Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) Blog

How Reliable Are Air Samples for Mold?

Wed, 22 Jan 2025 21:01:24 GMT

How Reliable Are Air Samples for Mold?

One of the most popular ways to sample the air for mold is with a cassette, like Air-O-Cell and Allergenco-D cassettes. These devices are attached to a tub, which is attached to an air pump. The air pump is calibrated (e.g., 15 liters per minute) and run for a predetermined about of time by the industrial hygienist or mold assessor. It works by using inertial impaction to capture particles (e.g., mold spores, pollen, insect fragments, fibers, etc.) as air is drawn through a tapered inlet slit and onto the collection media on the slide. When the laboratory receives the cassette, they open it and perform what’s called direct microscopy. (You can learn more about this process in my other blog .)

The outside morning air sample was collected on a clear, sunny morning; according to the laboratory report, the airborne Aspergillus levels are within normal levels. At lunchtime you collect another sample while your neighbor is mowing his lawn; according to the laboratory report, the outside levels of Aspergillus are hundreds of thousands of times higher than average. Lastly, you collect your final air sample in the late afternoon, while it is raining; and according to the laboratory report, there are no Aspergillus spores in the air.

You need a competent person to provide for your mold assessment needs; someone who can prove to you that they’ve found the location of mold colonization, the extent of its impact on the indoor environment, and justify an appropriate approach to mold remediation (i.e., write a protocol ). This is why I wrote my first blog on The Mold Assessment Process , to help you identify components of the mold assessment process and have a list of questions to ask potential assessors before you hired them.

The good news is that the Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services provides college-educated, Council- certified and accredited industrial hygienists and mold assessors to ensure the appropriate assessment is performed to achieve the purpose of your assessment needs. For more information, contact us for a no-obligation review of your needs.

Laboratory Analytical Methods for Mold

Wed, 22 Jan 2025 14:20:11 GMT

Methods of Mold Sampling & Analysis: Part 2 Methods of Laboratory Analysis for Mold

Frequently, people calling our office will ask what kind of mold sampling and analysis methods we offer. This is a good question, because the type of sampling and analysis performed should be directly related to the purpose of the assessment and the assessment’s needs to provide for that purpose. In the last blog I introduced you to the four principal mold sampling techniques. In this blog I’d like to introduce you to some of the most often used laboratory analytical methods for the identification of mold.

Why is this important to you?

If your assessor fails to identify the appropriate laboratory and/or laboratory analytical method on his/her Chain Of Custody (COC), the laboratory analysis may be flaw (i.e., it may not provide for your assessment needs or the purpose of the mold sample). This is not only a waste of time and money but may lead to additional liabilities (e.g., a misdiagnosis of the area being sampled).

Laboratory Analytical Methods:

A number of laboratory analytical methods are used to assess whether an unwanted or abnormal mold-related condition exists in a given sample. The following are most often requested of mold assessors in the United States:

Direct Microscopy. This is one of the most often used methods in the mold assessment industry, because it is the most taught method to mold assessors. This method visually identifies and counts the mold spores and fragments (e.g., hyphae). It does not distinguish between viable (i.e., living) and non-viable (i.e., not capable of living) mold spores nor does it identify the species of the organism ( - while it will determine the genus, e.g. Aspergillus , it will not determine the species, e.g. Aspergillus flavus -), as do other methods, but is good for the (1) confirmation of visual colonization in a given surface, (2) clarification of mold colonization where suspect in a given surface, (3) determination of the mold spore population (i.e., the types and quantity of mold spores on a given surface or in a given air-mass), (4) and other applications. Laboratory analysis is often faster than other types of analytical methods we’ll be discussing.
Culture. This method is commonly performed to expand the spore count into a determination of which of the mold types are viable and what are their species. While this may be beneficial for those seeking to determine if a given (or group of) mold species are present in relation to a diagnosed disease, there are technical limitations to this sampling and analytical method that must be considered, including but not limited to (1) bacterial infections of the sampling medium, (2) the type of mold being sought out (as some mold spores have highly specialized growth conditions that are not mimicked by the contents of the sampling medium), (3) the type of mold being collected on the sampling medium (certain spores produce inhibitors that can prevent growth), (4) overcrowding of spores on the sampling medium, (5) desiccation effects on collected mold spores, (6) the viability period of the sought after types of mold (as some mold spores have limited viability periods).
Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). This is a laboratory tool for assessing the content of mold in extracts and surface dust. It may detect the presence and relative levels of twenty-six mold species associated with water damage and ten mold species not associated with water damage but cannot (as of the date of this publication) detect all species of mold. (Consider there are over 180,000 species of mold and we’ve just discussed its ability to identify less than one hundred.) While this method may be beneficial for those seeking to determine if a given mold species is present (e.g., Histoplasma capsulatum where bird or bat droppings/infestation has been observed or an occupant has been diagnosed with Histoplasmosis ), its limited ability to define the mold populations along with some governmental recommendations to limit its use in building diagnosis (e.g., the EPA doesn’t recommend ERMI be used in building diagnosis) means you should always discuss the pros and cons of its use with your mold assessor prior to its application.

