LIMITED POST REMEDIATION INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL … · practices and guidelines put forth in...

LIMITED POST REMEDIATION INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL

(FUNGAL /MOLD) ASSESSMENT OF SELECT AREAS

AT THE

ENGLEWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

10300 OLD GREENSBORO ROAD TUSCALOOSA, AL 35405

SELC PROJECT # 2016-1251PR

Prepared for: Tuscaloosa County School System

C/O Mr. Scott King P.O. Box 2568

Tuscaloosa, AL 35403

Prepared by: Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting Inc.

P. O. Box 1848 Pelham, AL 35124

(205) 823-6200

August 2016

Page 1

September 1, 2016 Tuscaloosa County Schools C/O Mr. Scott King P.O. Box 2568 Tuscaloosa, AL 35403 RE: Limited Post Remediation Indoor Environmental (Fungal/Mold) Assessment of

Select Areas within Englewood Elementary School Located at 10300 Old Greensboro Road, Tuscaloosa, AL 35405 (SELC Project # 2016-1251PR)

Mr. King: On August 26, 2016, representatives of Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. (SELC) conducted a Limited Indoor Environmental (Fungal/Mold) Assessment of select areas within Englewood Elementary School located at 10300 Old Greensboro Road, Tuscaloosa, Alabama. The assessment was performed following remediation and restoration efforts by MAK Environmental within the kitchen, cafeteria, and Powell office areas. The assessment was conducted in accordance with standard practices and guidelines put forth in “Recognition, Evaluation, and Control of Indoor Mold” by the American Industrial Hygiene Association and ASTM Standard D7338–10 Standard Guide for the Assessment of Fungal Growth in Buildings. The scope of work included a thorough visual inspection of the kitchen, cafeteria, and Powell office areas and the collection of airborne and surface wipe fungal spore samples to characterize the success of the remediation effort. Building material moisture measurements, temperature, and humidity data were also collected. The visibly impacted ceiling tiles throughout the cafeteria and stage area were removed. The exposed ceiling grid appeared to have been cleaned. The previously impacted block walls in the stage area, cafeteria, and kitchen appeared to have been cleaned. The contents stored throughout the kitchen and cafeteria appeared to have been cleaned. The visible fungal growth was also removed from the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system components and ductwork serving the kitchen and cafeteria. No evidence of continued water intrusion or fungal contamination was observed in the kitchen, cafeteria, or stage area at the time of the assessment.

Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc.

P. O. Box 1848 Phone: 205-823-6200 Environmental, Health, and Safety Solutions Pelham, AL 35124 Fax: 205-823-9066

Page 2

The visibly impacted ceiling tiles from within Ms. Powell’s office were removed. The exposed ceiling grid appeared to have been cleaned. The previously impacted block walls and contents stored within Ms. Powell’s office appeared to have been cleaned. The HVAC system serving Ms. Powell’s office appeared to have been adequately cleaned. No evidence of continued water intrusion or fungal contamination was observed in Ms. Powell’s office at the time of the assessment. All indoor airborne fungal spore samples collected within the structure recovered background concentrations of common environmental fungal organisms typically found within the Central Alabama Region. The airborne fungal spore sample collected from the kitchen, cafeteria, and stage areas recovered concentrations ranging from 180 to 687 spores per cubic meter (spores/m³) with the predominant fungal type being Basidiospores. The airborne fungal spore sample collected from Ms. Powell’s office recovered 940 spores per cubic meter (spores/m³) with the predominant fungal type being Basidiospores. The outdoor ambient air sample recovered 24,342 spores/m3 with Basidiospores as the predominant fungal form. All five airborne fungal spore samples collected within the structure recovered concentrations less than the outdoor concentration with similar predominant organisms. Furthermore, the airborne fungal spore samples showed a greater than 99% reduction in potentially toxigenic and water indicator fungal forms when compared to the initial assessment. The composite surface wipe sample collected from the block wall in the stage area recovered less than 2 spores per square centimeter (spores/cm²). There were no fungal organisms identified by the analytical laboratory. The composite surface wipe sample collected from the block wall in the cafeteria recovered less than 2 spores/cm2. There were no fungal organisms identified by the analytical laboratory. The composite surface wipe sample collected from the kitchen center food storage area recovered 4 spores/cm2 with the predominant organism being Cladosporium. The composite surface wipe sample collected from the kitchen office recovered less than 2 spores/cm². There were no fungal organisms identified by the analytical laboratory. The composite surface wipe sample collected from the HVAC system serving the kitchen and cafeteria recovered 1 spore/cm² with the predominant organism being Basidiospores. The composite surface wipe sample collected from the block walls, contents, and furniture stored in Ms. Powell’s office recovered less than 1 spore/cm². There were no fungal organisms identified by the analytical laboratory. The composite surface wipe sample collected from the HVAC system serving Ms. Powell’s office recovered 2 spores/cm² with the predominant fungal forms being Basidiospores and Aspergillus/Penicillium group organisms. The surface wipe fungal spore samples collected from within the remediation areas showed a greater than 99% reduction in fungal spore concentrations when compared to the initial sampling. Background moisture concentrations were recovered from block walls and remaining ceiling tiles in the kitchen, cafeteria, and Ms. Powell’s office. Moisture measurements

