remaining three Bis in both high and low airflow locations inside the
computer
Table 6-1 details the effect of each fumigation scenario on Bl viability in both the fumigation chamber and
inside the computers. Bis were not placed in the control runs that were conducted without fumigant.
Table 6-1. Bl Survival in the Chamber and Computers for each Fumigation Scenario
Fumigation
Technology
Computer
power
Bis in
Chamber
Bis in
Computer
98-2 MeBr
Fumigation 1
Off
On
100%
100%
100%
98-2 MeBr
Fumigation 2
Off
On
100%
100%
100%
98-2 MeBr
Fumigation 3a
Off
On
40%
0%
0%
3000 ppmv
CI02
On and idle
0%
27%
This was the aborted 98-2 MeBr run, most likely at a much higher concentration.
The Bl data support the hypothesis that the fumigant concentration was much higher during the third
fumigation than the other two fumigations due to a power failure. The Bis inside the computers were the
lowest in the MEC chamber, and may have been subject to higher concentrations due to gravimetric
settling. The survival of the Bis following controlled 98-2 MeBr fumigation does not indicate that
conditions would have been ineffective against B. anthracis spores. The exposure conditions (300 mg/l
for 9 hours) were based on efficacy results obtained with 8. anthracis spores (Ryan, 2010). The higher
temperature (and lower humidity) inside the computers may have provided some protection to the Bis
during CIO2 fumigation.
59
-------
6.2 Health and Safety Effects of Fumigation
The following information was included in Alcatel-Lucent's IA&E report (LGS, 2010).
Part of the current material compatibility (DECON) project included a study to determine the level and
duration of MeBr outgassing from the 98-2 MeBr-exposed computers after they were removed from the
fumigation chamber. This determination was accomplished using specially designed chambers and the
highly sensitive Trace Atmospheric Gas Analyzer (TAGA) Atmospheric Pressure lonization Mass
Spectrometer available at EPA's NHSRC laboratory. The experimental design, including measurement
equipment used and sample chamber, are briefly described here.
One-day after fumigation, the computers were placed inside chambers made from 304 stainless steel.
This material was chosen because it is a special nonporous, silica-coated stainless steel that is inert to
many reactive gases. Use of 304 stainless steel use eliminated any chamber adsorption artifacts. The
chambers are shown in Figure 6-3. One chamber was dedicated to measuring MeBr outgassing from a
test computer that was fumigated with 98-2 MeBr one day prior to the off-gassing measurements. The
second chamber was used as a control for measuring the background outgassing from a control
computer that had been subjected to the elevated temperature and humidity test condition 30 days prior
to the off-gassing measurements.
Figure 6-3. MeBr Outgassing Chambers
60
-------
The chambers were sealed with a Teflon gasket between the flanges of the front panel. Electrical power
for the computers was supplied through a leak-tight bulkhead fitting. The computers could be turned on
by inserting a piece of stainless steel rod through a bulkhead fitting and pressing the power button. The
computer power state could be verified by peering through a 1/4" acrylic rod mounted through a different
bulkhead facing the monitor. To sample the air inside the chambers, each chamber was equipped with a
%" OD stainless steel tube that was connected into the inlet of the mass spectrometer. The mass
spectrometer had an atmospheric pressure ionization source with a triple quadrupole mass spectrometer
for mass selection. The mass spectrometer was calibrated for MeBr with standard methods. The MeBr
calibration was linear to 2 ppmvand was anticipated to be linear to 20 ppmv. Values over that limit were
outside the calibrated range and subject to significant error and instrumental non-linearity. This calibration
range is important to note because, in this outgassing study, MeBr concentrations up to 650 ppmv were
measured. Further research should be done to characterize the actual MeBr concentration from
desorption.
The MeBr concentration in the chamber (see dashed line in Figure 6-4) was found to increase to 610
ppmv (0.061 v-%) during the course of the experiment (8.5 hours). Some material in the computer was
clearly able to adsorb MeBr during fumigation and release the MeBr shortly thereafter. Since the
Threshold Limit Value (TLV) is 1 ppm and the ceiling exposure limit is 20 ppm according to the Material
Safety Data Sheet (MSDS), these measured values represent hazardous levels. Naturally, these levels
would be attained only in a small sealed enclosure, but the quantity of MeBr that is contained in the
computer is surprising. The differential change in MeBr is shown on the secondary axis of Figure 6-4. It
appears that the desorption rate peaked at 4.5 hours and began to decline after that.
700
- Methyl Bromide Cone.
-Differential Methyl Bromide Cone
3456
Time Since Start (Hours)
Figure 6-4. Outgassing MeBr Concentration over Time from decon209 Computer Fumigated
with 98-2 MeBr.
61
-------
A rough estimate is that the computer physically occupies 25 percent of the chamber space. That 25
percent translates into an average concentration of four times 0.061 or 0.25 vol-% MeBr in the computer.
MeBr will behave similarly to an organic solvent and adsorb into organic materials, especially less dense
materials. Likely candidates for such adsorbing materials in the computer test vehicles are the chip
packages, cable coatings, connector bodies, printed circuit board laminates, optical elements and optical
benches in the DVD drives, and epoxies that were used for various purposes in many subassemblies,
(see Figure 6-5). In these absorbent materials, the MeBr concentration must be locally much greater than
0.25 vol-%.
Plastics used for Cables, Chip Packages,
Connector Bodies, Printed Circuit Board
Laminates, CPU Heat Sink Housing, and
Optical Elements in DVD Drives
Aluminum Fins on CPU
and Video Heat Sinks
OSP (Organic Solderability
Preservative) Board Finish
Copper Planes and Transmission
Lines on Motherboard and All
Subsystem Boards; Copper Metal
in all Connectors, even when
Gold-Plated
Steel In Sheet Metal, Fasteners,
Chassis, Other Hardware
Figure 6-5.
Possible Corrosion-Susceptible Materials Inside the Dell Optiplex 760 Mini Tower
Computers.