Methods of Mold Sampling

Wed, 22 Jan 2025 13:28:20 GMT

Methods of Mold Sampling & Analysis: Part 1 Methods of Mold Sampling

Frequently, people calling our office will ask what kind of mold sampling and analysis methods we offer. This is a good question, because the type of sampling and analysis performed should be directly related to the purpose of the assessment and the assessment’s needs to provide for that purpose. So, in this blog, I want to share with you some of the most popular ways mold is sampled (by industrial hygienists and mold assessors) and analyzed (by an accredited laboratory).

The Purpose of the Sample:

Methods of Sampling:

A number of environmental sampling methods are used to assess whether an unwanted or abnormal mold-related condition exists in a given area. The four principal collection techniques include:

Collecting a bulk (e.g., a piece of wall drywall) from a surface. There are many reasons this may be performed (e.g., the surface has been sprayed or wiped, but a mold-related structure is suspected in the surface, or multiple methods of laboratory analysis may be desired from one surface). While this method of sampling does provide some unique benefits, it also has the con of damaging the material being sampled.
Collecting some dust from a surface (e.g., the floor or ventilation system). This method of sampling is often performed to determine the accumulated particulate matter (i.e., a term describing a group of particles, such as insect fragments, mold spores, pollen, fibrous particles, skin fragments, and other particles) that has settled on the surface (from the air) over time.
Tape-lifts or swab sampling (also referred to as wipe sampling). This methodology of sampling may be used to prove observed mold colonization in a given material or clarify if an abnormal surface mold spore population (i.e., the types and quantity of mold spores on a given surface whose identity, location, and quantity are not reflective of typical settled mold spores for a similar indoor environment) exists on/in a given material.
Air sampling. As you’ve seen with surface sampling, there are many ways to sample the air for mold, each method with its own set of strengths and weaknesses. It’s extremely important that your assessor be competent enough to determine which method is best suited to the purpose of the air sampling; otherwise, you may waste your money having the sample(s) performed. In a later blog, I will discuss this more.

The Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services offers all of these sampling methodologies, and provides college-educated, Council- certified and accredited industrial hygienists and mold assessors to ensure the appropriate sampling methodology is performed to achieve the purpose of your assessment needs. For more information, contact us for a no-obligation review of your needs.

The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same: Has the IICRC Mold Remediation Standard Lost Its Relevance?

Tue, 01 Oct 2024 21:12:39 GMT

The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same:

Has the IICRC Mold Remediation Standard Lost Its Relevance?

Since the work on the very first mold remediation standard (the IICRC S520, First Edition), there have been controversies over who is on the committee (putting the IICRC standard together) and the content within (and left out of) the standard. I recall that during the first mold remediation standard, many occupational safety and health (OSH) professionals opposed some of the OSH language being proposed as “not reflecting” OSH standards and laws at that time. Despite the debates, the first through the third editions of the mold remediation standard got published with a chapter on “Safety and Health”. Were they perfect? No. But was it a step toward maturation for the mold remediation industry? Yes.

You see, prior to the publication of the IICRC S520, there was no written standard for mold remediation. Contractors either drew from the asbestos remediation standards various procedures (e.g., containment and air filtration) or they just tore things out and rebuilt the building. So, while the first edition was not perfect, it was a good first step toward maturation.

However, since that first step, the IICRC committee debates have led the IICRC to remove the “Safety and Health” chapter from its 2024 (Fourth Edition) standard. While some were arguing for an inclusion of risk assessment language, others thought that went too far, requiring the mold remediation standard to become “a safety and health standard”; “Something we didn’t want the standard to be,” one IICRC representative told me. So, rather than taking the next step toward maturation, the IICRC decided to remove the “Safety and Health” chapter altogether.

Why Is This Important?

It's as simple as this: If a remediation technician doesn’t care about his or her health and safety, how do you expect them to care for your own? Your family’s? Your customers’? Your employees’? Etc.

By failing to incorporate safety and health into the mold remediation standard, the IICRC has become complicit (those who would willfully violate public and worker safety and health laws) by abstention; a step that could take the industry backward rather than toward maturation.

The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same

So, while the IICRC continues to provide revisions to the mold remediation standard, the condition of the mold remediation industry stagnates, leaving customers frustrated and potentially harmed, and worker incident/illness rates higher than the reported numbers (as many mold remediation companies are untrained in the required reporting laws governing their industry).

What Can Be Done?

