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 ------- |