Results from this study indicate that the operationally realistic short decontamination dwell times do not yield significant reduction of the chemical by chemical reaction alone, and suggest that extrapolating efficacy results from building decontamination studies or stirred reactor tests should be done with caution. Most of the tested products appear to be equally limited in efficacy over the dwell-time examined. Exceptions such as full strength bleach or RSDL are only efficacious against some of the chemicals. This reinforces the assertion that the decontaminant should be tailored to the chemical encountered. Further, the results of this study indicate that the decontamination efficacy may also depend on the composition of the contaminated substrate.
More abundant application of decontaminant or longer dwell times should improve efficacy although the latter may not always be operationally feasible, especially during decontamination line procedures of response personnel on supplied air. Based on this study, the inclusion of chemical neutralization in decontamination line procedures does not significantly reduce chemical exposure risks to personnel doffing PPE.
The type of physical removal employed, and the sequence of removal and neutralization in a decontamination line bears further study. For example, an initial reduction of the amount of chemical that is present on a PPE or related material through physical removal such as dry decontamination (with e.g., nonwoven dry fabric pads [20,21]), would significantly ease the stoichiometric contaminant/decontaminant burden to use larger amounts of liquid decontaminant. However, even marginal decreases in contamination due to neutralization chemistries can be important prior to PPE doffing. Additionally, once PPE is doffed neutralization should continue, reducing the hazard posed by contaminated PPE as hazardous waste.