The current committee leader is a flooring professional with no background relative to the subject matter being generated (i.e., safety and health), yet he dictates and controls the content of the material within the proposed field guide, all the while dismissing the questions and recommendations of other committee members (some of whom brought good questions and concerns to the meeting . . . and some of whom have more direct education and experience than the committee leader in the subject matter the document is meant to discuss).
The contents of the field guide do not reflect current scientific principles, legal precedent, nor regulations; thus, providing for an opportunity to (1) misguide the disaster restoration industry and (2) cause harm to those who look to the IICRC for guidance in their industry.
The contents of the field guide (1) do not dictate well the principles of safety and health . . . nor (2) do they communicate the proposed safety and health laws discussed in the committee meeting.
One of the major reasons the issues exist with the committee and the document is a limited, bias lens is being used to develop a document with limited focus on safety and health applications and the applications of the disaster restoration professional in the field (a direct contradiction of the title of the document).

I must warn the IICRC that the path that it is on is a dangerous one; perhaps not for the IICRC, itself, but for those who look to the IICRC for guidance in their industry. . .. I pray that the IICRC (1) strongly considers replacing the current committee leader with a competent person, (2) time is taken to develop a quality committee of safety and health professionals, (3) time is taken to develop a document that focuses on the truth in subject matter, and (4) issues a challenge to the disaster restoration industry to mature (as OSHA and other occupational safety and health regulatory bodies and industry-based agencies and organizations have done) - if not for the integrity of the IICRC and the document, for the safety and health of those who are employed in the disaster restoration industry as well as those they serve.

So, Does This Mean The IICRC Mold Remediation Standard Lost Its Relevancy?

To a point, yes. Federal, state, local, and provincial occupational safety and health laws dictate the responsibilities of employers and employees working in the disaster restoration industry. As the IICRC publishes revisions to its standards that do not reflect those requirements, their standards become less relevant to (1) those who understand these legal responsibilities and (2) care about their own, their employees’, and their customers’ safety and health.

In Closing:

The good news is that there are occupational safety and health consultants, like the Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services, who work with the public (and anyone else interested) to ensure proper measures are taken to protect the health and safety of mold remediators and other building occupants. If you have any questions regarding this blog or would like to discuss a need that you have with one of our industrial hygienists, contact us for a free, no-obligation review of your needs.

Should A Mold Remediator Perform Mold Assessments? Part 3

Wed, 24 Jul 2024 19:38:09 GMT

Should A Mold Remediator Perform Mold Assessments? Part 3

Since writing the second installment on this series of blogs, I have been asked a lot of questions about the hotel owner and mold assessor (mentioned in that blog). Questions like: "Why would that guy [who performed the mold assessment] do that? Why not just be upfront with the hotel owner?" The answer is rather simple:

The Florida statutes governing licensed mold service providers includes the following:

Section 468.8419(1)(d) provides that the mold assessor nor the company where the mold assessor works should "perform or offer to perform any mold remediation to a structure on which the mold assessor or the mold assessor’s company provided a mold assessment within the last 12 months.”

Likewise, section 468.8419(2)(d) provides that the mold remediator nor the company where the mold remediator works should "perform or offer to perform any mold assessment to a structure on which the mold remediator or the mold remediator’s company provided a mold remediation within the last 12 months."

By (1) not being up-front with the hotel owner, (2) not providing the hotel owner the protocol that he'd requested, (3) then obstructing other mold remediators from performing the work for the hotel owner, the mold assessor could buy time, holding out for that 12 month period, so he could sell the hotel owner on his mold remediation services rather than see the hotel owner hire a different mold remediator.

Thank you for the questions. If you have a question, feel free to email me at jason@gulfcoastiaq.com . Additionally, if you have a mold assessment need, contact the Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services, and let’s discuss how we may best serve you.

Should A Mold Remediator Perform Mold Assessments? Part 2

Wed, 17 Jul 2024 18:14:41 GMT

Should A Mold Remediator Perform Mold Assessments? Part 2

In the first blog in this series , we looked at how performing mold assessments and mold remediation is a conflict of interest (and illegal). In this blog, I want to start introducing you to some of the risks associated with using a mold remediator to perform your mold assessments.

The following is taken from a real customer review of a mold remediator who performs mold assessments:

“I had my service conducted late July. I still have not received an email with the findings, as promised over two weeks ago nor have I received a receipt for the $350 I paid for the lead inspection. I've sent follow up messages with no response.”

