envirosolutions
1000 Twelve Oaks Center Drive, Suite 101
Minneapolis, MN 55391
Phone: (952) 767-3487
Email: info@envirosolutions.net
  August 10, 2008
Douglas J. Smith
Union Hospital Health Group
Director of Materials Management
(Site of the first OZONATOR NG-1000 installation in the United States)
  January 2, 2007
Bill Patrakis
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Environmental Biologist - Division of Waste Management
  July 24, 2006
Ellen Lorscheider
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
  March - 2006
Douglas A. F. Saunders
Saskatchewan Corrections and Public Safety Supervisor
- Office of the Fire Commissioner
  February - 2006
Wayne Clifton
Clifton & Associates
  December - 2005
Stefan Wagener, PhD, CBSP
Scientific Director, Biosafety and Environment
Canadian Science Centre for Human and Animal Health
  August - 2005
BDS Laboratories
  August - 2005
Gary Bosgoed, P.Eng.
BOSGOED PROJECT CONSULTANTS LTD. - COLT ENGINEERING
  May - 2005
The first OZONATOR unit, manufactured by Brandt Industries
  February - 2005
Lois Duthie, Health Canada
- Regulatory and Scientific Section
- Licensing Services Medical Devices Bureau
  August - 2004
Colin D. Rasmussen, Ph.D., LL.B.
FURMAN & KALLIO AND UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
August - 2005

Gary Bosgoed, P.Eng.
BOSGOED PROJECT CONSULTANTS LTD. - COLT ENGINEERING


In August of 2005, Bosgoed Project Consultants Ltd. And Gary Bosgoed were contracted to conduct independent tests of the OZONATOR technology. Below is an excerpt from their letter indicating the successful results:

Forty (40) STS Spore Strips were inserted in the device for one hour on June 28, 2005 - (Bacillus atrophaeus and geobacillus stearothermophilus, containing 600,000 and 100,000 spores respectively).

Treated strips were tested by an independent laboratory at 35 degrees C and 55 degrees C for both plate count and growth (positive/negative) in a quality control media of Tryptic Soy Broth (TSB) and Tryptic Soy Agar (TSA).

There was a greater than a 4-log reduction in plate count on all strips.

All results negative for growth (TSB) except for Strip # 19, which still exceeded a 4-log reduction.

NOTE: During the testing of our technology, two methods of testing were used. The first was a “dry” process and the second was a “wet” process. In the wet process, the relative humidity was adjusted. Test strip #19 indicated in the tests was a test strip from the dry process which was included in the analysis of the wet process for comparison and verification.

A strip was not treated, but tested as a positive control strip.

Sample testing was done by BDS Laboratories in Qu’Appelle, SK (Test #M062805).

Gary now works for Colt engineering out of Calgary, Alberta.
 
 
2010 © Copyright - EnviroSolutions. All Rights Reserved