There are obvious implications when fumigating larger equipment. The relative rate for MeBr outgassing
is shown as a solid line in Figure 6-4. The out gassing rate appears to peak at roughly 4/4 hours and
decreases rapidly after 8 hours. Note that outgassing still occurs 8/4 hours after the experiment started,
illustrating the need for careful handling of fumigated samples post-exposure since the human health
hazards, including fatal incidents, posed by exposure to MeBr are known (Thompson, 1966).
The MeBr outgassing rate will be limited by the diffusion out of the computer. However, high air flow rates
past the computer can be used to dilute the MeBr to safe levels. This dilution process should be
considered for enclosed fumigation systems. When it was placed in the sampling chamber, the
outgassing computer, Decon209, was in an OFF state for 2/4 hours after the start of the experiment.
Decon209 was then turned on remotely and left turned on for the remaining 7/4 hours of the experiment.
The solid line in Figure 6-4 shows an outgassing rate which appears to peak near 4.5 hours then slowly
decreased thereafter. Remembering the actual MeBr concentrations are not calibrated in this range, we
62
-------
must be careful about overly analyzing this trend. However, the characteristics of the detector are such
that it would tend to saturate at some concentration level, and at lower levels than this "saturation
concentration" the detector would under-representthe concentration. So the reduction in the rate of
increase of outgassing (that is, the slight drop near 4 hours relative to a line drawn between the prior and
following points seen in Figure 6-4) appears to be real. Turning on the computer apparently causes a very
slow heating of those materials that had adsorbed MeBr. Over an hour is needed for those materials to
increase appreciably in temperature, but once they did heat, the rate of outgassing increased. No powder
was produced following fumigation with MeBr, nor were any other by-products of fumigation detected.
63
-------
7.0 Quality Assurance
The objective of this study was to assess the impact of 98-2 MeBron materials and electronic equipment
due to fumigation under conditions known to be effective against biological threats. The Data Quality
Objectives (DQOs) address this impact using visual inspection (both externally and internally) to assess
the loss in value or use of the tested material/equipment, as well as functionality of the material/electronic
equipment. The following measurements were considered critical to accomplishing part or all of the
project objectives:
• Real-time fumigant concentrations
• Temperature
• RH
• Fumigation time sequence
• Material inspection and electronic equipment functionality time sequence
• Growth/no growth of the Bis.
7.1 Data Quality
The Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) in place for this testing was followed with few deviations,
many of which were documented in the text above. Deviations included:
• Use of the Fumiscope alone for determination of real-time MeBr concentration. The development
of the method using the photoacoustic analyzer threatened to delay the testing past contractual
deadlines.
• The MeBr Fumigation C was aborted due to an electrical ground fault shutting down mixing fans
inside the MEC chamber. The risk of explosion was deemed too high to continue testing.
7.1.1 Data Quality Indicator Goals for Critical Measurements
The Data Quality Indicators (DQIs) listed in Table 7-1 are specific criteria used to quantify how well the
collected data meet the DQOs.
64
-------
Table 7-1. DQIs for Critical Measurements
Measurement Parameter
Real-time CIO2
concentration at the exit of
the MEC test Chamber
Real-time CIO2
concentration inside the
MEC test Chamber
Extracted CIO2, high
concentration
Real-time MeBr
concentration inside the
MEC test Chamber
Relative humidity
Differential time
Temperature inside the
isolation chamber
Analysis Method
ClorDiSys EMS monitor
(0.1-30mg/L)
ClorDiSys MiniDox
monitor (0.1 -30 mg/L)
Modified SM 4500-CIO2 E
Fumiscope 5.0
RH probes (0-1 00%)
Computer clock
Thermocouple
Accuracy
15%ofSM-4500-
EMiniDox
15%ofSM-4500-E
5% of Standard
NA
± 5 % full scale from
factory
1 % of reading
+ 2°F
Detection
Limit
0.1 mg/L
36 ppm
0.1 mg/L
36 ppm
0.1 mg/L
(solution)
NA
NA
0.5 sec
NA
Completeness1
%
95
95
100
95
95
95
95
Completeness goals of 100% are used for those parameters that are performed manually and infrequently: A
completeness goal of 95% is used for those data streams that are automatically logged.
The DQIs listed in Table 7-1 are specific criteria used to quantify how well the collected data meet the
DQOs. The accuracy of the real-time CIO2 monitors was assessed with respect to the Modified SM 4500-
CIO2 E Method. Corrections to the real time concentration set-point were made such that the target
concentration was attained according to the titration measurement. Precision of the real-time CIO2 and
MeBr monitors cannot be accessed due to unavailability of a constant-concentration source and the
feedback nature of their operation in this specific testing setup. The accuracy of the extractive titration
was assessed with respect to a standard solution.
The QAPP originally stated that the target accuracy for the RH probes would be 3.5 percent full scale
from the factory; however, the factory specification is actually 5 percent full scale from factory. The
accuracy goal for the RH probe was subsequently modified to reflect the factory specification.
7.7.2 Data Quality Indicators Results
The accuracy of the real-time CIO2 monitors was assessed with respect to the Modified SM 4500-CIO2 E
Method. Corrections to the real time CIO2 concentration set-point were made such that the target
concentration was attained according to the titration measurement. Accuracy of the real-time MeBr
monitor is unknown because the Fumiscope is not specific to MeBr. The Fumiscope reading was used
only for real-time control. The accuracy of the extractive titration was assessed with respect to a standard
solution.
7.1.2.1 98-2 MeBr Fumigations
Table 7-2 shows the actual DQIs for the MeBr fumigations.