This same company (who we’ll not name, rather call John Doe Restoration for the purpose of this blog) did the following, according to two sources (a hotel owner and his mold remediation project director) on a hotel mold remediation project:

After the mold remediation project director informed the hotel owner that a mold assessment with protocol was necessary, the hotel owner decided to hire the cheapest option: John Doe Restoration. (To be fair, this company does not name themselves a “restoration company”, rather an “environmental solutions” company. The hotel owner couldn’t have known what to expect from John Doe Restoration Company’s advertisement.) The price for a mold assessment with protocol: $350.00.
John Doe Restoration Company collected two samples inside the hotel; after which, they wrote a report stating (in one sentence) that there was a problem requiring mold remediation. No protocol was provided in the report.
When the mold remediator was provided with John Doe Restoration Company’s report (by the hotel owner), he requested the protocol; in response, the hotel owner gave the mold remediator his mold assessor at John Doe Restoration Company.
When the mold remediator called the assessor, the assessor attempted to solicit his services to the mold remediator. When the mold remediator told him that they do not use other mold remediators to perform mold assessments, the mold assessor stated, “Well, I have nothing to say to you then.” The mold remediator politely repeated his request for the protocol. The mold assessor responded, “Like I said, I have nothing to say to you” before hanging up on the mold remediator.
John Doe Restoration Company attempted to blame the mold remediator for not doing his job and proceeded to offer his mold remediation services to the hotel owner. Because the hotel owner declined, citing it as a conflict of interest, John Doe Restoration Company increased the mold assessment bill to $1,500.00, stating the $350.00 was only if he hired them to perform the mold remediation.
Because John Doe Restoration Company refused to provide a protocol, the hotel owner had to hire another mold assessor to perform an assessment of the hotel and write a protocol.

Nanoparticles in Consumer Products and the Indoor Air Quality

Mon, 03 Jun 2024 23:01:48 GMT

Nanoparticles in Consumer Products & The Indoor Air Quality

For generations, people have been concerned about particulate matter (i.e., particles) in the air. Traditionally, these particles have included things such as insect fragments, mold spores, pollen, fibrous particles, skin fragments, soot, and other particles, but, with the growing use of nanoparticles in consumer products and medication, people have begun to ask the question: Are we adding another environmental stressor (i.e., the nanoparticles) to our environments? And what risk does this pose to my health?

Perhaps you’ve heard the term nanoparticles, but have you ever thought about what that term means? Furthermore, have you ever considered where you may find nanoparticles?

Nanoparticles (e.g. carbon nanotubes; silver, gold, copper and silica nanoparticles) is a term used to describe a group of small particles that ranges between 1 to 100 nanometers (nm, or 0.0000000394 - 0.000003937 inches (in.)) in size. To help put into perspective how small these particles are, let’s compare them to other particles:

Particle Type:

Diameter Size Range:

A sheet of paper

10,000 nm

(0.000394 in.)

Coarse particles (e.g., visible dust)

2,500 – 10,000 nm

(0.0000984252 - 0.0003937008 in.)

Fine particles (also known as respirable particulate )

100 – 2,500 nm

(0.000003937 - 0.0000984252 in.)

Nanoparticles

1 – 100 nm

(0.0000000394 - 0.000003937 in.)

As you can see from these examples, nanoparticles are extremely small, undetectable by the human eye. The (nano-)technology used in the incorporation of nanoparticles is widely used to enhance the functionality of numerous consumer products. While you may be unaware of it, you are likely using multiple consumer products that have been created with the help of this (nano-)technology in your daily life. Products include things like cosmetics, various eyeglasses technology (e.g., protective and antireflective ultrathin polymer coatings, scratch-resistant coatings, and anti-fogging lens), in textiles (e.g., waterproof, windproof, stain resistant, odor resistant, wrinkle resistant, and sun protective clothing), deodorizing sprays, electronics (e.g., smartwatches and smartphones), sunscreens, and sporting equipment. Given its size and growing use in our everyday lives, it is reasonable to ask the question: Do these nanoparticles pose a risk to my health?

Given nanoparticles may transform physically and/or chemically from their original form after interacting with man-made or environmental factors, the answer to this question is slow in coming. Early research has shown that some risks exist (1) in the form of dermal exposure (e.g., to cosmetics) and (2) from the released and resuspended manufactured particles (spray-application products used indoors) during regular product and building use. However, while these researchers have shown increased exposure to nanoparticles, the actual risk-potential to those exposed has not been discussed. For example, this research project (see also image below) showed that – just by walking over a surface sprayed with a consumer product containing nanoparticles – nanoparticles were resuspended into the breath-zone (i.e., that portion of the air whereby a child or adult takes in air during respiration), but concluded: “Overall, these data on the resuspension of particles from nano-enabled consumer sprays could help us understand the resulting exposures and support future studies on human exposure reduction.” This doesn’t help answer your question, does it?

The actual risk-potential to one exposed to any particle requires careful consideration of several factors, for example:

1) The type and concentration of a given agent or group of agents,

2) The means of exposure to that type and concentration,

3) The duration of exposure to that type and concentration,

4) One’s biological disposition in relation to the type, concentration, and means and duration of exposure, and

5) Other factors.

