LIMITED SITE INSPECTION, AND AIR AND BULK SAMPLING FOR NON-VIABLE … · 2020-03-03 ·...

EnviroScience, Inc.An Environmental Consulting and Industrial Hygiene Company

2220 S. Bascom Avenue • Campbell, California 95008 • (408) 371-4181 • Fax (408) 371-4186

LIMITED SITE INSPECTION,AND

AIR AND BULK SAMPLINGFOR NON-VIABLE FUNGI

ATBUILDING 1400

CABRILLO COMMUNITY COLLEGE6500 SOQUEL DRIVE • APTOS, CA 95003

1.0 BACKGROUNDThe undersigned representative of EnviroScience, Inc. (ESI), an independent industrialhygiene (IH) consulting firm representing Cabrillo Community College, hereby presentsthe findings of the Site inspection, and limited air and bulk sampling conducted for potentialfungal activity at the location referenced below (Site).

It should be noted that ESI’s inspection & sampling was limited to Building 1400 of theCollege Campus only, and that the findings presented herein do not apply to other rooms,offices, or to other buildings on Campus.

2.0 GENERAL PROJECT INFORMATION

SITE LOCATION Cabrillo College6500 Soquel Drive • Aptos, CA 95003

BUILDING SURVEYD Building 1400SAMPLING DATE March 25, 2016

REPORT DATE April 4, 2016ON-SITE INSPECTOR Alfredo Rocha III

EPA-Certified Building Inspector/Contractor SupervisorCal/OSHA-Certified Site Surveillance Technician (#00-2806)CDPH-Certified Lead Inspector (#20474)

PROJECT MANAGER Hooman Sotoodeh, Ph.D., PEEPA-Certified Building Inspector/Project DesignerCal/OSHA-Certified Asbestos Consultant (#93-1097)CDPH-Certified Lead Inspector/Assessor/Project Designer (#1820)

SIGNATURE H. Sotoodeh

Background Inspection & Limited Air and Bulk Sampling for Non-Viable Fungi at Building 1400 Page 2Cabrillo Community College • Aptos, California EnviroScience, Inc.

3.0 PURPOSE

The purpose of ESI’s limited Site inspection & sampling was:

3.1 To inspect visible and accessible areas and surfaces of building 1400 for signsof moisture, water staining, or visible fungal growth;

Photo #1 — Normal moisture detected on Photo #2 — Normal moisture detected onvarious walls of Building 1400 various walls of Building 1400

Photo #3 — Normal moisture detected on Photo #4 — Normal moisture detected on variousCeiling surfaces of Building 1400 surfaces of Building 1400

3.2 To determine via comparative air sampling (i.e., indoor vs. outdoor), whetheran amplified (i.e., higher than ambient air) concentration of non-viable fungiwas present within Building 1400, as compared to outside air;

Photo #5 — Indoor air sampling for Photo #6 — Indoor air sampling fornon-viable fungi in the non-viable fungi in the

main classroom area of Building 1400 attic mechanical room of Building 1400


3.3 To determine via limited bulk sampling, whether the suspect discoloration(dark staining) on the wallboard surface in the attic mechanical room wasfungal in nature, or not.

Photo #7 — Tape lift sampling forNon-viable fungi on the wallboard surface

in the attic mechanical room(Under the Air Ducts)


4.0 FIELD MEASUREMENTS4.1 Direct Moisture Measurement

To determine whether elevated moisture conditions existed on interior surfacesthroughout the Site (especially around plumbing fixtures), which could fosterpotential fungal activity, ESI’s field representative conducted moisturemeasurements on randomly-selected wallboard, wood, and other surfacesthroughout the Site, using a hand-held “pin-type” moisture meter manufactured byGE Sensing called the GE Protimeter SurveyMaster,similar to that shown to the left. This instrument showsmoisture levels in Wood Moisture Equivalent (WME).A WME of 0-14% on wallboard surfaces is typicallyconsidered to be normal (i.e., dry). Anything between14-20% WME is in the questionable range andindicates possible moisture intrusion, and any moisturemeasurement above 20% WME is considered to beelevated or wet, which could foster continued growth offungi, if not remediated or dried promptly.