65
-------
Table 7-2. DQIs for Critical Measurements for 98-2 MeBr Fumigations
Measurement
Parameter
Fumiscope 5.0
RH probes
(0-100%)
Thermocouple
Fumigation A
Accuracy
(%)
NA
4.4
±0.3°C
Completeness
(%)
85.9
70.1
27.5
Fumigation B
Accuracy
(%)
NA
1.7
±0.3°C
Completeness
(%)
95.8
98.5
3.7
Fumigation C
Accuracy
(%)
NA
9.5
±0.3°C
Completeness
(%)
89*
21.2
78.4
* While accuracy and completeness values have been listed for the aborted Fumigation C, there is strong evidence
to suggest that the measured values were not representative of the bulk chamber conditions due to settling of the
heavier gases in the unmixed chamber.
The Fumiscope was zeroed on hot humid air and spanned with calibration gas before each fumigation.
Because the Fumiscope is not specific to MeBr, the accuracy of the measurement cannot be assessed.
Accuracy may also be reduced if interferences are present in the experimental gas that were not present
in the calibration gas. The accuracy of the differential time was not assessed, but is expected to be
negligible through the use of a computer clock. The accuracy of the thermocouple was determined though
the measurement of the uncertainty following calibration.
7A.2.2 CIO2 Fumigations
Table 7-3 shows how the DQI parameters met the goals for the CIO2 fumigation during exposure.
Table 7-3. DQIs for Critical Measurements for CIO2 Fumigations
Measurement Parameter
ClorDiSys EMS monitor
(0.1 -30mg/L)
ClorDiSys MiniDox monitor
(0.1 -30mg/L)
Modified SM 4500-CIO2 E
RH probes (0-1 00%)
Differential Time
Thermocouple
Fumigation A
Accuracy
(%)
11
12
1.4
-3.1
NA
±0.3°C
Completeness
(%)
100
100
100
98.9
74
0
The accuracy of the differential time was not accessed but is expected to be negligible through the use of
a computer clock. The accuracy of the thermocouple was determined though the measurement of the
uncertainty following calibration.
66
-------
7.2 Quantitative Acceptance Criteria
The quantitative acceptance criteria were associated with targeted setting conditions in the MEC test
chambers or system control accuracy (SCA) and completeness. The other quantitative acceptance
criteria are associated with the precision of the instruments during the entire exposure time.
The SCA is defined as the deviation from the set parameter over the duration of the test, as calculated by
Equation 7-1:
SCA = -
(7-1)
where Yt is the target parameter.
Completeness is defined as the ratio of the total number of data points that satisfy the acceptance criteria
to the total number of data points measured. All measured data are recorded electronically or on data
sheets or project notebooks. The system accuracies and test completeness are presented in Table 7-4.
Table 7-4. System Control Accuracy Results for Critical Measurements
Measurement
Parameter
Real-time CIO2
concentration inside
the MEC test chamber
Extracted CIO2 inside
the MEC test chamber
Real-time MeBr
concentration inside
the MEC test chamber
Relative humidity
inside both the MEC
test and control
chambers
Temperature inside
both the MEC test and
control chambers
Analysis Method
ClorDiSys MiniDox
monitor (0.1 -30
mg/L
Modified SM 4500-
CIO2E
Fumiscope 5.0
RH probes
(0-100%)
Thermistor
System Control Accuracy (%)
(Completeness, %)
Target
10
(95)
+ 15
(100)
+ 10
(95)
+ 5
(95)
+ 5
(95)
MeBr A
11
(85.9)
5.7
(70.1)
4.5
(27.5)
MeBrB
4.1
95.8
2.1
(98.5)
6.7
(3.7)
MeBrC
7.5*
(89)
11.4*
(21.2)
2.2*
(78.4)
CIO2
3.1
(100)
10.6
(100)
0.3
(98.9)
9.9
(0)
Conditions reported during Run C are not fully representative of actual conditions due to poor mixing. The MeBr test (Run C)
was exposed to higher concentrations of 98-2 MeBr due to poor mixing caused by a Gound Fault Circuit Interrupter (GFCI) fault
during fumigation. The exact concentration is unknown but is expected to be greater than 150,000 ppmv.
67
-------
To measure the instrument precision and stability, it is necessary to make replicate measurements of a
relatively unchanging parameter. The ability to measure precision is dependent upon the type of data that
is being measured. For this specific test program, precision is defined as the deviation from the average
measured values over the duration of the test. The best way to represent all of the replicate responses to
average values is with a relative standard deviation (RSD) for multiple measurements per run.
RSD =
(7-2)
The precision for each instrument used for each test sequence is presented in Table 7-5 and 7-6 for the
MeBr and CIO2 fumigations, respectively.
Table 7-5. Precision Criteria for 98-2 MeBr Fumigations
Measurement Parameter
Fumiscope
KOH wet chemistry
RH probes (0-1 00%)
Thermistor
98-2 MeBr Fumigation
RSD (%)
A
6.6
18
4.0
2.2
B
1.1
4.8
1.9
2.1
C*
6.2
13
6.9
1.3
* Fumigation C data is not representative of the entire chamber due to poor mixing.
One useful metric may be the total amount of fumigant injected. The required amount of MeBr to reach
setpoint and maintain conditions for Fumigation A was 1.6 kg, for Fumigation B was 2.3 kg, and for
Fumigation C was 2.0 kg.
Table 7-6. Precision (RSD %) Criteria for CIO2 Fumigation
Measurement Parameter
ClorDiSys MiniDox monitor
(0.1-30 mg/L),
Modified SM 4500-CIO2 E
RH probes (0-1 00%)
Thermistor
Fumigation A
RSD (%)
1.9
3.0
0.3
1.2
All data from this CIO2 fumigation satisfied the precision requirements.
68
-------
7.3 Audits
This project was assigned Quality Assurance (QA) Category III and did not require technical systems or
performance evaluation audits.
69
-------
8.0 Conclusions
In this study, all Category 2 and 3 materials proved to be resilient to 98-2 MeBr exposure, with the
exception of the steel outlet/switch box (rusted edges) and the low carbon steel coupons (severe
corrosion on the surface). Exposure to 98-2 MeBr resulted in far fewer damaging effects than the CIO2
gas, and those effects were apparently caused by the chlorine (choropicrin) component. MeBr alone may
prove to be the more compatible fumigant of the two. It is recommended that future work with MeBr be
tested to examine the effects of just MeBr without chloropicrin.