One analyzing the indoor environment for such risk-potential should consider the environmental stressors in question as well as those factors that may cause the physical or chemical transformations (discussed earlier) and the byproducts of those transformations, routes of exposure, source of the environmental stressor(s), and other important factors. This is where Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services can help. Our accredited staff can perform various material data analyses, airborne chemical and physical properties, and other important factors in helping determine the presence and extent of contamination as well as the likely means of one’s exposure, causal factor(s), and other important factors. To learn more about how we may help you, give us a call or email us for a free review of your needs. Let’s discover how we may best serve you.

Avoiding the “Free Mold Inspection” Scam Part 2

Mon, 29 Apr 2024 16:46:08 GMT

Avoiding the “Free Mold Inspection” Scam Part 2

In my previous blog , we looked at how there’s no such thing as a free inspection; how remediators are either doing the work themselves or hiring someone else who takes a percentage of profits off the remediator’s invoice. In this blog, I want to share with you two major problems with that arrangement; problems that I’ve seen injure people and businesses.

Problem # 1

Problem # 2

In Conclusion:

So, based on these two blogs, I hope you can see that not only are there no such things as free mold inspections but there are inflated costs and liabilities with those offering them. Don’t let necessity leave you in a compromised position. Find an unbiased source for indoor air quality and mold assessments prior to the need for such services, and don’t let anyone intimidate you into using someone you aren’t comfortable with in your home or office. Of course, if you have any questions or require any service, contact Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services and let’s discuss how we may best serve you.

Avoiding the “Free Mold Inspection” Scam Part 1

Wed, 17 Apr 2024 14:08:51 GMT

Avoiding the “Free Mold Inspection” Scam Part 1

Me: “But the IICRC calls that a conflict of interest. Do you work with other assessors, or do you do both yourself?”

Them: “We are using other company to do for us the protocols if we are providing remediation and if we are providing testing we are recommending other companies for the remediation. We are working with other assessors as well.”

Me: “Surely, the assessor you’re using doesn’t offer their service for free? They’d go out of business.”

Them: “The amount of work that we are giving them, they provide inspection with high percentage of closing.” This is when they begin to try to sell to me how great their program is, closing with: “Are you an assessor?”

I explained, “We are a contract industrial hygiene company, offering hazard and risk assessments , protocol generations, PRVAs [Post Remediation Verification Assessments], training, legal consultations and expert witness testimony, occupational safety and health consultations, etc.” (Brackets inserted) That’s when they quit speaking with me.

In part two of this series we will look at what these types of mold remediator/mold assessor relationships mean to you in the form of risks and liabilities.

In the meantime, my team and I are here to help you anytime. Feel free to give us a call or email us for a free consultation. Let’s see how we may best serve you. God bless.

Difference Between Recommendations and Protocols

Tue, 12 Mar 2024 20:56:55 GMT

The Difference Between Recommendations and Protocols for Remediation

As a peer in the indoor environmental (remediation and assessment) industry, I perform various reviews of individuals and businesses on a regular basis. I’ve performed these duties since 2018, across the Southeast and Midwest United States (U.S.). And I cannot tell you how often I read reports or listen to assessors, hygienists, and other types of inspectors misuse the term “protocol”. Ladies and gentlemen, this is important, so I want to touch on (1) what each is and (2) why having an assessor who knows the difference matters to you.

Differences Between Recommendations and Protocols

An example of this is when a mold assessor writes a report saying things like the following:

For verification purposes, this assessment included air and/or surface mold spore sampling to prove the existence of mold growth in the residence. The sample results confirmed mold spore contamination. There should be no occupancy throughout the sanitization/remediation process.

Once the mold sanitization/remediation has been completed a thorough post remediation verification (PRV) shall be performed by a licensed mold assessor such as [redacted]. This PRV should be conducted after the mold sanitization/remediation, but before the rebuild, in order to verify that all mold amplification has been removed.

Folks, there are some cheaper and some more expensive than this performing just as poorly. While some attempt to provide some specification, they are “subjectively vague” as one assessor described his process of reporting to me. This may be the most honest response that I’ve been given by anyone in my 34 years of doing this. Subjective vagueness is a type of vagueness used to refer to concepts and ideas that depend on each one’s subjective to be applicable. And the broad use of subjective vagueness is why you may ask five contractors something and get differing answers to your questions. Frustrating (and infuriating), isn’t it?

Protocols. A protocol is an official procedure or system of governing affairs related to the remediation of mold within a specified building. A protocol is based on (1) a detailed, site assessment, (2) a defined condition to the assessed indoor environment (i.e., evidence and justification for the protocol), (3) scientific research, standards of care, and regulations applicable to the various components of the protocol (e.g., if the assessment found a risk of inhalation hazards to workers, the protocol will seek to enforce regulations and standards of care relative to working in such an environment), and (4) other pertinent resources.