4.2 Non-Viable Air Microbiological SamplingNon-viable (essentially dead) mold spores were collected on “Air-O-Cell” sporetrap, air sampling cassettes manufactured by Zefon Analytical, Inc., of St.

Petersburg, Florida. A battery-operated, portablebio-pump also manufactured by Zefon was usedto draw air through the Air-O-Cell cassette at aflow rate of 15 liters per minute (lpm) for 5minutes. Prior to Site arrival, the air samplingpump was pre-calibrated using a field rotameter,which had been calibrated against a primarystandard by the pump manufacturer. Uponcollection, air samples were properly sealed, anddelivered to an independent, AIHA-accredited,and EMLAP-certified laboratory (Aemtek, Inc.,of Fremont, California, EMLAP #167620) for24-hour RUSH analysis, along with a signedcopy of the appropriate chain-of-custodydocumentation.

4.3 Bulk (Tape Lift) Microbiological SamplingSuspect discoloration or growth on surfaces wassampled using the “Tape-Lift” samplingtechnique. With this method the sticky surface of aclear adhesive tape is pressed against the surfacebeing sampled. Once the dust sample is collected,the tape is positioned on a pre-labeled glassmicroscope slide, and then placed inside a sterilehard-shell container for safe transport to thelaboratory. Tape Lift sample(s) were also deliveredto Aemtek, Inc. for prompt analysis, along with asigned copy of the appropriate chain-of-custodydocumentation.


5.0 ANALYTICAL DATA FOR NON-VIABLE AIR SAMPLES

5.1 Non-Viable Air SamplesSample Sample Sampling Particle ID Concentration

N º Location Date (Particles/m3)

21656369 Outside ambient air 03-25-16 Alternaria —(Pre-start) Ascospores 299

Aspergillus/Penicillium-like 234Basidiospores 897Cladosporium 312

Ganoderma 13Myxomycete/Periconia/Rust/Smut 13

Pithomyces —Other hyaline spores 2,015

TOTAL 3 , 7 8 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21656345 S. side of space 1401 03-25-16 Alternaria —(under the registers) Ascospores 13


Ganoderma —Myxomycete/Periconia/Rust/Smut —

Pithomyces —Other hyaline spores 377

TOTAL 6 2 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21656370 N. side of space 1401 03-25-16 Alternaria —(under the registers) Ascospores 13




TOTAL 4 2 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21656353 Hallway between offices 03-25-16 Alternaria 131403 & 1412 Ascospores 39


Ganoderma —Myxomycete/Periconia/Rust/Smut 13


TOTAL 4 5 5


5.0 ANALYTICAL DATA FOR NON-VIABLE AIR SAMPLES (CONT’D)

5.1 Non-Viable Air SamplesSample Sample Sampling Particle ID Concentration

N º Location Date (Particles/m3)

21656306 Hallway between offices 03-25-16 Alternaria —1406 & 1408 Ascospores —


Ganoderma 13Myxomycete/Periconia/Rust/Smut —


TOTAL 2 6 0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21656373 Space 1402 03-25-16 Alternaria —(under the registers) Ascospores 13




TOTAL 1 1 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21656322 Inside 03-25-16 Alternaria —Mechanical room Ascospores 26


Ganoderma 13Myxomycete/Periconia/Rust/Smut —


TOTAL 2 0 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21656352 Outside ambient air 03-25-16 Alternaria —(Post-completion) Ascospores 351


Ganoderma 26Myxomycete/Periconia/Rust/Smut 39

Pithomyces 13Other hyaline spores 1,261

TOTAL 2 , 6 0 0


5.2 Non-Viable Bulk Microbiological SamplesDuring the analysis of the tape lift sample, the laboratory analyst microscopicallyexamines each sample and estimates a relative quantity of spores or particulates onthe slide. The quantities of fungi found by the analyst are visually estimated and arereported as one of the following seven (7) approximate percentage ranges.

Reported A p p r o x . ApproximateConcentrat ion Percentage Spore Concentration

Rare 1-10% 1-10 spores seen on the prep.Some 11-30% 11-30 spores seen on the prep.