Alactel-Lucent (LGS, 2010) determined that in this new generation of computers, the heat sinks were
made from a single aluminum alloy that is resistant to MeBr and chloropicrin, as well as to CIO2. The
power system failures, eventually detected in all 98-2 MeBr exposed computers, were also traced by
Alactel-Lucent to the chloropicrin component of the fumigant (LGS, 2010).
The vast majority (83.7%) of failed tests with 98-2 MeBr were found to be related to the CD/DVD drive.
However, this subsystem is not reliable, with one out of three failing in two of the control condition
computer sets. Exposure to fumigants clearly further reduced reliability of the CD/DVD systems.
Off gassing from plastics, rubber and other materials should be considered when fumigating with 98-2
MeBr. Tests showed that off-gassing is still occuring 8/4 hours after the experiment started, illustrating
the need for careful handling of fumigated samples post-exposure due to the human health hazards.
70
-------
9.0 Recommendations
This section provides recommendations resulting from the experiments. The recommendations relate to
functional failures of various tested materials and electronic components that were subjected to a
decontamination scenario using 98-2 MeBr. These recommendations are presented below.
9.1 Corrective Actions
Corrective actions can be implemented immediately after the fumigation event to reduce/prevent further
degradation of sensitive materials and components. These corrective actions include evaluation of the
power supplies, which were vulnerable to the 98-2 MeBr. In addition, all personnel should be aware of the
potential off-gassing of MeBr following fumigation which poses a health risk.
9.2 Listing of "At Risk" Material and Electronic Components
During the planning stages of a remediation, inventory at-risk components, including power supplies and
metal bearings, and those that contain affected subsystems, such as DVDs and floppy drives. These
components could be candidates for alternative decontamination techniques or immediate replacement
after fumigation.
9.3 Further Research
An unexpected result of this study was that MeBr itself did not cause the observed corrosion.The
observed corrosion was caused by the 2 percent chloropicrin (tear gas) which is added to warn users of
exposure (LGS, 2010). This study should be repeated using MeBr alone.
A research plan should be developed to investigate additional materials/electronic component
compatibilities that are vital to other high-end electronic equipment but not covered under these
experiments. The list may include the compatibility of lubricated metals, aluminum alloys, and other types
of plastic used in the electronics industry. As more information becomes available on the effectiveness of
additional fumigation conditions, investigation of these additional fumigation conditions is important. In
planning activities for remediation, the inventory of at-risk items and components can be prepared so that
these items and components can be identified for special alternative decontamination procedures or
immediate replacement.
The safety aspect of off-gassing should also be considered for future research. MeBr concentrations
from the desorption from the computers exceeded expectations of the research team.
71
-------
REFERENCES
Bartram, P.W., Lynn, J.T., Reiff, L.P., Brickhouse, M.D., Lalain, T.A., Ryan, S.P., Martin, G.B., and D.
Stark, "Material Demand Studies: Interaction of Chlorine Dioxide Gas With Building Materials,"
EPA/600/R-08/091. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., September 2008.
Blinn, R.C., and F.A. Gunther, "Estimation of Methyl Bromide in Air," Anal. Chem., 21, 1289-1290, 1949.
ClorDiSys Systems Inc., ClorDiSys EMS Chlorine Dioxide Monitoring System: System Operations Guide.
Inv1.00ed.;2002.
Czarneski, M.A. , "Decontamination of a 65 Room Animal Facility Using Chlorine Dioxide Gas. In: Dun,
Sarah, Report on 2006 Workshop on Decontamination, Cleanup, and Associated Issues for Sites
Contaminated with Chemical, Biological, or Radiological Materials". EPA/600/R-06/121 2007. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Homeland Security
Research Center, Decontamination and Consequence Management Division, Research Triangle
Park, NC. January 2007.
Eaton, A.D., Clesceri, L.S., Rice, E.W., and A.E. Greenberg, Eds., Standard Method 4500-CIO2-E.
Amperometric Method II. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 21st ed.
American Public Health Association, American Waterworks Association, and Water Environment
Federation. Washington, D.C., 2005.
Kolb. R.W. and R. Schneiter, "The germicidal and sporicidal efficacy of methyl bromide for Bacillus
anthracis." Journal of Bacteriology, 50: 401-412, 1950.
LGS Innovations, LLC, "Assessment and Evaluation of the Impact of Chlorine Dioxide Gas on Electronic
Equipment;" publication pending; U.S. EPA: Washington, D.C., 2009.
LGS Innovations LLC, Alcatel - Lucent; "Assessment and Evaluation of the Impact of Fumigation with
Methyl Bromide Fumigation on Electronic Equipment. Final Report," Alcatel - Lucent 600 Mountain
Avenue, Murray Hill, NJ 07974; December 28, 2010.
PC-Doctor Inc. PC-Doctor® Service Center™ 7.5 Technical Brief. Available at http://www.pc-
doctor.com/files/enqlish/pcd service center 75 data sheet.pdf, 2011.
Rastogi, V.K.; and S.P.Ryan, "Studies of the Efficacy of Chlorine Dioxide Gas in Decontamination of
Building Materials Contaminated with Bacillus anthracis Spores", In: Dun, Sarah, Report on the 2006
Workshop on Decontamination, Cleanup, and Associated Issues for Sites Contaminated with
Chemical, Biological, or Radiological Materials. EPA/600/R-06/121 2007. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Homeland Security Research
Center, Decontamination and Consequence Management Division, Research Triangle Park, NC.
January 2007.
72
-------
Rastogi, V. K., S. P. Ryan, L. Wallace, L. S. Smith, S. S. Shah, and G. B. Martin, "Systematic Evaluation
of the Efficacy of Chlorine Dioxide in Decontamination of Building Interior Surfaces Contaminated with
Anthrax Spores," Appl Environ Microbiol., 76(10): 3343-3351, 2010.