Page 3

collected from block walls and remaining ceiling tiles in the kitchen, cafeteria, and Ms. Powell’s office ranged from 10% to 15%. Wood science studies have shown that moisture concentrations at or above 20% to 28% are adequate to sustain microbial growth. Temperature measurements recovered within the structure were 74.8° to 76.4° Fahrenheit. Relative humidity measurements collected within the structure ranged from 55.8% to 59.4%. Guidance provided by the American Society of Refrigeration, Heating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) and the U.S. EPA, indicate that extended periods of relative humidities greater than 60% can result in microbial proliferation. These organizations also recommended a comfort level of 30% to 50% for most indoor environments. Based on this data and the visual inspection, the remediation efforts were successful in removing or reducing the water indicator and potentially toxigenic fungal forms on construction materials to typical background concentrations. No further remediation for fungal contamination is determined to be warranted and no additional analytical testing is determined to be necessary. Please be advised that this assessment is only representative of the conditions at the time of inspection. If future water intrusion events or periods of elevated humidity impact the structure, fungal re-growth may occur. Appendix A of this report contains the analytical results in table form. Appendix B contains photographic documentation. Appendix C contains the actual laboratory report. Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. are pleased to have provided you with these services. If you have any questions concerning this information, please feel free to contact me at (205) 823-6200. Sincerely,

Brad Stiles, CIEC Director of Operations / Senior Project Manager Certified Indoor Environmental Consultant #1203015 Reviewed by,

Shannon Sutton, CIH, CHMM, REM, REPA Certified Industrial Hygienist #8445 Certified Hazardous Materials Manager #10290 Registered Environmental Manager #12552 Registered Environmental Property Assessor #878928326 Vice President / Technical Director

APPENDIX A

TABLES

TABLE A – AIRBORNE FUNGAL SPORE ANALYSES TABLE B – SURFACE WIPE FUNGAL SPORE ANALYSES

Englewood Elementary Cafeteria 10300 Old Greensboro Road

Tuscaloosa, AL 35405 August 26, 2016

SELC Project # 2016-1251PR Englewood Elementary School August 26, 2016 10300 Old Greensboro Road


TABLE A: TOTAL AIRBORNE FUNGAL SPORE ANALYSES

SAMPLE LOCATION CONCENTRATION1, spores/m3 IDENTIFICATION2

1 – Outside Ambient Air 24,342

Basidiospores (65%) Aspergillus/Penicillium (12%)

Ascospores (6%) Curvularia (6%)

Cladosporium (5%) Smuts/Myxomycetes/Periconia (3%)

Bipolaris/Drechslera (1%) Fusarium (1%)

Other Unidentified Spores (1%) Alternaria (<1%)

Nigrospora (<1%) Pithomyces (<1%)

Torula (<1%)

2 – Kitchen SE 613


Cladosporium (8%) Curvularia (2%)

Ascospores (1%) Smuts/Myxomycetes/Periconia (1%)

Torula (1%)

1-Concentration is measured in spores per cubic meter of air, as determined from impaction onto spore trap cassettes, collected with a high volume pump, set to 15 liters per minute for ten minutes, totaling 150 liters per sample. 2-Species identified are listed according to predominance.