An example of a protocol might include details on what type (if any) air filtration should take place during remediation, including something like:

In keeping with OSHA ventilation principle and the IICRC S520, negative pressure must be maintained throughout the duration of the remediation of the work area. The negative air machine should be used in a fashion that creates negative air pressure in the work area, maintained at -5.0 Pascals (or -0.02 Water Columns [inch]) and at a minimum of 4 Air Changes per Hour (ACH). Pressurization, machine performance, and filter exchanges shall be monitored and recorded throughout the remediation processes, and adjustments made, as necessary, to maintain these engineering controls.

Additional air scrubbers and/or increased ACH may be needed to move air space where the above specifications are not met in micro-climates (e.g., in a corner of a room) with the negative air machine(s) alone. (Alevantis et al., 1996; ACGIH, 1999) If additional air scrubbers are utilized, they shall be regularly monitored and maintained to assure proper performance and cleanliness. The monitoring and maintenance of these devices should be documented.

[Redacted] offers the following guidance: Install Negative Air Machines (NAMs) within the work area(s) as follows:

1) Duct the NAMs through the primary bedroom southwest window.

2) Make-up air should be filtered and brought in through the southwest window located in the kitchen’s southwest window.

3) Ensure the HVAC systems’ NAM(s) usage is in accordance with current standards of care developed by NADCA (see section 3.10 for the HVAC protocol).

Closing Comments:

Why does this matter to you? Well, there are a lot of reasons, here are just a few: When insurance adjusters, third-party administrators (TPAs), and/or building owners get bad advice or incomplete advice on any insurance claim or property restoration project, several things happen, impacting everyone interested in the claim/project: (1) the duration of the project is made longer by the confusion, conflict, limitations, etc. created by the recommendations in the assessor’s report, (2) the cost of any project, whether an insurance claim or not, goes up, as the risk of falling victim to predatory contract behaviors increase, (3) the risk of secondary damages increase (e.g., where someone gets poor advice on a water-damage, improper procedures may lead to bacterial infections in the building and its occupants), (4) the risk of lawsuits increase, (5) property values may depreciate, and (6) other unwanted outcomes.

This is why it is so important to have an emergency response plan and team in place before a natural disaster, plumbing leak, fire, or other unwanted situation arises. Benjamin Franklin once said, “ Necessity never made a good bargain. ” And I agree with him. Whether you have one of these plans in place or you’re just beginning to put one together, you need to include a competent indoor environmental consultant on your team of professionals, and you need one who will provide you the specificity that you require to safely and effectively have damages repaired. If you’re putting together your emergency response plan or just starting and want to learn more about how Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services can help you, contact us and let’s discuss how we may best serve you.

How to Avoid Florida's "I'm Certified!" Scams

Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:40:29 GMT

How to Avoid Florida's "I'm Certified!" Scams

When you hear someone say they’re “certified”, what does that mean to you? Well, here in the southeastern United States (U.S.), it has come to mean a lot of different things, many of which have nothing to do with being certified. These scams have hurt a lot of people and businesses, which has led to us writing this blog. We hope it serves to help you make informed decisions about who you are hiring to perform your assessments, testing, and remediation.

"They were intellectuals, excited by ideas more important to them than people. Self-identified intellectuals were among the most dangerous people on the planet. The problem was, all intellectuals first self-identified as such before others accepted their status and sought them for words of wisdom. They didn't need to pass a test to confirm their brilliance, didn't appear before a credentialed board by which they needed to be certified. It was easier to be celebrated as an intellectual than to get a hairdresser's license."

~ Dean Koontz, The Whispering Room

Differences Between Certificates, Certifications, & Licenses

Just because someone says they’re certified in something, doesn’t always mean it is so. For example, often Florida licensed assessors and remediators advertise they’re certified because they’re licensed to perform work in the State of Florida, but that’s not the case. A license doesn’t certify the person. So, let’s first look at the differences between certificates, certifications, and licenses.

Certificates. Certificates are awarded upon completion of a training program. Some of these programs require the individual to complete a test, evaluating their understanding of the training program’s subject matter. Some of these certificates are permanent, while others require the individual to return and retake the training program. One of the most common practices, especially in the water-damage and mold remediation industries, is to go to a training program (for three-to-five days), take a test at the end of that program, and come out with a certificate as an IICRC Water-damage Restoration Technician (WRT) and Applied Structural Drying (ASD) or Applied Microbial Remediation Technician (AMRT). While these certificates do a much better job of training professionals on those things lacking in the Florida license laws and they demonstrate competency in the material covered in the course, they may or may not specifically represent the over-all competency and experience of the individual seeking to serve as a water-damage restoration or mold remediation professional (e.g., the WRT course doesn’t teach the student the water-damage restoration standard of care).

