LEGISLATIVE UPDATE – FLORIDA

EEF Faces Scrutiny for Alleged Misstatements

Hospital Recovers from Hurricane Charley in 25 Days

Successful Cleanup of Condition 2 Settled Spores

VOICES

“The [homeowners insurance] companies say, ‘We’ll take care of you.’ But if you let them do that, it can come back to bite you.”

— Marcia Salkin, senior policy representative for the National Association of Realtors, quoted May 26 in a CNN report on the trend among some insurance companies of not renewing the policies of homeowners who have filed claims including for mold and water damage
EPA LISTS IEQ RESEARCH NEEDS

Word on the Street 

LIKE ELVIS, THEY’VE LEFT THE BUILDING
The Houston office of Munters Moisture Control Services laid off or fired six to eight employees in one day late last month, several people told IE Connections. When the employees arrived at work on Monday, May 23, they say they were told on the spot they no longer had jobs at Munters, some of them not receiving severance packages. Frank Shambarger, director of human resources for Munters, was in a meeting when IE Connections called for comment, and he did not respond by deadline. Two former employees said that many of the people who were let go were committed and loyal workers, often responding to calls for work at all hours of the day and spending months away from home in response to large jobs like hurricane-response calls in Florida last year. The former employees who spoke with IE Connections asked not to be identified by name for confidentiality reasons.

HURRICANE VICTIMS DROPPED
Allstate Insurance, fighting off “heavy underwriting losses” incurred after the 2004 hurricane season in Florida, “is cutting loose more than 100,000 of its Florida homeowners by refusing to renew their policies,” according to a CNN report filed May 26 by Les Christie. The report, dubbed “Homeowners insurance: Use it and Lose it,” included tips provided by the Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America on how homeowners can file small claims in a way that makes their policies less likely to be purged when it comes time to renew. The tips recommend that homeowners maintain all aspects of the house and pay out-of-pocket for losses that are $200 above the deductible. Other tips favored long-term loyalty to one company that would provide more than just one type of insurance.

In the meantime, over half of the Florida’s homeowners “have taken action to protect their homes from hurricanes,” according to results of a statewide survey disclosed last month by the Institute for Business & Home Safety. Of the 800 Florida homeowners included in the telephone survey, 11 percent said they were not concerned at all about preventing and reducing hurricane damage. Among groups not included in the survey were people who filed homeowners insurance claims in 2004.

YOU WON’T FIND THIS ON EBAY
Has there been a gas monitor collecting dust for months in your attic that you just know ought to have a perfectly good home? Are you looking for a good price on a used noise dosimeter? The American Industrial Hygiene Association last month announced the launch of its online auction site, OEHS AuctionCentral. This central marketplace, which debuted May 24 at the American Industrial Hygiene Conference and Expo in Anaheim, Calif., allows users to buy and sell new and “gently used” professional equipment. This new service is open to all OEHS professionals. OEHS AuctionCentral will provide a new outlet for equipment sales, as well as a way to earn money on items for which an individual or company no longer has use. For more information, visit www.oehsauctioncentral.com or contact AIHA’s Marketing Department at (703) 849-8888.

SHARPER IMAGE LOOKING DIM
The past two months have not been kind for retailer Sharper Image. After being hit in Consumer Reports magazine for poor performance results in testing its flagship product, the Ionic Breeze electrostatic precipitator, the corporation’s stock values were on the decline at the end of April and into May. Smartmoney.com  reported May 20 that shares of SHRP HAD plummeted 10 percent to $12.49, the lowest price of the stock since Feb. 15, 2002. Sharper Image Corporation reported 2005 first-quarter losses of 30 cents per share last month. As per longstanding company policy, the corporation last month again refused to disclose publicly the sales figures for each of its product lines. However, the Smartmoney.com article, titled “Not So Sharp,” included one independent analyst’s speculation on how important the Ionic Breeze line is to Sharper Image. Robert Straus of New York-based IRG Research said, “I believe that the Ionic Breeze makes up 30 percent of revenues and a larger percentage of profit. … The company is suffering from declining sales, and I think Ionic Breeze is likely to remain in a troubled spot for the next couple of quarters.”

PROACTIVE GOVERNMENT
The Korea Times reported last month that South Korea’s government is acting to curb what it labels “sick school syndrome.” Part of the government’s plan, the news organization reported, “is an inspection program for measuring the air pollution level of newly built schools.” Under the three-year plan, schools will undergo two inspections each year from government-picked “municipal environmental research institutes and private agencies,” according the Korea Times. It also reported that new school construction materials and equipment will be subject to the “enforcement of stricter standards” under the plan.