Englewood Elementary Cafeteria 10300 Old Greensboro Road


SELC Project # 2016-1251PR Tuscaloosa County Schools System August 26, 2016



3 – Kitchen NE 180 Basidiospores (74%) Cladosporium (15%)

Aspergillus/Penicillium (11%)

4 – Cafeteria 580 Basidiospores (91%)

Aspergillus/Penicillium (6%) Cladosporium (2%) Ascospores (1%)

1-Concentration is measured in spores per cubic meter of air, as determined from impaction onto spore trap cassettes, collected with a high volume pump, set to 15 liters per minute for ten minutes, totaling 150 liters per sample. 2-Species identified are listed according to predominance

Englewood Elementary 10300 Old Greensboro Road


SELC Project # 2016-1251PR Tuscaloosa County School System August 25, 2016



5 – Stage in Cafeteria 687

Basidiospores (86%) Ascospores (6%)

Aspergillus/Penicillium (5%) Cladosporium (2%)

Fusarium (1%)

6 – Ms. Powell’s Office 940


Curvularia (6%) Ascospores (4%)

Cladosporium (4%) Smuts/Myxomycetes/Periconia (1%)

1-Concentration is measured in spores per cubic meter of air, as determined from impaction onto spore trap cassettes, collected with a high volume pump, set to 15 liters per minute for ten minutes, totaling 150 liters per sample. 2-Species identified are listed according to predominance.




TABLE B: SURFACE WIPE FUNGAL ANALYSES

SAMPLE LOCATION CONCENTRATION1, spores/cm2 IDENTIFICATION2

7 – Block Wall Stage Composite <2 Not Detected

8 – Cafeteria Block Wall Composite <2 Not Detected

9 – Center Food Storage Area Composite 4 Cladosporium (100%)

10 – Kitchen Office Composite <2 Not Detected

1-Collected with a moistened cotton swab over a 10 to 100 square centimeter area. Concentration is measured in spores per square centimeter (spores/cm2). 2-Species identified are listed according to predominance.




TABLE B: SURFACE WIPE FUNGAL ANALYSES

SAMPLE LOCATION CONCENTRATION1, spores/cm2 IDENTIFICATION2

11 – Cafeteria/Kitchen HVAC Composite 1 Basidiospores (100%)

12 – Ms. Powell’s Office Composite 1 Basidiospores (100%)

13 – Ms. Powell’s Office HVAC Composite 4 Aspergillus/Penicillium (50%)

Basidiospores (50%)

1-Collected with a moistened cotton swab over a 10 to 100 square centimeter area. Concentration is measured in spores per square centimeter (spores/cm2). 2-Species identified are listed according to predominance.

Appendix B

Photographic Documentation




Kitchen, Cleaned, Post Remediation Kitchen Office, Cleaned, Post Remediation

Kitchen Dry Food Storage, Cleaned, Post Remediation

Kitchen Dry Food Storage, Cleaned, Post Remediation




Kitchen, Cleaned, Post Remediation Food Storage Cabinetry in Kitchen, Cleaned, Post Remediation

Exhaust Hood in Kitchen, Cleaned, Post Remediation

Center Food Storage Area in Kitchen, Cleaned, Post Remediation




Food Storage Cabinetry in Kitchen, Cleaned, Post Remediation

Food Storage Cabinetry in Kitchen, Cleaned, Post Remediation

Food Preparation Area in Kitchen, Cleaned, Post Remediation

Break Room in Kitchen, Cleaned, Post Remediation




Kitchen Closet, Cleaned, Post Remediation Kitchen Closet, Cleaned, Post Remediation

Dishwashing Area in Kitchen, Cleaned, Post Remediation

Food Service Area in Kitchen, Cleaned, Post Remediation




Dishwashing Area in Kitchen, Cleaned, Post Remediation

Cafeteria, Cleaned, Post Remediation

Cafeteria, Cleaned, Post Remediation Previously Impacted Ceiling Tiles Cafeteria Removed, Ceiling Grid Cleaned, Post

Remediation




Previously Impacted Ceiling Tiles Cafeteria Removed, Ceiling Grid Cleaned, Post

Remediation


Remediation


Remediation

Kitchen Contents Cleaned, Post Remediation




Stage in Cafeteria, Cleaned, Post Remediation Previously Impacted Ceiling Tiles in Cafeteria Removed, Ceiling Grid and Block Wall Cleaned,

Post Remediation

Contents in Cafeteria Cleaned, Post Remediation

Previously Impacted Walls and Contents in Ms. Powell’s Office Cleaned, Post Remediation






Previously Impacted HVAC Cooling Coils Serving Ms. Powell’s Office Cleaned, Post

Remediation

Previously Impacted HVAC Return Ductwork Serving Ms. Powell’s Office Cleaned, Post