Ryan, S.P., Rastogi, V.K., Wallace, L., Martin, G.B., Smith, L. S., Shah, S.S., and P.A. Clark, "Study on
the Use of Biological Indicators in Determining the Efficacy of the Decontamination of Building
Materials Contaminated with Bacillus Anthracis," In: National Conference on Environmental Sampling
and Detection for Bio Threat Agents, Brooklyn, NY, October 25-27, 2006; Brooklyn, NY, 2006.
Ryan,S.P., "Biological Threat Agent Decontamination Research and Development, National Homeland
Security Research Center (NHSRC) Systematic Decontamination Studies". In: Dun, Sarah, Report
on the 2007 Workshop on Decontamination, Cleanup, and Associated Issues for Sites Contaminated
with Chemical, Biological, or Radiological Materials. EPA/600/R-08/059. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, National Homeland Security Research
Center, Decontamination and Consequence Management Division, Research Triangle Park, NC. May
2008.
Ryan, S.P., "Persistence Testing and Evaluation of Fumigation Technologies for
Decontamination of Building Materials Contaminated With Biological Agents," Washington,
D.C.:U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/600/R-10/086, 2010.
Scheffrahn, R.H. and M.J. Weinberg, "Structural Fumigation with Methyl Bromide for Control of Bacillus
Spores: Field Demonstration with B.subtilis and B. stearothermophilus", described in "Compilation of
Available Data on Building Decontamination Alternatives," 2003.
Thompson, R., "A Review of the Properties and Usage of Methyl Bromide as a Fumigant." J. Stored.
Prod. Res. 1:353-376, 1966.
U.S. EPA, "Determining the Efficacy of Liquids and Fumigants in Systematic Decontamination Studies for
Bacillus anthracis Using Multiple Test Methods," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
DC, EPA/600/R-10/088, 2010.
U.S. EPA., "Compatibility of Material and Electronic Equipment with Chlorine Dioxide Fumigation," U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-10/037, 2010.
U.S. EPA, "Systematic Investigation of Liquid and Fumigant Decontamination Efficacy against
Biological Agents Deposited on Test Coupons of Common Indoor Materials," U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/600/R-11/076, 2011.
U.S. EPA, "The Phaseout of Methyl Bromide," http://www.epa.gov/ozone/mbr/, website accessed August
13,2012.
Weinberg, M.J., "Final Report: Whole-Structure Decontamination of Bacillus Spores by Methyl Bromide
Fumigation". EPA Contract Number 68D02080, 2003.
73
-------
Weinberg, M.J., "Whole-Structure Decontamination of Bacillus Spores by Methyl Bromide Fumigation."
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Small business Innovation Research (SBIR) - Phase II EPA
Contract Number 68D03056, 2003.
74
-------
Appendix A: Category 2 & 3 Materials
Material Description
PALM Z22 Handheld Organizer
Virgin Mobile Prepaid Marble Cell Phone - Black
First Alert 9- Volt Smoke Detector
Brother Fax-575 Fax/Copier
CD: Today's #1 Hits (DIGI-PAK)
DVD: Sleepwalking
Spring-Clamp Incadescent Light
DSL Line Conditioner
Smoke Alarm Tester
Textured Alloy Aluminum Sheet, 0.063" thick, 12"x12"
Alloy 101 Oxygen-Free Copper Sheet, 0.064" Thick, 6"X6"
Type 316 Stainless Steel Strip W/2B Finish, 12"X12"
Type 309 Stainless Steel Rectangular Bar, 2"X12"
Miniature Stainless Steel Shape Type 430 Strip, 1"X12"
Type 410 SS Flat Stock Precision Ground, 12"X24"
Low Carbon Steel Round Edge Rectangular Bar, 1 .5"X6'
Type E 304 Stainless Steel Strip W/#3 Finish, 2"X12"
Yellow SJTO 300 Vac Service Cord, 15FT
Steel Outlet/Switch Box
4X6 Standard Collor Print Glossy Finish
Gasket, round
Dry wall nail, coated, 1-3/8", Grip Rite Fas'ners
Drywall screw, coarse thread, 1-5/8", Grip Rite Fas'ners
Part Number
010921401
1627K48
1522T23
6638T21
88685K12
3350K19
9090k11
9205K151
8457K49
9524K62
6511k29
9085K11
8169K32
71695K81
14002
138CTDDW1
158CDWS1
Vendor
WALMART
WALMART
WALMART
Walmart
Walmart
Walmart
McMaster Carr
McMaster Carr
McMaster Carr
McMaster Carr
McMaster Carr
McMaster Carr
McMaster Carr
McMaster Carr
McMaster Carr
McMaster Carr
McMaster Carr
McMaster Carr
McMaster Carr