IS THE SLUMLORD THE TARGET?
A new law in the state of Washington was intended to affirm the resident’s right to safe housing. Gov. Christine Gregoire signed the bill May 10, ushering in a new era in which apartment owners must be responsible for finding temporary housing for the tenants in apartments that have been shut down for safety-code violations. A front-page article last month in the Olympian newspaper reports that the law was inspired by the situation at the Forest Glen apartment complex in the state capital. However, some argued against the bill’s passage because they predicted the unintended effect of gentrification, which is just what happened at Forest Glen, the Olympian reported. Tim Seth, president of the Olympic Rental Association, was quoted as saying that at Forest Glen, “Economically marginal families lost housing they could afford. That’s the consequence of this beat-up-the-landlord approach.”

LEGISLATIVE UPDATE – FLORIDA
State Passes Requirements for Mold Professionals
Bill Provides for Experience, Education and Insurance
By Steve Sauer

Florida’s bicameral legislature has passed a bill that sets requirements for mold remediators and assessors but stops short of providing for a state-mandated licensing program.

However, the bill had not yet reached the desk of Gov. Jeb Bush by the time this newspaper went to press.

House Bill 315 last month gained the near-unanimous approval of both houses of the state legislature. The measure was passed on the last day of the 2005 legislative session, May 6.

A media contact in the governor’s office said no advance preparation had been done within the office to look at the bill, so there was no immediate indication as to whether Bush was expected to sign the bill or veto it.

The bill’s passage in the state legislature was the culmination of about two years of work to follow somewhat in the footsteps of Texas and Louisiana, the only states to have instituted programs for the licensing of mold remediators and assessors. However, Florida’s approach toward professional credentials is vastly different, a fact some industry professionals attribute to a strong show of effective lobbying.
Members of various industry organizations last year helped to establish an alliance that would contribute efforts to aid state legislators in drafting an appropriate piece of legislation. Known as the Florida Coalition on Health Indoor Environments, the group consists of organizations and partners including the National Air Duct Cleaners Association, the American Indoor Air Quality Council’s Southeast Chapter, the Indoor Air Quality Association, and the Institute of Inspection, Cleaning and Restoration Certification, among others.

First in 2003, State Sen. Mike Bennett introduced legislation aimed at shielding residents from unethical practitioners in the indoor air quality marketplace. The bill did not pass the legislature that year, but when reintroduced in late 2004 in the wake of the state’s most destructive hurricane season on record, the bill easily gained more unilateral support.

While earlier drafts of Bennett’s legislation called for the state Insurance Board to adopt and fund a statewide licensing program, he eventually filed legislation that would leave more room for the industry to regulate itself. Bennett pre-filed Senate Bill 590 for the 2005 legislative session, and the bill favored recognizing existing industry and university certifications over creating a licensing program.

It was not Bennett’s bill but a similar bill, however, that passed the House and Senate last month. Drafted by Rep. Bob Allen and filed Jan. 12, House Bill 315 was originally a bill dealing strictly with requirements for home inspectors. The requirements for mold assessors and remediators found in Bennett’s bill were absorbed into the home-inspection bill.

HB 315 carries four important components pertaining to mold assessment and remediation: 1.) It requires that mold assessors carry insurance. 2.) It sets minimum requirements of education and experience for assessors and remediators. 3.) It sets a list of prohibited acts and penalties for noncompliance. 4.) Finally, it identifies a list of parties who are exempted from the requirements.

Requirement for Insurance

If the bill is signed, all mold assessors and remediators would be required to carry liability insurance policies specifically for mold, effective Oct. 1.
The exact language used in the bill states:
• “A mold assessor must maintain a mold-specific insurance policy in an amount of not less than $1 million.”
• “A noncontracting mold remediator shall maintain a general liability insurance policy with a mold insurance pollution rider in an amount of not less than $1 million.” (The term “noncontracting mold remediator,” is used throughout the bill and is specifically defined as “any person that performs mold remediation.”)
Likewise, the bill sets liability insurance requirements for home inspectors. The minimum amount for a home inspector’s policy is $300,000 under the bill.

Requirement for Education and Experience
If the bill is signed, the law would set requirements pertaining to mold assessors’ certification. Those bearing certification must be certified by either a community college or university or a nonprofit organization meeting certain criteria. Mold assessors who are not certified must work under the direct supervision of someone who is.