Remediation




Previously Impacted HVAC Return Ductwork Serving the Cafeteria and Kitchen Cleaned,

Post Remediation

Previously Impacted HVAC Cooling Coils Serving the Cafeteria and Kitchen Cleaned,

Post Remediation

Previously Impacted HVAC Cooling Coils Serving the Cafeteria and Kitchen Cleaned,

Post Remediation

Appendix C

Analytical Results

And

Chain-of-Custody

MICROBIAL LABORATORY FUNGAL ANALYSIS

REPORT


P. O. Box 1848 Pelham, AL 35124

Phone: 205-823-6200 Fax: 205-823-9066

Environmental, Health, and Safety Solutions

Indoor Environmental (Mold/Fungal) Report

Prepared For

Safety Environmental Laboratories & Consulting, Inc. 989 Yeager Parkway Pelham, AL 35124

Project Name: Englewood Elementary Project Location: Cafeteria, Kitchen, Ms. Powell’s Office

SELC Project Number: 2016-1251PR Date Sampled: August 26, 2016 Date Reported: August 27, 2016

1

MICROBIAL LABORATORY FUNGAL ANALYSIS REPORT:

SECTION 1 BACKGROUND INFORMATION: 1.1 General Information: The following background information is provided to assist the client in evaluating the analytical results revealed by the mold / fungal analyses. This information is based on years of sampling and field experience, published references, governmental guidelines and association standards. It should be noted that mold / fungal spores are found within the air and on surfaces of all structures, including homes, schools, health care facilities, industrial and manufacturing facilities. Fungal organisms are a part of our natural environment. However, elevated concentrations of water indicator and potentially toxigenic fungal forms are known to adversely impact the indoor environment. At this time, there are no federal regulations governing the types or concentrations of molds / fungi for the indoor environment. A listing of pertinent references is provided later in this report. 1.2 Common Groupings of Mold / Fungal Forms: References to “common environmental mold / fungal forms” has come to mean those fungal organisms routinely found in the outside / ambient air environment and therefore the fungal forms we are exposed to on a daily basis. Examples of such genera or groupings are Alternaria, Ascospores, Basidiospores, Cladosporium, Curvularia, Pithomyces, Rusts, Smuts, etc. References to “water indicator and potentially toxigenic fungal forms” have come to mean those fungal organisms, which have a high water requirement and are known to produce various mycotoxins when subjected to certain environmental stimuli. Examples of such genera include Aspergillus, Chaetomium, Fusarium, Penicillium and Stachybotrys. This grouping contains the commonly referred to “toxic black molds”. 1.3 Comparison of Background / Baseline Fungal Analyses: The following comparisons may be helpful to the Client for understanding the analytical method of reporting spore concentrations and surface density units. Air concentrations are reported in total fungal spores per cubic meter of air (spores/m3). A cubic meter is roughly equivalent to 35 cubic feet or 264 gallons. Tape lifts and surface wipes are reported in units of total spores per square centimeter (spores/cm2). A square centimeter is roughly equivalent to the area of one face of a sugar cube. Bulk dust and building


P. O. Box 1848 Phone: 205-823-6200 Environmental, Health, and Safety Solutions Pelham, AL 35124 Fax: 205-823-9066

2

material samples are reported in units of total spores per gram of material (spores/g). There are 454 grams per pound or 28 grams per ounce. Typically, baseline / background total airborne concentrations of fungal forms within residential and commercial facilities of the southeastern United States range between 100 to 1,000 spores per cubic meter of air and are composed of common environmental fungal forms found in the outdoor / ambient air. Furthermore, hard surfaces, such as furniture and walls, within these structures typically reveal a baseline / background range of 1 to 100 fungal spores per square centimeter of surface area and are composed of common environmental forms. These values will vary depending on the thoroughness of housekeeping, humidity and moisture loadings within the structure. The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienist (ACGIH) provides the following guidance concerning data interpretation;" Data from individual sampling episodes is often interpreted with respect to baseline data from other environments or the same environment under anticipated low exposure conditions" . In layman terms, and with the absence of established acceptable exposure limits, it is often necessary to use a comparison value as a benchmark or "standard" when interpreting fungal (mold) data. Also, ACGIH states that "differences that can be detected with manageable sample sizes are likely to be in 10 fold multiplicative steps (e.g., 100 versus 1,000)". This statement infers that if the total fungal spore count is ten (10) times greater in the sample from the suspect area than in the negative control sample collected from a non-suspect area (background / baseline), then that sample area may be a fungal amplification site. ACGIH further states that "active fungal growth in indoor environments is inappropriate and may lead to exposure and adverse health effects." SECTION 2 METHODOLOGY: Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. (SELC) provides direct microscopic analyses for fungal organisms on spore traps (air samples), surface wipes (sterile swabs), tape lifts, bulk dusts and bulk building materials. Microscopic quantitative analyses are conducted at 400X to 600X magnification. Identification of fungal organisms may be further enhanced by the use of stains and oil immersion techniques at 1,000X magnification. The results are reported as total fungal spores, meaning they include both viable and non-viable fungal spores. Direct microscopic techniques do not allow for the differentiation of Aspergillus and Penicillium spores. Therefore, such spores are reported as Aspergillus / Penicillium –like. Also, depending on the spores morphology (shape, size, structure), other non-distinctive spores will be reported in groups or categories such as Ascospores, Basidiospores, or colorless / brown spore groups.