Walgreens
Sigma Electric
Lowe's
Lowe's
75
-------
Appendix B: Computer Specifications for Category 4 Testing
Base Unit:
Processor:
Memory:
Keyboard:
Monitor:
Video Card:
Hard Drive:
Floppy Disk Drive:
Floppy Disk Drive:
Operating System:
Mouse:
NIC:
CD-ROM or DVD-ROM Drive:
CD-ROM or DVD-ROM Drive:
CD-ROM or DVD-ROM Drive:
Sound Card:
Speakers:
Cable:
Documentation Diskette:
Documentation Diskette:
Factory Installed Software:
Feature
Service:
Service:
Service:
Service:
Installation:
Installation:
Service One:
Misc:
OptiPlex 760 Minitower Quad Base Standard Power Supply (224-5180)
Core2 Quad, 9400/2.66GHz, 6M 1333FSB (317-0592)
3GB, Non-ECC, 800MHz DDR2, 3X1GB OptiPlex (311-9528)
Dell USB Keyboard, No Hot Keys English, Black, Optiplex (330-1987)
Dell 18.5 inch Flat Panel Display, E1910, OptiPlex, Precision, Latitude and Enterprise (320-
8151)
Integrated Video, GMA 4500, DellOptiPlex 760 and 960 (320-7407)
80GB SATA 3.0Gb/s and 8MB DataBurst Cache, Dell OptiPlex (341-8006)
3.5 inch, 1.44MB, Floppy Drive Dell OptiPlex Desktop or Minitower (341-3840)
Cable for 3. SIN, 1.44MB Floppy Drive, Dell OptiPlex Minitower (330-0474)
Windows XP PRO SP3 with Windows Vista Business LicenseEnglish, Dell Optiplex (420-
9570)
Dell USB 2 Button Optical Mouse with Scroll, Black OptiPlex (330-2733)
Intel Standard Manageability Hardware Enabled Systems Management, Dell OptiPlex (330-
2902)
16X DVD+/-RW and 16X DVD, Data Only, Dell OptiPlex Minitower Black (313-7064)
Cyberlink Power DVD 8.2, with Media, Dell Relationship LOB (421-0536)
OPEN MARKET - Roxio Creator Dell Edition 10.3, Media, Dell RLOB (421-1189)
Performance Core2Quad Dell OptiPlex 760 Minitower (317-0595)
Internal Chassis Speaker Option, Dell OptiPlex Minitower (313-3350)
OptiPlex 760 Minitower Quad Standard Power Supply (330-3676)
Documentation, English, Dell OptiPlex (330-1710)
Power Cord, 125V, 2M, C13, Dell OptiPlex (330-1711)
No Dell Energy Smart Power Management Settings, OptiPlex (467-3564)
No Resource DVD for Dell Optiplex, Latitude, Precision (313-3673)
Basic Support: Next Business Day Parts and Labor Onsite Response 2 Year Extended
(991-3622)
Basic Support: Next Business Day Parts and Labor Onsite Response Initial Year (991-
6350)
Dell Hardware Limited Warranty Plus Onsite Service Extended Year(s) (992-6508)
Dell Hardware Limited Warranty Plus Onsite Service Initial Year (992-6507)
Standard On-Site Installation Declined (900-9987)
Standard On-Site Installation Declined (900-9987)
Keep Your Hard Drive, 3 Year (984-0102)
Shipping Material for System Smith Minitower, Dell OptiPlex (330-1186)
Vista Premium Downgrade Relationship Desktop (310-9161)
76
-------
Appendix C: Parts List of Copper and Aluminum Service Panels
C.E.S. (Garner)
214-A Garner Business Court,
Garner WC, 27529.
Phone: 919-661-1155
Fax: 919-661-8866
Email: GarnerD015gces-us.net
ARCADIS US INC
4915 PROSPECTUS DR
SUITS F
DURHAM NC
27713
Date:
Entered by:
Account-:
Order Number:
BACKING SLIP
GAR/031103
01 Oct 2008
Page 1/1
Robert Carr
00150396001
EPA
Qty Item
Description
$ Price Per
$ Goods
34 BR110
1 SHIPPING & HANDLIKG
14 PSS PS52S6-X
100 SO-14/3
14 MADISON MCG-50A5SO
14 C-H BR2417CFGP
100 MADISON 1-51
30 NM-B-14/2 ALUM
250 NH-B-14/2-CCT-250C
14 RACO 1S2
7 PSS 3232-1
7 PSS 66Q-IG
14 MADISON CPB-50
14 PSS TPJ18-I
14 RACO 778
SP 1BA BR BREAKER
SHIPPING S HANDLING
ISA 125V PLUG
Sfl-14/3
1/2 CORD CDHN
70A MLO PL LD CTR
3/B 2SCR NMC COHN
14/2 ALUM ROMEX
NM-B-14/2-CU-WG-250CL
4SU 1-1/2D BCX CCMB KO
DPLX RCPT-NEMA5-15R
SP 15A120V GKD AC SW
1/2 PLSTC INS BUSH
IV 2G TDG/DPLX PLT
4-IH SQ 1/2D 2G SH RING
5.27
82.15
6
336
449
26
25
500
215
34
55
74
12
66
183
.86 S
.02 M
.00 C
.00 B
.30 C
.00 K
.00 M
.50 C
.00 C
.50 C
.86 C
.07 C
.74 C
442.SB *
82.15 *
9S.04
93.60
62. B£
364.00
25.30
15.00
53.75
13.23
3. 85
5.22
l.BO
9.25
25.72
Signature:
m Jti£K in i
IKVC y Ak£ SiJL
Print Name:
(HOGS 3HAU. I-A33 Kl lUfi KVXBR CM LPSLIVSRY, KIT tU OOODS KSHA1N THE rfojl-£fcl¥ Ot 1
--.••-•.-.•u.l-. tO --t.IL-.-l:. ACCI iOk .-.!>- V-'(I.-. I. . N- Of £AL&. -..'L.t-L- OP -I*.--. Ab£ AVAILACLE '. L .--I
Goods Total
™ax Total
Total
. PAID 5UR.