The bill specifies that the nonprofit organization providing mold assessment certification must have a focus on indoor air quality or industrial hygiene. The nonprofit organization must also require applicants for certification to pass an examination that tests knowledge related to mold and mold assessment.
The training and education offered by community colleges and universities must relate to mold assessment and provide a certification in order to qualify under the bill as granting an individual the authority to work as a mold assessor.
However, the nonprofit organization must also have certain educational and experiential prerequisites for its applicants.

If from a nonprofit organization, the organization must require either a two-year degree along with three years of experience documented by a qualified mold assessor or a four-year degree without any documented experience. The degree must be in a subject applicable to the work, such as a field of science or building science, according to the bill.

It appears that under the bill, these stringent educational and experiential requirements do not apply to those who have received a certification from a community college or university training and education on mold assessment.
Not all of the prominent certifications available from nonprofit organizations with these focuses currently require degrees. Designated spokespersons from some of the major certifying bodies in the Florida told IE Connections that if the bill becomes law, they would act accordingly to ensure that their certification programs comply with the law.

All of these educational and experiential requirements, like those for insurance, would go into effect Oct. 1 if the bill is passed.

Likewise, mold remediators would need at least a high-school diploma and two years of experience.

Prohibited Acts, and Penalties for Noncompliance
The bill outlines a number of actions that would be illegal and punishable. One of these restricts a mold assessor’s ability to remediate the mold in a structure the same individual or company assessed at any time during the past 12 months. Any type of compensation from remediators for an assessor’s referral or that of an assessment company is also outlawed.

The bill also threatens to punish violators with jail time. Noncompliance with the bill is punishable as a misdemeanor offense. The maximum penalty allowed by law for a second offense is 30 days of jail. A third violation, and each additional offense, constitutes a felony, which carries a maximum penalty of one year of jail.

Exempted Parties
Parties exempted from these requirements include property owners performing assessment or remediation on their own property as part of “routine maintenance,” which is not clearly defined in the bill. Also exempted are tenants working on their own living space and managing agents providing assessment or remediation services for property owners. There is also an exemption for government employees.

An announcement by the Environmental Education Foundation two months ago stated that the organization had merged with a Texas-based association. However, interviews with several sources at other organizations over the past year have revealed another story: Not all of EEF’s claims can be verified.

EEF has strived to make a name for itself in the indoor air arena in recent years through direct e-mail marketing and a series of press releases. A close examination of these materials shows how they could be misinterpreted.

An April 2005 press release from EEF reported that the Texas Association for Indoor Air Quality was merging with EEF. However, this “merger” apparently took place without the knowledge and approval of the Texas association’s Board of Directors.
A series of interviews with the most recent leaders of the Texas Association for Indoor Air Quality reveals that a majority of its own board members had barely even heard of the Environmental Education Foundation before receiving the announcement that TAIAQ was merging with EEF.

The move, which was enacted on TAIAQ’s side by TAIAQ’s president and executive director, took a majority of TAIAQ officers off guard, including Hollis Horner, who last served for the association as president-elect.

When TAIAQ’s board members had last spoken altogether several months ago, the future of their organization was not only in question but decidedly over, said board member Gary Stanford. “It was my understanding that [Executive Director Joe McCullough] did not see sufficient numbers of people licensed by the state [Texas] to make this a viable membership base and viable organization,” Stanford said. “So, we were just going to close the books and close it [TAIAQ] up.”

McCullough, an experienced association management professional at the helm of a number of nonprofit organizations based out of his office in Texas, was serving as executive director of TAIAQ at the beginning of 2005. It was around that time that Stanford says McCullough decided continuing the association would no longer be a viable option.

EEF claims in its press release specifically that the “TAIAQ board of directors will be taking key strategic rolls [sic] in the EEF, including committee chair positions and selected appointments to various federal and state agency committees the EEF enjoys.” However, none of the former board members of TAIAQ contacted by IE Connections said they were contacted EEF about such key positions.

In fact, at least two of the former TAIAQ board members said they no longer work in Texas, and at least one of them indicated he no longer performs IAQ work at all.
EEF described the move as a merger of two organizations, although McCullough said in a phone call last month that the move involves little more than his own resignation as executive director and a merger of mailing lists. When asked to clarify whether the relationship between EEF and TAIAQ could accurately be described as a merger, McCullough responded, “We merged our mailing list with theirs.”