The CESB states, “Certification can be easily confused with certificates. Certificates are often given to individuals for attendance or the successful completion of a course of study. Such certificates do not measure competence to perform a body of knowledge as do certifications.”

Choosing the Right Assessor or Remediator

IICRC Certificates: 844-464-4272

Water Damage Restoration Technician (WRT)

Applied Structural Drying (ASD)

Applied Microbial Remediation Technician (AMRT)

ACAC Certifications: 888-808-8381

Council-certified Indoor Environmentalist (CIE)

Council-certified Indoor Environmental Consultant (CIES)

Council-certified Microbial Remediator (CMR)

Council-certified Microbial Remediation Supervisor (CMRS)

Florida’s Best Choice for Indoor Air/Environmental Quality Assessments & Consultations

Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services’ assessors are college educated, have gone through a thorough peer-review to be certified with accredited certifications, and are licensed in the State of Florida. Continuing education for our assessors is ongoing, specifically they are required to complete more than three times the State of Florida’s licensing program. Furthermore, our assessors must agree to our strict no conflict-of-interest policy, which prevents them from having any interest in work or investments that may create the potential for a conflict of interest (e.g., they cannot be involved in property management, remediation, claims adjusting, or restoration services). To learn more or if you have a concern about a known, suspect, or potential indoor environmental stressor (e.g., mold or smoke damage), give us a call or email us and let’s discuss how we can best serve you.

The Truth About Stachybotrys Mold

Thu, 16 Nov 2023 16:00:41 GMT

The Truth About Stachybotrys Mold

“A link between other adverse health effects, such as acute idiopathic pulmonary hemorrhage among infants, memory loss, or lethargy, and molds, including the mold Stachybotrys chartarum has not been proven. Further studies are needed to find out what causes acute idiopathic hemorrhage and other adverse health effects.” (CDC: Basic Facts about Mold and Dampness )

The problem with how this research paper was used can be summarized as this: (1) The paper did not study the Cleveland and San Francisco clusters of infant deaths and (2) Correlation doesn’t necessarily equal causation - just because the infants (in Cleveland and San Francisco) with the bleeding lungs lived in the moldier homes doesn't mean that the high levels of Stachybotrys (or other molds) is to blame or may be the singular causal factor for their deaths. In addition to the research paper’s lack of site-specific studies, the possibility of other causal or contributing factors was left out of their research and the CDC investigations. And this is why there is all the confusion today. Was Stachybotrys the singular cause of their deaths; was it a contributing factor; was it neither causal or contributing to their deaths; were there other contributing or causal factors; . . .? The list of questions left unanswered was endless. Despite these questions, many professionals (and the CDC) have dug into their stance on the issue; further compromising the type of information and services people receive today.

So, what’s the truth about Stachybotrys and acute idiopathic pulmonary hemorrhage among infants? Firstly, let’s look at some research on the Cleveland cases that were non-biased in their discoveries and reporting, such as Overview of Investigations into Pulmonary Hemorrhage among Infants in Cleveland, Ohio . In this paper researchers report finding: “An epidemiologic investigation of pulmonary hemorrhage in infants in Cleveland found an association with exposure to S.chartarum and other airborne fungi. Exposure to environmental tobacco smoke was an additional risk factor in the presence of S.chartarum . Further studies are needed to determine whether the fungal association is causal.” This is a good place to start, because it reinforces the following truths that you should be aware of:

Stachybotrys and other types of molds can, under certain circumstances, pose health risks to infants and other occupants of a water-damaged and mold-contaminated building; however,
Those risks are not fixed. In other words, the type and dose of airborne mold does not equally correlate with a given biological response in all individuals. Some may experience allergic reactions, others infectious disease, others death, others no negative response at all. Therefore, …
The presence of an abnormal airborne mold spore population doesn’t mean that a life-threatening situation is present; however, negative health effects due to exposure (including death) should not be dismissed.
Care should always be taken to reduce or eliminate exposure to such environments until (1) the presence, extent, and risk-potential has been defined by an Indoor Environmental Professional (like Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services ) and (2) confirmed remediation has been completed.
Finally, another environmental stressor (e.g., environmental tobacco smoke and bacteria) may be a contributor or causal factor in building related symptoms or illnesses. If building related symptoms (BRS) or building related illness(es) (BRS) are known, suspect, or potential, it is crucial to have a competent indoor environmental consultant and/or industrial hygienist assess the building for hazards and risks as appropriate to develop a corrective action plan (i.e., protocol ) for remediation. This assessment often looks for several environmental stressors – not just mold – to determine the condition of the building relative to those BRS/BRI concerns occupants have, thus providing the specificity desired for safe remediation and re-occupancy of the building.