3

2.1 Air Samples – Spore Trap Analyses: All analysis of spore trap media is conducted in accordance to ASTM published method D7391-09. Typically, during the analysis of the sample one hundred percent (100%) of the trace (collection area) of the spore trap (air sample) is analyzed. If the sample is heavily loaded with fungal material, the analyst may elect to analyze a lesser percentage of the trace and extrapolate the result for the entire sample. Fungal forms with greater than 500 spores per sample (an elevated fungal count) are difficult to analyze. Therefore, a sample with a significantly elevated fungal concentration may be an approximation. Excessive non-fungal particulate matter can obscure the presence of fungal spores. Such sample conditions can reduce the analytical accuracy. All samples are evaluated by the following debris scale for data qualification.

Air Sample Debris Rating Scale

Debris Rating

Description Interpretation

0 No particulate detected

The absence of particulate matter on the slide could indicate improper sampling or a blank sample. Analyst should note accordingly.

1 Minimal non-fungal Debris (0% to 5%)

Reported values are minimally affected by debris (typically 0-5% coverage of sample surface area)

2 Approx. 6% to 25% of slide occluded.

Non-fungal particulate can mask fungal spores. Actual values may be slightly greater than the values reported. Negative bias is expected and increases with percentage of trace analyzed.

3 26% to 75% occluded with non-fungal debris.

Non-fungal particulate can mask fungal spores. Actual values may be slightly to moderately greater than the values reported. Negative bias is expected and increases with percentage of trace analyzed.

4

51% to >90% of slide occluded with non-fungal debris.

Non-fungal particulate can mask fungal spores. Actual values may be moderately to significantly greater than the values reported. Sample slide is overloaded and cannot be reliably quantitatively analyzed due to excessive debris. Identification and an estimation of concentration may be provided at the Laboratory’s discretion. Negative bias is expected and increases with percentage of trace analyzed.

2.2 Surface Wipe Samples – Sterile Swabs: Fungal spores and hyphae are extracted from the swab by mechanical action. The fungal components are placed on a slide, stained, identified and counted. The results are reported as spores per sample or spores per square centimeter, based upon the client supplied sample area. If the sample is heavily loaded with fungal material, the analyst may elect to analyze a lesser percentage of the sample preparation and extrapolate the result for the entire sample. Therefore, a sample with a significantly elevated fungal count may be an approximation.

4

2.3 Surface Samples – Tape Lifts: Fungal spores and hyphae are collected on the adhesive side of clear tape. The sample is placed on a slide, identified and counted. The results are reported as spores per square centimeter. If the sample is heavily loaded with fungal material, the analyst may elect to analyze a lesser percentage of the sample preparation and extrapolate the result for the entire sample. Therefore, a sample with a significantly elevated fungal count may be an approximation. 2.4 Bulk Samples – Dusts and Building Materials: The bulk sample is weighed and fungal components are extracted or lifted from the material. The fungal components are placed on a slide, stained, identified and counted. The results are reported as spores per sample or spores per gram of material. If the sample is heavily loaded with fungal material, the analyst may elect to analyze a lesser percentage of the sample preparation and extrapolate the result for the entire sample. Therefore, a sample with a significantly elevated fungal count may be an approximation. SECTION 3 TERMS AND CONDITIONS: 3.1 Sample Retention: Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. will retain all samples for a period of 90 days. The Client may reclaim the samples during this time period. Following this time period, all samples will be disposed of in an appropriate manner. 3.2 Health Related Issues: Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. makes no written or verbal claims or recommendations as to direct health related issues based on this data or report. Clients should consult with a licensed and board certified health care professional / physician such as an allergist, immunologist, or environmental health specialist. 3.3 Insurance Claims: Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. makes no claims or recommendations as to the Client’s insurance coverage. This data or report does not imply coverage of these issues by the insurance carrier. 3.4 Independent Contractor: Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. is an independent contractor and is not an employee of the Client. The Client is hereby contracting with Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. to perform analytical services. Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. reserves the right to determine the method, manner and means by which the services will be performed. The order or