Even a merger of this nature should have been voted on by members of the TAIAQ Board, said board member Gary Stanford, who said he thought their mailing list was the property of the association and should not have been disseminated without board approval.

Greg Becker, who last served as president of TAIAQ, deferred IE Connections’ interview questions to McCullough, the former executive director of TAIAQ, and to Johnson, executive director of EEF, because they are the appropriate press contacts listed in the notification announcing the group’s merger. “I was really not all that involved,” Becker said.

David Aitken is the only member of the TAIAQ board IE Connections was unable to contact.

When IE Connections told Johnson last month that a majority of TAIAQ’s board members reported not knowing about the merger before it took place, he said it was a lie. He forwarded an e-mail from McCullough dated Sept. 21, 2004, and another from Becker dated Aug. 27, 2004. These e-mails show that talks of a merger were in place at the time amongst Becker, McCullough and Johnson; however, they do not prove that the board at any time approved a merger.

Vague or misleading statements in EEF’s promotional materials have caused some concern within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which awarded a contract to EEF under which the organization convened an advisory group to make recommendations regarding the EPA’s I-BEAM guidance.

In one promotional material EEF distributed last year, its executive director, Troy Johnson, listed tasks EEF would be doing for the EPA. That list included the development of guidance for EPA. Asked last August to comment on EEF’s press release, John Girman of the EPA said the wording caused him some concern. Girman, who directs the Center for Analysis and Studies within the EPA’s Indoor Environments Division, added that this was not the first time Johnson had mischaracterized the duties EEF would be contractually obligated to perform. “We’ve had some difficulty with this fellow before … about saying he’s going beyond what we’ve actually agreed that he would be doing,” Girman said Aug. 30, 2004, in a voicemail message left for IE Connections. EEF has served on and off as a cooperative partner for the EPA for more than 10 years.

EEF’s Web site currently displays an undated letter from David Mudarri, Ph.D., another contact at the EPA, stating details of the contract under which EEF developed an advisory group to analyze I-BEAM guidance developed by the EPA. Another document on the Web site is the statement of work for that contract. When prompted by IE Connections, Mudarri verified the authenticity of these two documents. However, neither of them gives EEF the authority to develop guidance on behalf of the EPA; rather, the contract provides that EEF will promote guidance already developed by the EPA.

An EEF representative, Emma Chastain, has posted regularly to the Internet discussion group IE Quality over the past few months. The bulk of her contributions to the group sought to promote EEF. One of her posts there, dated May 19, implied some connection between the announcement of a position paper on mold prevention from the Association of Heating, Refrigeration and Air-Conditioning Engineers and the advisory group convened by EEF under its contract with the EPA. This post prompted Wane Baker of ASHRAE’s Environmental Health Committee to demand Chastain “post a retraction and clarification in this matter.” As of press time, no retraction or clarification had been posted.

At the EPA, Mudarri said May 25 that he would “endeavor to insure [sic] that the communications they have with the public about this contract are accurate.” He added that EEF is “performing under that contract.”

Hurricane Charley, a powerful category 4 hurricane, turned Friday the 13th of August 2004 into a very unlucky day for thousands of southwest coast Floridians. The storm, packing 145 mph winds and 10-foot waves, aimed almost directly at the healthcare facilities of Bon Secours St. Joseph Healthcare Group in Port Charlotte, Fla.

The complex is comprised of Bon Secours St. Joseph Hospital, St. Joseph Nursing Care and Rehabilitation Center, and an assisted living facility called Bon Secours Place. The four-story hospital, with patient care on every floor, was staffed and fully operational as the storm approached. There were more than 600 people in the building, including 140 patients.

Quick Action Taken as Charley Hits
Gary Miles, senior risk manager, and his team followed an emergency evacuation plan, moving patients to the fourth floor due to the potential of flooding on the first floor. But they quickly altered that move when the building was hit by the storm. The safest part of the hospital turned out to be the first floor, so they quickly relocated as many people as possible to that floor.

Hospital staff brought patients into interior hallways and then moved them downward one floor at a time. When the storm subsided, staff evacuated almost everyone from the damaged building. Eight to 12 hours after the storm hit, all of the patients had been moved to other hospitals up the Florida coast.

The hurricane wreaked havoc in many areas, snapping utility poles, demolishing residences and flooding roads as it moved inland and northeast. St. Joseph Hospital, located only a few miles from the epicenter of the hurricane’s fury, sustained considerable damage from the storm. The damage was so extensive that, at one point, the hospital’s administrators worried that the hospital building might come down.

