You are here:
Personnel Decontamination Line Sprayer Options for Biological Contamination Incident Response
Citation:
Archer, J. AND K. McConkey. Personnel Decontamination Line Sprayer Options for Biological Contamination Incident Response. U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC, EPA/600/S-20/366, 2020.
Impact/Purpose:
To provide EPA responders information on conventional and innovative methods for conducting personnel decontamination during a Bacillus anthracis (Ba) or other biological agent response. This brief summarizes comparison studies of two different types of sprayers for use in the personnel decontamination (decon) line.
Description:
Following a bioterrorism event, an incident or unified command would be established, the impacted area would be characterized, and response work zones set up based on the extent of indoor/outdoor contamination. The personnel decontamination (decon) line, established in the contamination reduction zone, is essential for ensuring potentially biohazardous contamination on worker personal protective equipment (PPE) does not migrate outside of this zone. During personnel decontamination, conventional backpack or portable garden-type sprayers are often used to distribute liquid decontaminant onto PPE surfaces to physically remove and/or inactivate the contaminant. This process can lead to migration of biological contaminants and produces large volumes of liquid waste. A comparison of the performance of electrostatic sprayers and conventional backpack sprayers in personnel decontamination revealed that the electrostatic sprayer generated substantially less liquid runoff (~75X), which would minimize waste generation and disposal costs following an event. Pilot-scale tests using manikins with PPE showed decontamination efficacy greater than 6 log reduction (liquid and aerosol inoculation) for the conventional backpack sprayer while decontamination was effective but incomplete with the electrostatic sprayer (< 6 log reduction) with residual spores detected at “hard-to-reach” areas. Decontamination efficacy of the electrostatic sprayer was improved by increasing the spray time as greater than 6 log reduction was then observed (liquid and aerosol inoculation). Spore reaerosolization was higher during decontamination with the conventional backpack sprayer. The electrostatic sprayer as used in this study presents a viable decontamination option for personnel decon line following biological agent contamination incidents.