Common 61-60% 31-60 spores seen on the prep.Many 61-100% 61-100 spores seen on the prep.

Abundant 100% More than 100 spores seen on the prep.TNTC 100% + Too numerous to count (TNTC),

but no fruiting structures observedColony 100% + Abundant or numerous spores and

fruiting structures associated fruiting structures observed

The findings of the non-viable “Tape Lift” sample collected from the Site aresummarized below.

Sample Sample Particle ID RelativeN º Location Density

CC-TL1 Discoloration on None Detected —the attic wallboardunder the air ducts

(NW Corner)


6.0 CONCLUSIONSThere are currently no regulatory standards as to acceptable levels of mold in indoorenvironments nor are there any standards established for microbial permissible exposurelimits (PELs).

The State of California has attempted to set such standards. In 2001, the CaliforniaLegislature passed the "Toxic Mold Protection Act of 2001" requiring CaliforniaDepartment of Public Health (CDPH) to determine the feasibility of identifying PELs forindoor molds. According to the 2005 report, CDPH concluded that it is presently notfeasible to set such limits because the scientific data from which such standards are set isnot available. CDPH also concluded that another challenge is found in the differences inindividual susceptibilities to mold due to factors such as genetics, age, nutritional status,personal habits and medical conditions.

CDPH concluded that "notwithstanding the inability to develop PELs for indoor molds,CDPH agrees with other building and health professionals that indoor dampness, waterintrusion, or fungal growth should always be eliminated in a safe and efficient manner. Thepublic health is best protected by limiting exposure to mold growth, other biologicalcontaminants, and chemicals in damp buildings to prevent allergic, irritant, and infectioushealth effects." See California Department of Health Services Report to the CaliforniaLegislature “Implementation of the Toxic Mold Protection Act of 2001”, updated Feb.2006, available at http://www.cdph.ca.gov/ programs /IAQ/ Pages/IndoorMold.aspx.

Due to the absence of government standards on acceptable mold levels, EnviroScienceemploys the industry standard for fungal air quality monitoring recommended by theAmerican Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA). This guideline recommends that thecomparison of the biodiversity of fungi indoors to that outdoors be of primary importanceto the interpretation of an indoor air quality (IAQ) study. The rationale behind this is that ifthere were no fungal reservoirs or amplification areas indoors, then one would expect to findthe same biodiversity as that found in the ambient air. While there are exceptions to thisgeneral rule, it provides a basis for assessing IAQ issues.

Given the wide variation of factors affecting spore distribution, ESI does not consider singledigit spore counts indoors which are not represented in the ambient air, as fungalamplification. Furthermore, according to the American Conference of GovernmentalIndustrial Hygienists (ACGIH) in “Bioaerosols: Assessment and Control”, a difference infungal concentrations less than 100 spores/m3 is not considered significant, and may beattributed to sampling variability. Similarly Tape Lift results with “Rare” or “Some”concentrations of fungal spores are considered to be background or ambient levelcontamination.

6.1 The visual inspection of visible and accessible areas of building 1400 and theMechanical room, did not indicate any obvious signs of moisture staining, floorbuckling, baseboard cracking, or similar suspect conditions. ESI’s field inspectorobserved visible signs of an old water staining on some wallboard surfaces belowthe air ducts in the attic Mechanical room;

6.2 The moisture measurements conducted by ESI throughout randomly-selected areasof building 1400 and attic Mechanical room did not indicate any elevated moisturelevels at the time of our investigation;


6.3 The limited non-viable air microbiological sampling conducted within various indoorlocations of building 1400 indicated an airborne fungal spore concentration thatwere 92-97% lower than the outdoor air samples. Furthermore, all fungigenus/species identified indoors were also represented outdoors at much higherconcentrations; and

6.4 The microscopic examination of the tape lift microbiological sample collected fromthe suspect discoloration on the attic mechanical room wallboard did not indicateany surface mold spore contamination (i.e., None Detected).

Based on the current regulatory climate regarding such air and bulk sampling and datainterpretation, and based on the interpretation of results during a small window of time whensampling took place, ESI does not believe that an amplified fungal spore concentrationexists in the air or on surfaces of Building 1400, at the time of our Site visit.