Despite the need to evacuate patients to other hospitals, the hospital was able to maintain services in the emergency department with supporting lab and radiology, and continued to serve the emergency needs of the storm-ravaged area.
The staff never had experienced a storm of Charley’s magnitude. They previously have had some internal flooding due to storms, but Charley was the most powerful storm to hit the area since 1960.

All of the buildings on the hospital campus were damaged and required attention, but the primary hospital building was the focus of the recovery effort. In that building, the first floor was flooded, and there was open exposure to the elements on the fourth floor, where the roof was gone.

The wind had peeled back much of the hospital’s roof and rolled the light concrete ceiling right off, causing water to pour into the fourth floor. Countless gallons of water had cascaded down to the third and second floors of the building. High winds also caused structural damage throughout the building; loose items had been moved around and debris blown inside.

Before a new roof could be installed, a contractor erected a temporary roof to help stabilize the interior environment, aiding the drying process.

There obviously was a sense of urgency to return the hospital building to operation as soon as possible. As a precaution, three days prior to the storm, Miles had spoken with our company and pre-arranged for an emergency response team in the event Hurricane Charley struck the hospital.

Due to this proactive approach, our company was able to respond by 6 a.m. the day after the storm and to begin its recovery work that same day.

Debris Removal/Structural Drying
About 50 people worked at the site. They removed debris that had accumulated on the first floor and throughout the building. That process took roughly 12 hours to complete and was necessary before dehumidifiers, generators and ducting could be installed. It was also important to identify totally damaged wet contents and quickly remove them from the building, which resulted in a rapid stabilization.

The facility had taken in a considerable amount of rainwater. Workers spent a great deal of time extracting water from the hospital because rain continued to intrude the building after the hurricane subsided while roofers installed the temporary roof. Each time a water intrusion occurred, we had to take immediate action to ensure the building environment remained stabilized. In addition, quick response helped minimized replacement costs to the structure and its contents; it also helped to control potential microbial risks.

Ducting was placed on the first floor of the building to distribute dry air from desiccant dehumidifiers. Initially, the system pumped dry air into the hospital, moving it through the duct distribution system to stabilize conditions and protect expensive equipment. This reduced the humidity inside the building.

After standing water was removed from the building, drying efforts focused on the wet structural materials to save as much of the interior structure as possible. In addition to water extraction, structural drying, debris removal and document recovery, a controlled demolition was necessary to expedite the drying process. Many wet walls throughout the facility had to be cut out, and many ceiling tiles were removed.

Six desiccant dehumidification units, some capable of producing up to 4,500 cubic feet per minute of air, plus 40 smaller refrigerant units and hundreds of air movers were used throughout the complex as needed during the two-week project.

Desiccant Dehumidification
Desiccant dehumidification proves to be a very effective technology for moisture control because it develops low relative humidity and dewpoint temperatures inside a structure. Unlike cooling-based dehumidifiers, which cool the air to condense moisture and then draw it away, desiccants attract moisture molecules directly from the air and release them into an exhaust air stream.

Desiccants can attract and hold from 10 to more than 10,000 percent of their dry weight in water vapor. They are very effective in removing moisture from the air at low humidity levels and do not freeze when operated at low temperatures.

The essential characteristic of desiccants is low surface vapor pressure. A cool, dry desiccant can attract moisture from the air because its surface vapor pressure is low. When the desiccant becomes wet and hot, creating high surface vapor pressure, it will give off vapor to the surrounding air. Vapor moves from the air to the desiccant and back again depending on the vapor pressure differences.

Desiccant dehumidifiers use the changing vapor pressures to dry air continuously in a repeating cycle:

• In stage one of the cycle, when the desiccant has a low surface vapor pressure, the desiccant picks up moisture from the air being introduced into the building.
    

• In stage two, the saturated desiccant is taken out of the moist air and heated so moisture moves off the surface to the new air stream. This is referred to as the reactivation air stream. The desiccant is now dry but still has high vapor pressure due to its heat content and cannot collect moisture.
   

• In the third stage, cool air is introduced to return the desiccant to its dry, cool level so it can begin its moisture-collection cycle again.

Document Recovery
Time is an enemy to successful recovery of water-damaged documents. Any delay in the decision to dry the materials can result in permanent loss. Inks can break down, making the text illegible. Dirt and grime can penetrate the paper. Mold and mildew will grow quickly on water-soaked documents. Drying techniques must be employed as soon as possible to eliminate the moisture fungi use as a food source to grow. Otherwise, the microbiological contamination, and the associated objectionable odors, will continue, making restoration unlikely.The recovery process to dry and clean documents begins with two initial steps:

• Inventory and sorting: Decisions are made regarding which to dry and clean and which to discard. Loose documents and files stored in cabinets are packed into boxes, labeled to identify contents.

