Chemical apparatus and process disinfecting – deodorizing – preser – Process disinfecting – preserving – deodorizing – or sterilizing – Using disinfecting or sterilizing substance
Reexamination Certificate
2002-03-28
2004-03-02
Le, Hoa Van (Department: 1752)
Chemical apparatus and process disinfecting, deodorizing, preser
Process disinfecting, preserving, deodorizing, or sterilizing
Using disinfecting or sterilizing substance
C422S004000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06699433
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Field of Invention
The instant invention relates to a novel method and means for the efficient, safe, and economic decontamination of entire physical structures, such as buildings, and/or articles contaminated by microorganisms inclusive of pathogenic spores.
2. Prior Art
The prior art of eradication of entire buildings of insects such as termites, cockroaches, wood-boring beetles, rats, mice, bats and other such arthropod and vertebrate animals has, over the last approximately sixty years, consisted of covering and sealing the structure to be treated with a vinyl tarpaulin and, thereafter, introducing the selected fumigant into the structure covered by or confined within the tarpaulin. Among the various fumigants used in the prior art for this purpose has been methyl bromide, a USEPA registered pesticide. However, due to the ozone-depleting properties of methyl bromide as have been recognized by the Montreal Protocol of 1992, methyl bromide was officially added to the list of ozone-depleting chemicals and, pursuant thereto, its production was frozen at 1991 levels thereof. Further, any chemical with an ozone depletion potential (ODP) of greater than 0.02 was, under the Protocol, banned at the end of 2000 and, in the case of methyl bromide, its use in the United States has been banned by the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) effective in 2005. Moreover, neither methyl bromide nor other known structural fumigants, have ever been employed for the purpose of decontamination of a structure which are contaminated by microorganisms that are pathogenic to humans including bacteria (prokaryota).
Methyl bromide has been used as a fumigant since the 1930s to control pests in soil, stored commodities, structures and shipments that must meet agricultural quarantine regulations. The major use in agriculture is soil fumigation. It is an extremely effective herbicide, nematicide, insecticide, and fungicide. It is important for the large-scale commercial production of strawberries, tomatoes, peppers, melons, grapes, cucumbers, eggplants, ornamentals, and tobacco. In addition, U.S. regulations require that a wide array of imported food and non-food commodities be fumigated with methyl bromide as a condition of entry into the country. Methyl bromide has never been employed as a means for decontamination of structures of human pathogens such as viruses and hazardous bacteria. Rather, if the contamination of a structure was known to be limited to a particular surface or article, one could employ bleach (sodium hypochlorite), a foam, such as Sandia foam, or a toxic gas, such as chlorine dioxide, which are commonly unstable and/or explosive.
Methyl bromide (CH
3
Br, also abbreviated as MeBr), a member of the chemical family of alkyl halides, is a colorless and non-flammable gas, which has no odor at toxic levels. It is stable under normal conditions of handling and use. Methyl bromide gas is commercially available at a purity greater than 99% from Great Lakes Chemical Corporation (West Lafayette, Ind.) under the trade name Meth-O-Gas® 100 and Meth-O-Gas® Q.Most fumigation treatments are recommended on the basis of dosage for a certain volume, expressed in pounds per 1000 cubic feet (lb/1000 ft
3
) in the industry, and in milligram per liter (mg/l) using the metric system. The common dosages used for treating commodities range from 1 lb/1000 ft
3
for dried fruits such as dried apples and prunes, to 8 lb/1000 ft
3
for cotton seeds, equivalent of from 16 to 128 mg/l. For structural fumigations, such as in termite infested houses and buildings, the common dosage is from 1 to 3 lb/1000 ft
3
, equivalent of from 16 to 48 mg/l. An important factor used in the industry is the amount of gas acting on the pests over a certain period of time, expressed as the product of concentration and time (CT product, mg-hr/l). The use of methyl bromide has never been considered at the concentration, temperature, and time combinations suggested herein.
Given the new reality of bio-terrorism and its potential in the wake of the events of September, 2001, much concern and attention have been directed to the decontamination of entire buildings that have been the subject of a biological attack such as occurred in Florida, Washington, D.C., and various U.S. Post Offices in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut and elsewhere. Government, inclusive of the EPA and CDC, as well as research community and industry have lacked experiences other than that of decontaminating buildings subjected to a purely chemical contamination, such as by asbestos or PCBs and therein has had no experience with the many problems related to the decontamination of entire buildings, parts of which have been infected (or potentially infected) by a bio-weapon consisting of a microorganism such as a virus, bacteria or spores thereof. Historically, structural decontaminations of biological weapons occurred at an Army facility at Ford Detrick in 1970 and 1971 for a building previously used for producing
Bacillus anthracis
, commonly known as anthrax. The building was decontaminated twice using formaldehyde gas, and further hydrochloric acid was forced through pipes and valves that carried a bacteria mixture. Anthrax spores and other bacteria were not found after the decontamination. However, the damage by the caustic decontamination has threatened the structural integrity of the building. In light thereof, the EPA and CDC, after consultation with scientists, public health specialists, industry experts and even historians on the subject of bio-weapons, settled on the use of chlorine dioxide gas on a massive scale, never before attempted, as a means of decontaminating buildings exposed to a bio-weapon and, particularly, spores of anthrax. As such, operating with little historical or scientific precedent, EPA/CDC have attempted to employ, in substantial quantity, chlorine dioxide gas which, in the past, had been employed only in context of purification of drinking water. In these efforts, the EPA determined that use of chlorine dioxide gas on a large scale entails several hazards and problems, this apart from an underlying question with regard to the concentration, temperature, humidity and time of exposure necessary to kill anthrax spores in sufficient quantity. For example, the humidity within a building to be so decontaminated must be first be elevated from an ambient level of about thirty percent to that of seventy percent, which is considered the optimum level for chlorine gas to kill spores of anthrax. Furthermore, because of the extreme oxidative properties of chlorine dioxide, substantially all equipment and furniture, within a building to be decontaminated must be removed to preclude corrosion or degradation of the surfaces thereof by the oxidative effect of the chlorine dioxide. Further, a special chemical, such as sodium bisulfate, must be employed to neutralize and vent the chlorine dioxide from the building itself. Then, all removed equipment and furniture must be brought back into the building after being fumigated in chambers with flammable ethylene oxide gas. Thereafter, test strips containing a bacterial endospore (
Bacillus subtilis
var.
niger
) more chemically resistant than anthrax spores are used to verify the effectiveness of the chlorine dioxide decontamination.
In view of the above, an urgent need has arisen for a method of decontamination of whole buildings (including the inside, outside, duct work and piping therein,) that will not only obviate the need to remove sensitive articles such as photographs, documents, and computers, and heavy items such as furniture, but which will also obviate the need to pump steam into the structure to elevate the humidity thereof and that does not require a special chemical to neutralize the active agent beyond these issues is a need for a method that can provide a higher level of confidence that the targeted pathogenic organism has, in fact, been killed, and therefore is unable to germinate.
In spore-forming bacteria, the spore is protected from environmental extre
Scheffrahn Rudolf H.
Weinberg Mark J.
Le Hoa Van
Malin Haley & DiMaggio, P.A.
LandOfFree
Method of decontamination of whole structures and articles... does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Method of decontamination of whole structures and articles..., we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Method of decontamination of whole structures and articles... will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3279997