5

sequence of the work shall be under the control of Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. 3.5 Limited Warranty: Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. warrants to Client that the material, analysis, data, programs and services, will be of the kind and quality designated and will be performed by qualified personnel. Special requirements for format or standards to be followed shall be attached as an exhibit and must be executed by both parties. Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. makes no other warranties, whether written, oral or implied, including without limitation, warranty of fitness for purpose or merchantability. This report is based on data / information supplied by the Client. Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions on the Client’s behalf. In no event, shall Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc., its employees, ownership, managers or directors be liable for special or consequential damages, either in contract or tort, whether or not the possibility of such damages have been disclosed to Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. or could have been reasonably foreseen by Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. SECTION 4 REFERENCES AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:

1 Bioaerosols: Assessment and Control, Janet Macher, Ed., American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienist, Cincinnati, OH 1999.

2 The Inside Story, A Guide to Indoor Air Quality, United States Environmental Protection Agency and the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission, Washington, DC (1995)

3 Exposure Guidelines for Residential Indoor Air Quality, Environmental Health Directorate, Health Protection Branch, Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario (1989)

4 Fungal Contamination in Public Buildings: Health Effects and Investigative Methods, Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario (2004)

5 S500 Standard and Reference Guide for Professional Water Damage Restoration, 3rd Edition, Institute of Inspection, Cleaning, and Restoration Certification, Vancouver, WA (2006)

6 S520 Standard and Reference Guide for Professional Mold Remediation, 1st Edition, Institute of Inspection, Cleaning, and Restoration Certification, Vancouver, WA (2004)

7 Field Guide for the Determination of Biological Contaminants in Environmental Samples, American Industrial Hygiene Association, Fairfax, VA (2005)

8 Standards of Practice for the Assessment of Indoor Environmental Quality, Volume 1: Mold Sampling; Assessment of Mold Contamination, Indoor Environmental Standards Organization (2002)

9 Guidelines for Mold and Fungi Control and Remediation for Worker Protection in Indoor Work Environments (ASSE / ANSI Z 690 Standard), American Society of Safety Engineers / American National Standards Institute (2006)

6

10 Guidelines on Assessment and Remediation of Fungi in Indoor Environments, New York City Department of Health, http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/epi/moldrpt1.html.

11 “Mold Remediation in Schools and Commercial Buildings”, United States Environmental Protection Agency, http://www.epa.gov/iaq/molds/mold-remediation.html.

12 Mold Resources, United States Environmental Protection Agency, http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/moldresources.html.

13 “A Brief Guide to Mold, Moisture, and Your Home” United States Environmental Protection Agency, http://www.epa.gov/iaq/molds/moldguide.html.

14 “The Facts About Mold”, American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA), http://www.aiha.org/content/accessinfo/consumer/factsaboutmold.htm

15 Worker Protection Information, United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), http://www.osha.gov/sltc/molds/index.hmtl

16 CDC Mold Facts, http://www.cdc.gov/mold/faqs.html

SECTION 5 ANALYTICAL RESULTS AND CHAIN OF CUSTODY: The results of the analyses performed are attached and presented in table format. Each sample type (spore traps - air samples, surface wipes -sterile swabs, tape lifts, bulk dusts and bulk building materials are provided on separate tables. A copy of the submitted chain of custody form is provided following the analytical results. Safety Environmental Laboratories and Consulting, Inc. appreciates the opportunity to provide these services. If you have any questions concerning this report, feel free to contact us at (205) 823-6200. Sincerely, ____________________ Brad Stiles, MS Project Manager ____________________ Carol Findlay Technical Manager