• Freezing: In order to halt deterioration, it is essential that documents be frozen within 48 hours. Usually, freezer-equipped truck trailers or freezer warehouses are used for this stage. The frozen materials can be stored until the professional drying procedure begins.

Depending upon the type and extent of damage, and the materials, different treatments may be recommended. There are two primary methods used to dry documents – desiccant drying and vacuum freeze-drying.

At the hospital, our company removed all records, including X-ray films, inventoried them and placed the records into freezer-equipped trucks designed to stabilize them. The trucks transported the stabilized materials to our document-recovery center in Chicago, where they were blast-frozen, freeze-dried, cleaned, packed and returned.

Other Buildings Required Services
Restoration work and drying services also were performed for other peripheral buildings along with the primary hospital building.

Documents were retrieved from the St. Joseph Nursing Care and Rehabilitation Center storage shed and from the Human Resources building. The majority of the documents were relocated to a dry environment or to our document-drying center in Chicago.
The Human Resources building suffered extensive roof damage that resulted in severe water intrusion. We utilized desiccant dehumidifiers and several refrigerant units for drying of that facility.

At Bon Secours Place, small dehumidifiers and fans were set up to dry water-soaked areas of the building.

On Sept. 6, Labor Day, two weeks after recovery work began, St. Joseph Hospital was again completely operational.

Selecting a Full-service Contractor
When selecting a qualified water restoration contractor, it is important to find one with complete understanding of water restoration procedures and standards and proven experience in project management, dehumidification and drying, sanitizing and disinfecting, document and media restoration, smoke and water decontamination, corrosion and mold control and controlled demolition. Many training and certification courses are offered by associations such as the Indoor Air Quality Association, National Air Duct Cleaners Association, the Institute of Inspection, Cleaning and Restoration Certification, and the Association of Specialists in Cleaning and Restoration.

Pre-selecting the service provider assures that building owners and managers will have a “partner” in the reclamation process. There will be no learning curve during an emergency because the firm already will be familiar with the structure and the plan. It then can move rapidly to begin recovery work within the first 24 hours – a critical parameter to minimize the effects of water.

Steve Willis is Gulf Coast regional sales manager for Munters Moisture Control Services, a water-damage recovery/temporary humidity control company providing emergency services through 30 offices in the United States and Canada. Willis has been in restoration and IAQ for over 12 years and has extensive experience in both sales and operations. Willis is active in several industry associations and is a nationally recognized speaker and trainer. He can be reached via e-mail at steve_willis@munters.com or by phone at (800) 959-1761.

Portions of this article may have appeared elsewhere as they were included in promotional material supplied to other publications.

Successful Cleanup of Condition 2 Settled Spores
William Vaughan, Ph.D., QEP
President, Principal Scientist
Nauset Environmental Services Inc.
East Orleans, MA

Settled mold spores are not removed by the limited methods many mitigators use. Yet settled spores are now afforded the recognition they are due as potential future contaminants and irritants. In the IICRC S520 “Standard and Reference Guide for Professional Mold Remediation,” excess settled spores now constitute Condition 2 contamination, requiring professional mold remediation.

An initial air sample can show low spore levels, and the place may “look” great. However, it may still be contaminated by settled spores. A “quiet” sample taken with a spore trap or culture plate measures only those spores that have not yet settled and can be quite misleading. I have encountered many situations where “visual inspection” has led the mitigator to conclude that things “look pretty good,” yet there may well be Condition 2 contamination.

Settled spores are a critical element in IICRC’s approach to mold cleanup spurred by knowledge of the health impact of molds and the fact that mold spores are biological organisms, capable of recontaminating a space! [Remember: If you were to remove 99.9 percent of oil, PCB or lead contamination and the area was impacted by a leak, then you would have only 0.1 percent of the original contamination. If you remove 99.9 percent of mold spores and a leak occurred, then there is a good chance that the area will be recontaminated, since molds spores can grow and reproduce, increasing their numbers.]

How do you know that there are settled spores present initially or left behind following HEPA cleaning? Some professionals recommend taking tape lift or swab samples to determine the presence of Condition 2 contamination, as part of a pre- or post-remediation sampling or assessment, but where do you take those individual samples: floors? walls? easy-to-reach places? every stud bay? every fifth stud bay? Also, how many samples do you need from each lift/wipe location? Will the pressure for scientific confidence be severely compromised by real-world budget constraints?