$1294.45
S87.38
S1381.B3
77
-------
Appendix D: Subsystems of Category 4 Computers (Provided by Alcatel-Lucent)
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Major subsystem
Motherboard
Motherboard
Motherboard
Motherboard
Motherboard
Mthbd card connector
Motherboard
Motherboard
Motherboard
Motherboard
Motherboard
Motherboard
Motherboard
Motherboard
Motherboard
Motherboard
MthBd cable
connector
Description
Dual processor CPU chip
Dual processor CPU heat sink
IO Controller 1C
CMOS (CMOS RAM with RTC & NVRAM)
SDRAM memory cards (DIMM)
SRAM DIMM module board mounted
connector
Graphics and Memory Controller Hub
Intel 82Q965 heat sink
SPI (Serial Peripheral Interface) Flash Device:
ROM BIOS FWH (firmware hub) : contains
BIOS Setup program POST, PCI auto-config
and Plug&Play support
SuperlO Controller (contains floppy drive
controller, serial port controller, parallel port
controller, power management (fan) controller
LPC Interface TPM (Trusted Platform Module)
protects signature keys and encryption
Lan-On-Motherboard (NIC) with 10/100/GbE
support
Battery (3V Lithium)
Audio CODEC (compression/decompression)
Frequency timing generator/Real time clock
battery - mount and socket
SATA DriveO (hard drive)
Chipsets involved
Inter Core™ 2 Duo E6400
Inter Core™ 2 Duo E6400
Inter 82801 HB/82801HR
ICH8
Inter 82801 HB/82801HR
ICH8
Hyundai 51 2MB DDRW-
SDRAM
Inter 82Q965
Inter 82Q966
MXIC MX25L8005
SMSCSCH5514D-NS
Broadcom BCM5754KM
Ethernet NIC and ATMEL
AT45DB001B Flash SPI
memory device
Panasonic CR2032 3V
Analog Devices HO Audio
SoundMAX CODEC AD1983
Inter Core 2 Duo E6400,
ICS9LP5052 and 32.768k
crystal clock chip
Inter 82801 HB/82801HR
ICH8
PC-Doctor®
Tests this
subsystem
(yes/no)
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
n
y
78
-------
#
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
Major subsystem
MthBd cable
connector
MthBd cable
connector
MthBd cable
connector
MthBd cable
connector
MthBd card connector
MthBd card connector
MthBd card connector
MthBd card connector
MthBd cable
connector
MthBd cable
connector
MthBd cable
connector
MthBd cable
connector
MthBd cable
connector
MthBd cable
connector
MthBd component
MthBd component
MthBd component
MthBd component
MthBd component
MthBd component
MthBd component
Fan
Power supply module
Power supply module
Power supply module
Description
SATA Drivel (DVD drive)
SATA Drive4 (not connected)
SATA Drive5 (not connected)
Front Panel Connector (ON/OFF switch, 2
USB ports, front audio in/out ports)
Chipsets involved
Inter 82801 HB/82801HR
ICH8
Inter 82801 HB/82801HR
ICH8
lntel®82801HB/82801HR ICH8
PCI Expressx16 connector (SLOT1) (not connected)
PCI Expressx16 connector (SLOT4) (not connected)
PCI Connector (SLOT2)
PCI Connector (SLOTS)
Floppy drive connector
Serial connector (not connected)
Fan connector
Internal Speaker connector (not connected)
Processor power connector (4 pin)
Main power connector (24 pin)
Beep speaker
Capacitor
Resistor
Transistor
Choke
Solder bond pad - specify location
screws and other mounting hardware
Main chassis fan
Electrical function
Mains power plugs (1 1 0V)
Chassis
PC-Doctor®
Tests this
subsystem
(yes/no)
y
n
n
y
n
n
y
y
y
n
n
n
y
y
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
y
n
n
79
-------
#
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
Major subsystem
Power supply cable to
motherbrd 24 pin
conn
Floppy disk drive
Floppy disk drive
Floppy disk drive
Floppy disk drive
Floppy disk drive
Floppy disk drive
Hard drive
Hard drive
Hard drive
Hard drive
Hard drive
Hard drive
DVD Drive
DVD Drive
DVD Drive
DVD Drive
DVD Drive
DVD Drive
DVD Drive
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Monitor
Mouse
Mouse
Keyboard
Keyboard
Commun. Port COM1
Printer Port LPT1
Description
Power cable
Chassis
Motor
Head
Power connector
Power cable
Data cable
Chassis
Motor
Head
Power connector
Power cable
Data cable
Chassis
Drive motor
Head
Power connector
Power cable
Data cable
Drawer open/close on chassis
Screen
Data Cable
Data Cable connector
Power Cable
Power Cable 110V plug
Video connector on chassis
Base of monitor stand
USB Data Cable
Mechanical operation
USB Data Cable
Mechanical operation
COM1 connector on chassis
LPT1 connector on chassis
Chipsets involved
PC-Doctor®
Tests this
subsystem
(yes/no)
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
y
y
y
y
y
y
80
-------
#
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
Major subsystem
USB Port 1 keyboard
USB Port 2 mouse
USB Port 1
USB Port 2
USB Port 3
USB Port 4
USB Port 5
USB Port 6
Network (LAN) Port
Audio out
Audio in
CASE
CASE
CASE
CASE
CASE
CASE
CASE
Description
USB connector on chassis
USB connector on chassis
USB connector on chassis
USB connector on chassis
USB connector on chassis
USB connector on chassis
USB connector on chassis
USB connector on chassis
Network (LAN) adapter connector on chassis
Audio line out connector (green) on chassis
Audio line in connector (blue & pink) on
chassis
Removable side of case
Case interior floor
Case back panel screens
Case front panel
PCI Plates
Release Latch
Screws on exterior
Chipsets involved
PC-Doctor®
Tests this
subsystem
(yes/no)
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
y
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
81
-------
-®
Appendix E: PC-Doctor Service Center™ 7.5 Tests
Test#
Test
System Board
1
2
RTC Rollover Test
RTC Accuracy Test