Client : SELC SELC Project #: 2016-1251PR Project Name :C/O : Brad Stiles AIHA EMPAT Proficient Laboratory #: 100766 Date Received :Address : 989 Yeager Parkway Total Fungal Spore and Hyphal Analyses - Air Date Reported : Pelham, AL 35124 SELC Method: A-001 Spore Trap AnalysisSample NumberSample IdentificationDate AnalyzedVolume (m3)Percent Of Trace AnalyzedNumber of Traverses Read

Result DL Result DL Result DLHyphal Fragments 10 200 20 n/a 4 27 7 n/a <1 <7 7 n/aTotal Fungal Spores 1,217 24,342 20 100 92 613 7 100 27 180 7 100

Alternaria 1 20 20 <1 0 7 0 0 7 0Arthrinium 0 20 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Ascospores 73 1,460 20 6 1 7 7 1 0 7 0Aspergillus/Penicillium - Like 145 2,900 20 12 17 113 7 18 3 20 7 11Basidiospores 790 15,802 20 65 63 420 7 68 20 133 7 74Bipolaris/Drechslera 7 140 20 1 0 7 0 0 7 0Botrytis 0 20 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Chaetomium 0 20 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Cladosporium 57 1,140 20 5 7 47 7 8 4 27 7 15Curvularia 74 1,480 20 6 2 13 7 2 0 7 0Epicoccum 0 20 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Fusarium 8 160 20 1 0 7 0 0 7 0Memnoniella 0 20 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Nigrospora 4 80 20 <1 0 7 0 0 7 0Oidium/Peronospora 0 20 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Pithomyces 2 40 20 <1 0 7 0 0 7 0Rusts 0 20 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Smuts/Myxomycetes/Periconia 36 720 20 3 1 7 7 1 0 7 0Stachybotrys 0 20 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Spegazzinia 0 20 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Torula 2 40 20 <1 1 7 7 1 0 7 0Ulocladium 0 20 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Other Spores-Clear, Brown, etc. 18 360 20 1 0 7 0 0 7 0Debris Rating

Analyst : Brian Ray (Lab Technician) Quality Review : Carol Findlay (Microscopy Manager)

10

1

Analyte Total Count

Count/M3%

Outside Ambient Air8/27/2016

0.150033

8/26/20168/27/2016

0.1500100

8/27/20160.1500

100

2 3Kitchen SE8/27/2016

Englewood Elementary

111

Fungal Spore Identification Fungal Spore Identification Fungal Spore Identification

30

Kitchen NE

30Count/M3

%Total Count

Count/M3% Total

Count

Client : SELC SELC Project #: 2016-1251PR Project Name :C/O : Brad Stiles AIHA EMPAT Proficient Laboratory #: 100766 Date Received :Address : 989 Yeager Parkway Total Fungal Spore and Hyphal Analyses - Air Date Reported : Pelham, AL 35124 SELC Method: A-001 Spore Trap AnalysisSample NumberSample IdentificationDate AnalyzedVolume (m3)Percent Of Trace AnalyzedNumber of Traverses Read

Result DL Result DL Result DLHyphal Fragments 3 20 7 n/a 1 7 7 n/a 3 20 7 n/aTotal Fungal Spores 87 580 7 100 103 687 7 100 141 940 7 100

Alternaria 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Arthrinium 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Ascospores 1 7 7 1 6 40 7 6 6 40 7 4Aspergillus/Penicillium - Like 5 33 7 6 5 33 7 5 59 393 7 42Basidiospores 79 527 7 91 89 593 7 86 60 400 7 43Bipolaris/Drechslera 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Botrytis 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Chaetomium 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Cladosporium 2 13 7 2 2 13 7 2 6 40 7 4Curvularia 0 7 0 0 7 0 9 60 7 6Epicoccum 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Fusarium 0 7 0 1 7 7 1 0 7 0Memnoniella 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Nigrospora 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Oidium/Peronospora 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Pithomyces 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Rusts 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Smuts/Myxomycetes/Periconia 0 7 0 0 7 0 1 7 7 1Stachybotrys 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Spegazzinia 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Torula 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Ulocladium 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Other Spores-Clear, Brown, etc. 0 7 0 0 7 0 0 7 0Debris Rating