One approach to these assessment dilemmas, both pre and post-remediation, is to take “disturbed” air samples. Our company has been utilizing disturbed air sampling since 2002 and find it very cost-effective in addressing Condition 2 mold contamination.

The advantage of disturbing the air is that settled spores from many areas of the room, including rafters in cathedral ceilings, nooks and crannies in awkward corners, baseboard heat exchanger fins, etc. can be impelled into the air and mixed so that they can be sampled in a traditional way. The disturbance integrates settled spores from many possible locations in a room/area. The disturbance simulates, to some extent, human activities that could remobilize those settled spores to travel to uncontaminated areas after containment barriers are removed. Those activities might include:

• fans set up for cooling occupants or providing general ventilation;
• remodeling activities that involve dropping supplies or material, like dry wall panels, onto the floor; and
• vacuuming floors, carpets, woodwork and so forth, in the normal course of house maintenance.

During these “normal” human activities, settled spores can be kicked into the air by drafts and then slowly settle onto the new/cleaned surfaces in a room/area after refurbishing. Our idea has been to simulate occupant activities with drafts from a typical table fan while there is still a chance to make sure the cleaning activity has been reasonably effective and, if not, suggest further “air polishing” of the room/area to reduce the settled spores even more.

How can you disturb the air without being non-representative? At first, we took on the guidance for the asbestos abatement industry where leaf blowers are operated and moved about within containment areas for extended periods of time before and during air sampling. These aggressive “clearance” samples are called for under standard EPA protocol and must result in very low fiber counts before an area is declared clean enough to be re-opened for occupancy.

This approach does point out areas where additional remediation activities are required, but we were criticized because those extremely strong drafts are not “typical” for lived-in spaces and result in too stringent a cleanup challenge in light of the absence of firm cleanup guidance.

We then switched to using 12-inch household fans, either table or stand styles, to provide ventilation and cooling in homes. That decreased level of disturbance was considered acceptable in a living space and not extreme, as the leaf blowers were. The technician disturbs the air by holding the fan and directing it around the space being sure to blow back and forth across the floor, across moldings and horizontal ledges, into baseboard fins, into corners, and anyplace imaginable where spores could have settled in a room. Two to three minutes of waving the fan is usually sufficient to cover most surfaces, obviously longer for larger areas.

We do not take a “disturbed” air sample by itself to determine Condition 2 contamination but pair it with a traditional “quiet” air sample to see how much the airborne spore levels change when the settled spores are mobilized into the air. In this way, two samples, usually total spore air trap samples, give a fairly thorough, integrated picture of mold spore contamination in a room or area. By using the total spore number, we focus on the health impact for occupants, since both viable and non-viable spores can cause allergic reactions in sensitized individuals. (Of course, at least one outdoor air sample is taken during these efforts in non-winter conditions in order to compare the mix of spores outdoors with those indoors to demonstrate any water-induced mold amplification.)

Here is an example of what our paired samples have found and how they have been used: Failure of two baseboard heaters led to damage from direct water as well as condensation. Four separate areas in the house were contained and remediated by HEPA-vacuuming and wiping down. We were brought in for post-remediation sampling at a time when the outdoor total spore level was 2,650 S/m3.

Chart 1 shows the initial post-remediation air sample pairs (quiet and disturbed) in each of the four areas. In Areas A and C, disturbing the air with the 12” fan stirred up few additional spores.

In Area B, near one of the leaks, the total spores were initially at 1,222 S/m3, a seemingly acceptable level compared to the 2,640 S/m3 in the outdoor air. However, the total spores increased 18-fold after the fan’s drafts suspended them, but, within that sample, the Aspergillus-Penicillium (Asp-Pen –like) spores (“A-P” in the chart) increased 24-fold! Those are significant differences (i.e. well over an order of magnitude) indicating a reservoir of settled spores persisting after the traditional remediation.

In Area D, on the floor below the other leak, the difference in levels induced by the fan’s drafts is much more dramatic. The initial quiet conditions at 944 S/m3 again seem to be quite acceptable. However, the total spore levels increased some 41-fold under the influence of the drafts with Asp-Pen like spores increasing some 120-fold!
There are numerous other examples that can be cited where we have used this disturbed air technique to reveal extensive Condition 2 contamination. The bottom line is that the additional information from a “disturbed” air sample can point to the need for initial or further remediation to reduce Condition 2 contamination and it is more cost-effect and has less sampling bias than isolated tape or wipe samples from somewhat arbitrary locations.