To prevent potential future fungal activity indoors, however, it is imperative that anycontributing factors allowing for water intrusion into the Building to be investigated andproperly repaired by State-licensed, and experienced professionals.

Mold and fungal colonies can grow at any time, if moisture or humidity is allowed to enterthe building envelope and wet surfaces for a prolonged period of time. Therefore it is agood idea to dehumidify damp areas, and make sure that all plumbing fixtures, water lines,exterior walls, roofing membranes, window surrounds, and the entire building envelope iswater tight at all times.


7.0 LIMITATIONS

This report was prepared solely for the use of ESI’s client Cabrillo Community College,and their designated representatives, only. No part of this report shall be copied or used forany purpose by anyone other than the client, without written consent from ESI. Anyreliance on this report by a third party is at such party's sole risk. The contents andconclusions provided by ESI in this report are based on very limited information collectedduring its assessment, which include, but are not limited to, visual Site inspection, limitedsampling and analysis, and our professional judgment.

ESI did not attempt to perform exhaustive sample collection at the site, nor did we collectany viable air samples or viable mold cultures, which may provide substantially differingresults from the non-viable samples, collected. ESI assumes that the samples collected andlaboratory results are reasonably representative of the entire Site, which may not be the caseat unsampled areas or surfaces. The results of the sampling and the recommendations madehere are applicable to a small window of time on the date, time, and location that samplingwas conducted. Any generalization of these recommendations to others dates, times, orlocations will not be applicable or accurate.

This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or itsrepresentatives, to ensure that the information contained herein is brought to the attention ofthe appropriate regulatory agencies or other parties, where required by law. Additionally, itis the sole responsibility of the owner to properly dispose of any hazardous substances onsite, in accordance with existing laws and regulations.

This assessment was performed in accordance with generally accepted principles andpractices of environmental engineering and assessment in northern California at the time ofthe work. This report presents our professional opinion based on our findings, technicalknowledge, and experience working on similar projects. No warranty, either expressed orimplied, is made. The limited conclusions presented are based on the current regulatoryclimate. We are not responsible for the impact of any changes in environmental standardsor regulations in the future.

To the fullest extent permitted by law, Client agrees to limit the liability of ESI, its officers,shareholders and employees, for any acts, errors or omissions or breaches of contract to thegreater of $2,500 or the amount of ESI's fees for services rendered under this Agreement.Client agrees to defend, indemnify and hold ESI harmless from any loss, cost, damage orexpense, including attorney's fees, in excess of the foregoing limits. In no event shall ESIbe liable for, and Client shall indemnify and hold ESI harmless against, any indirect, specialor consequential loss or damage. Failure of Client to give written notice to ESI of any claimof negligent act, error or omission within one (1) year of performance shall constitute awaiver of such claim by Client.

ESI will retain the records related to this project including lab data for a period of six (6)months from the date of this investigation, only. Thereafter all paper and electronic recordswill be discarded safely. It will be the responsibility of the client to retain all records relatedto this project after the 6-month period. ESI assumes no responsibility for documentreproduction in legal dispute matters after the 6-month expiration period.

There are no third party beneficiaries of this agreement between Client and ESI and no thirdparty shall be entitled to rely upon any work performed or reports prepared by ESIhereunder for any purpose. Client shall indemnify and hold ESI harmless against anyliability to any third party for any loss, expense, or damages arising out of or in connectionwith reliance by any such third party on any work performed or reports issued by ESIhereunder.


Appendix AINDEPENDENT LABORATORY

ANALYTICAL RESULTSFOR

NON-VIABLE AIRMICROBIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS

“SPORE TRAP AIR SAMPLES”




Appendix BINDEPENDENT LABORATORY

ANALYTICAL RESULTSFOR

NON-VIABLE BULKMICROBIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS

“TAPE LIFT SAMPLES”


Date post:	11-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

LIMITED SITE INSPECTION, AND AIR AND BULK SAMPLING FOR NON-VIABLE … · 2020-03-03 ·...

Documents