Intel® Core™ 2 CPU 6400 @ 2.13GHz CPU:0
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Register Test
Level 2 Cache Test
Math Register Test
MMX Test
SSE Test
SSE2 Test
SSE3 Test
SSSE3 Test
Stress Test
Multicore Test
Intel® Core™ 2 CPU 6400 @ 2.13GHz CPU:1
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Register Test
Level 2 Cache Test
Math Register Test
MMX Test
SSE Test
SSE2 Test
SSE3 Test
SSSE3 Test
Stress Test
Multicore Test
CMOS
23
24
Checksum Test
Pattern Test
512 MB DDR2-SDRAM (666 MHz)
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
Pattern Test
Advanced Pattern Test
Bit Low Test
Bit High Test
Nibble Move Test
Checkerboard Test
Walking One Left Test
Walking One Right Test
Auxiliary Pattern Test
Address Test
Modulo20 Test
Moving Inversion Test
82
-------
C:
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
Linear Seek Test
Random Seek Test
Funnel Seek Test
Surface Scan Test
SMART Status Test
SMART Short Self Test
SMART Extended Self Test
SMART Conveyance Self Test
HL-DT-ST DVD+-RW GSA-H31N
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
56
57
58
59
60
61
(DVD-RW Drive) Read Write Test
(DVD-R Drive) Read Write Test
(CD-R Drive) Read Write Test
(DVD Drive) Linear Seek Test
(DVD Drive) Random Seek Test
(DVD Drive) Funnel Seek Test
(DVD Drive) Linear Read Compare Test
(DVD+R DL Drive) Read Write Test
(DVD+RW Drive) Read Write Test
(DVD+R Drive) Read Write Test
(CD-RW Drive) Read Write Test
CD-ROM Drive) Linear Seek Test
(CD-ROM Drive) Random Seek Test
(CD-ROM Drive) Funnel Seek Test
(CD-ROM Drive) Linear Read Compare Test
(CD-ROM Drive) CD Audio Test
Floppy disk drive
62
63
64
65
Linear Seek Test
Random Seek Test
Funnel Seek Test
Surface Scan Test
PCDoctor® USB Test Key 2.0 USB Device
66
67
68
69
70
71
Scan Test Port 1
Scan Test Port 2
Scan Test Port 3
Scan Test Port 4
Scan Test Port 5
Scan Test Port 6
Intel® Q965/Q963 Express Chipset Family
72
73
74
Primary Surface Test
Fixed Transformation and Lighting Test
Transformation and Lighting Stress Test
Intel® Q965/Q963 Express Chipset Family
75
Primary Surface Test
83
-------
76
77
Fixed Transformation and Lighting Test
Transformation and Lighting Stress Test
Broadcom NetXtreme 57xx Gigabit Controller
78
79
80
Network Link Test
TCP/IP Internal Loopback Test
Network External Loopback Test
HID Keyboard Device
81
Keyboard Interactive Test
Dell™ USB Mouse
82
Mouse Interactive Test
SoundMAX Integrated Digital HD Audio Driver
83
84
Playback Mixer State Test
Sound Interactive Test
Intel® Q965/Q963 Express Chipset Family
85
Audio Visual Interleave (AVI) Interactive Test
Dell ™ E157FP (Plug and Play Monitor)
86
Monitor Interactive Test
Communications Port (COM1)
87
88
89
90
91
External Register Test
External Loopback Test
Internal Register Test
Internal Control Signals Test
Internal Send and Receive Test
ECP Printer Port (LPT1)
92
93
Internal Read and Write Test
External Read and Write Test
PCI Bus
94
Configuration Test
PCDoctor® USB Test Key 2.0 USB Device
95
USB Status Test
Dell™ USB Keyboard
96
USB Status Test
Dell™ USB Mouse
97
USB Status Test
Intel® Q963/Q965 PCI Express Root Port - 2991
98
PCI Express Status Test
Microsoft UAA Bus Driver for High Definition Audio
99
PCI Express Status Test
Intel® ICH8 Family PCI Express Root Port 1 - 283F
100
PCI Express Status Test
Intel® ICH8 Family PCI Express Root Port 5 - 2847
101
PCI Express Status Test
Broadcom NetXtreme 57xx Gigabit Controller
102
PCI Express Status Test
84
-------
SoundMAX Integrated Digital HD Audio Driver
103
Rough Audio Test
Batch 5
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
System Timer
BIOS Timer
IRQ Controller
DMA Channels
RAM Refresh
RTC Clock
CMOS RAM
Keyboard
PCI
USB Port
Video Memory
Video Pages
VGA Controller Registers
VGA Color-DAC Registers
VESA Full Video Memory Test
COM 1 Registers And Interrupts
COM 1 Internal Loopback
COM 1 FIFO Buffers (16550A)
LPT 1 Command And Data Port
SMBUS
Batch 4
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
CPU 1 CPU Registers
CPU 1 CPU Arithmetics
CPU 1 CPU Logical Operations
CPU 1 CPU String Operations
CPU 1 CPU Misc Operations
CPU 1 CPU Interrupts/Exceptions
CPU 1 CPU Buffers/Cache
CPU 1 CoProc Registers
CPU 1 CoProc Commands
CPU 1 CoProc Arithmetics
CPU 1 CoProc Transcendental
CPU 1 CoProc Exceptions
CPU 1 MMX Test
CPU 2 CPU Registers
CPU 2 CPU Arithmetics
CPU 2 CPU Logical Operations
CPU 2 CPU String Operations
CPU 2 CPU Misc Operations
CPU 2 CPU Interrupts/Exceptions
CPU 2 CPU Buffers/Cache
85
-------
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
CPU 2 CoProc Registers
CPU 2 CoProc Commands
CPU 2 CoProc Arithmetics
CPU 2 CoProc Transcendental
CPU 2 CoProc Exceptions
CPU 2 MMX Test
Base Fast Pattern
Base Fast Address
Base Medium Pattern
Base Medium Address
Base Heavy Pattern
Base Heavy Address
Base Bus Throughput
Extended Fast Pattern
Extended Fast Address
Extended Medium Pattern
Extended Medium Address
Extended Heavy Pattern
Extended Heavy Address
Extended Code Test
Extended Advanced Pattern
PCI post Card Test
165
166
167
168
169
170
D1
D2
D3
D4
D5
D6
Power Supply Tests
171
172
173
174
175
20/24
Motherboard
Hard drive
DVD drive
Floppy Drive
86
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
PRESORTED STANDARD
POSTAGE & FEES PAID
EPA
PERMIT NO. G-35
Office of Research and Development (8101R)
Washington, DC 20460
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300
------- |