Cleaning Up Condition 2 Spores
One must realize that settled spores have eluded the traditional carpet fan and air scrubber approaches to remediation. They do that because they are solid objects and cannot “jump” into the air on their own. They need drafts. BUT not any draft will do.

If you are trying to remove leaves from a driveway, you sweep the leaf blower back and forth across the surface and gradually corral/move the leaves into the pile you want. You know that if you just set up the leaf blower in the driveway and walked away, you would move the leaves off the surface only in the direct path of the exhaust while leaves on either side would just lay there even though the leaf blower’s blast is very strong. Similarly, on a much smaller scale, a carpet fan that is blowing in one direction without being redirected can mobilize only those spores in its direct draft, not those to the side, much less those in the room behind it.

Our approach to reduce settled spore levels is to direct remediators to follow an “air polishing” protocol after their traditional approach. That protocol involves maintaining the containment and, with worker’s still wearing protective gear, then:

• Set up an air scrubber in each area or room remediated, as opposed to operating in the negative air mode under which spores outside the containment could be drawn into the newly “cleaned” space. Set up two or three oscillating fans (similar to those used to disturb the air in the above discussion) in the same area or room to minimize stagnant air zones. Be creative with aiming oscillating fans since they are not there for the comfort of inhabitants in the center of the room, rather for minimizing the quiet areas where spores can settle at the edges or corners of a room. One can use stand-type oscillating fans aimed up to rafters, exposed beams, shelves, etc. to stir up spores on those surfaces.
   
• If there are several gutted rooms with a common air space, bounded by studs and incomplete partitions, a single air scrubber may still work. Use multiple smaller oscillating fans in the smaller areas to keep nooks, crannies and corners disturbed and add one or more carpet fans to develop a circulation pattern to direct the suspended spores to the central air scrubber.
    
• Periodically, two or three times a day, use a strong fan or leaf blower to stir up the settled spores left over after the remediation activities so that they can eventually be moved to the air scrubbers on drafts from the fans and be filtered out of the air. Direct the leaf blower to all corners of the room and elevated surfaces that are difficult to reach. In addition, reposition or redirect the air scrubber(s) exhaust as well so that it hits a new corner or quiet zone after each visit. Be sure to direct drafts to any baseboard fins in the room.
    
• Operate the oscillating fans and air scrubber(s) for at least 36–48 hours in each area/room after the traditional cleanup is completed, periodically revisiting the room/area for leaf blower mixing and ALSO repositioning the smaller fans after each leaf blower visit to reduce the dead zones where spores can settle out and collect.
  To indicate the effectiveness of “air polishing” alone and no additional HEPA vacuuming in the example above, look at the data in Chart 2.

In Area B the quiet spore levels have been reduced to under 600 s/m3 and the disturbed spore levels were only increased by less than threefold, compared to 18-fold before “air polishing,” and Asp-Pen levels by less than 6-fold, compared to over 22-fold before “air polishing.”

In Area D the effect of “air polishing” is more dramatic. The quiet air sample now has total spore levels just over 2,100 S/m3, down some 88 percent. When disturbed, the total spore readings now increased just over 5-fold, compared to over 41-fold earlier, with Asp-Pen like spores increasing just over fourfold to only 244 S/m3, compared to the 120-fold increase to nearly 39,000 S/m3 initially.

Conclusion
The air polishing technique has been demonstrated to successfully reduce the level of total spores in areas B & D of this house, without any additional HEPA vacuuming.
The use of strong leaf blowers at the air polishing stage, not at the initial, pre-remediation stage, aggressively moves settled spores into the air for filtration by air scrubbers. There are likely to be fewer settled spores left over under this approach, resulting in a higher likelihood of a successful post-remediation sampling evaluation and fewer return trips to complete the remediation – saving money for the client and shortening the total remediation effort.

Dr. William M. Vaughan is president and principal scientist for Nauset Environmental Services. He received a doctorate degree in biophysics in 1969. In 1994, in recognition of his then more than 20 years of multimedia environmental experience, he received Qualified Environmental Professional credentials from the Institute for Professional Practice. His speciality over the years in runnng three companies has been air-quality investigation, both ambient and indoor. He can be reached by e-mail at nesinfo@capecod.com or by phone at (508) 247-9167.