1 1 1


Total Count

Count/M3%


30 30 30

Analyte Total Count

Count/M3% Total

CountCount/M3

%

0.1500 0.1500 0.1500100 100 100

Cafeteria Stage in Cafeteria Ms. Powell's Office8/27/2016 8/27/2016 8/27/2016

8/26/20168/27/2016

4 5 6

Client : SELC SELC Project #: 2016-1251PR Project Name :C/O : Brad Stiles AIHA EMPAT Proficient Laboratory #: 100766 Date Received :Address : 989 Yeager Parkway Total Fungal Spore and Hyphal Analyses - Surface Date Reported : Pelham, AL 35124 SELC Method: S-001Sample NumberSample IdentificationDate AnalyzedMicroscopic Fields CountedDilution FactorTotal Microscopic Field AreaArea (cm2)

Result DL Result DL Result DLHyphal Fragments <2 <2 2 n/a <2 <2 2 n/a <1 <1 1 n/aTotal Fungal Spores <2 <2 2 100 <2 <2 2 100 3 4 1 100

Alternaria 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Arthrinium 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Ascospores 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Aspergillus/Penicillium - Like 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Basidiospores 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Bipolaris/Drechslera 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Botrytis 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Chaetomium 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Cladosporium 0 2 0 0 2 0 3 4 1 100Curvularia 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Epicoccum 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Fusarium 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Memnoniella 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Nigrospora 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Oidium/Peronospora 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Pithomyces 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Rusts 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Smuts/Myxomycetes/Periconia 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Stachybotrys 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Spegazzinia 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Torula 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Ulocladium 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0Other Spores-Clear, Brown, Etc. 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 1 0


Analyte

100.0000 100.0000

Block Wall Stage Composite8/27/2016

50.02.0

3000.0

50.0

8/26/20168/27/2016

Total Count

9

100.0000

8/27/201650.02.0

Center Food Storage Area Composite

2750.0


7

%

Fungal Spore Identification Fungal Spore Identification

Count/cm2 Total Count

Cafeteria Block Wall Composite

%

2.0

Count/cm2Total Count

8/27/2016

%

8

3250.0

Fungal Spore Identification

Count/cm2


Result DL Result DL Result DLHyphal Fragments <2 <2 2 n/a 1 1 1 n/a <1 <1 1 n/aTotal Fungal Spores <2 <2 2 100 1 1 1 100 1 1 1 100

Alternaria 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Arthrinium 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Ascospores 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Aspergillus/Penicillium - Like 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Basidiospores 0 2 0 1 1 1 100 1 1 1 100Bipolaris/Drechslera 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Botrytis 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Chaetomium 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Cladosporium 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Curvularia 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Epicoccum 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Fusarium 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Memnoniella 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Nigrospora 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Oidium/Peronospora 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Pithomyces 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Rusts 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Smuts/Myxomycetes/Periconia 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Stachybotrys 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Spegazzinia 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Torula 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Ulocladium 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0Other Spores-Clear, Brown, Etc. 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0



% Total Count

Count/cm2%


Analyte Total Count

Count/cm2% Total

CountCount/cm2

4000.0 1750.0 2500.0100.0000 100.0000 100.0000

50.0 50.0 50.02.0 2.0 2.0

Kitchen Office Composite Cafeteria/Kitchen HVAC Composite Ms. Powell's Office Composite8/27/2016 8/27/2016 8/27/2016

8/26/20168/27/2016

10 11 12


Result DLHyphal Fragments <1 <2 2 n/aTotal Fungal Spores 2 4 2 100

Alternaria 0 2 0Arthrinium 0 2 0Ascospores 0 2 0Aspergillus/Penicillium - Like 1 2 2 50Basidiospores 1 2 2 50Bipolaris/Drechslera 0 2 0Botrytis 0 2 0Chaetomium 0 2 0Cladosporium 0 2 0Curvularia 0 2 0Epicoccum 0 2 0Fusarium 0 2 0Memnoniella 0 2 0Nigrospora 0 2 0Oidium/Peronospora 0 2 0Pithomyces 0 2 0Rusts 0 2 0Smuts/Myxomycetes/Periconia 0 2 0Stachybotrys 0 2 0Spegazzinia 0 2 0Torula 0 2 0Ulocladium 0 2 0Other Spores-Clear, Brown, Etc. 0 2 0



Fungal Spore Identification

Analyte Total Count

Count/cm2%

3500.0100.0000

50.02.0

Ms. Powell's HVAC Composite8/27/2016

8/26/20168/27/2016

13

Date post:	15-Aug-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

LIMITED POST REMEDIATION INDOOR ENVIRONMENTAL … · practices and guidelines put forth in...

Documents