If you are dealing with a known, suspect, or potential indoor environmental quality issue in your home or workplace, contact the professionals at Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services to discuss how we can best serve you.

Health Effects of Inhaled Materials & the Indoor Air Quality Assessment PART 2

Wed, 01 Nov 2023 19:23:01 GMT

Health Effects of Inhaled Materials & the Indoor Air Quality Assessment PART 2

Airborne materials may exert their effect locally in our bodies, that is, directly on the tissues with which contact is made. This may cause irritation or other local diseases of the respiratory tract where contact is made. However, there are agents, called systemic toxins, that affect the entire body or many organs rather than a specific site. Once inhaled, they reach their site of action through blood transport. For example, when carbon monoxide is inhaled, it reacts with hemoglobin in red blood cells. It does this by binding to the iron atom of the hemoglobin in the same way oxygen does; in fact, carbon monoxide will bind more avidly to the iron atom than oxygen, causing saturation of the hemoglobin at lower concentrations than oxygen. Such saturation prevents normal function of transporting oxygen and leads to ill-health and death.

Not all inhaled materials are deposited in the same location (within the respiratory tract) and the location in the respiratory tract where disease is experienced may vary. Several factors influence this such as the physical characteristics of the inhaled material (e.g., is it too large to infiltrate the lungs?), the chemical properties of the material (and/or its toxins), as well as the dose of inhaled material, or the amount of exposure (e.g., is it something one is regularly exposed to at work or is it a one-time event). For example, contradistinctions may be made between soluble and less soluble gases. While soluble gases tend to affect the upper region of the respiratory tract (as well as moist tissue around the eyes; ammonia being an example), less soluble gases tend to affect the middle or deep regions of the respiratory tract (e.g., phosgene gas).

When an Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) assessor responds to the concerns of an occupant, these considerations are important in ensuring the assessment process will be specific to the concerns of the occupant. They must be accounted for. For example, when sampling for an airborne particle, the assessor must prepare by performing a size-selection sampling strategy (SSS). The American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) has defined three particle size fractions that are used during the SSS: inhalable, thoracic, and respirable.

Health Effects of Inhaled Materials & Indoor Air Quality Assessment PART 1

Wed, 01 Nov 2023 18:00:26 GMT

Health Effects of Inhaled Materials & the Indoor Air Quality Assessment PART 1

There are many classifications of airborne hazardous materials. For purposes of our discussion of health effects of inhaled materials, we will use the following terms and classifications:

Particulate Matter (PM) or particles (e.g., solid particles like fibrous particles, insect fragments, pollen, mold spores, asbestos, etc.)
Mists (are airborne droplets from an operation or process involving liquids, like sprays, coolants, cutting fluids, paints, solvents, pesticides, etc.)
Gases (the most familiar of airborne contaminants, including but not limited to nitrogen, oxygen, argon, water vapor, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, acetylene, chlorine, hydrogen fluoride, sulfur dioxide, etc.)
Vapors (the gaseous phase of liquids, including but not limited to ethanol, acetone, styrene, etc.)
Fumes (metals that are heated to the point where they become a vapor or gas, for example during welding and torch cutting)

Why is this important? Well, that depends on who you are:

If you’re someone who is experiencing symptoms within a given building (e.g., your workplace or home but no where else), you’ll want to have an Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) assessment that takes into consideration the building’s unique features, conditions, usages, integrity, ventilation system(s), etc. so specificity may be provided in relation to (1) what’s causing your symptoms, (2) where is this cause located, (3) has it impacted other locations in the building, (4) how are you being exposed, (5) what should be done about it, and other important considerations.
If you’re a worker, who may be exposed to hazardous substances in the course of work, you’ll want to have a full health, safety, and risk assessment performed, so site-specific, proper plans and procedures may be developed to perform work efficiently, effectively, and safely – for you and those around your work area.
If you’re a patient or litigant, suffering with an illness, with a need to develop a clear understanding of potential site-exposure to a given environmental stressor, you’ll need an IEQ assessment that defines many of the things I outlined in bullet one as well as (1) the potential routes of exposure associated with observed hazards and the person in question, (2) behavioral analysis of the site being assessed, (3) relationships between the previously outlined, and other important factors.
If you’re someone who needs (or thinks you need) remediation (e.g., fire-damage or mold remediation) in your home or office, you want an assessment that clearly defines the presence, extent, and behavior of the hazards in question (e.g., char, soot, ash, mold, etc.) and the portion(s) of the building requiring remediation. You’ll need this assessment to be specific and complete, so the assessor – not the remediator – can generate a corrective action plan (i.e., protocol for remediation) that justifies work being performed, provides for you and others within the building safety and health, and other important factors.

Navigating the Aftermath: Essential Steps After a Hurricane

Thu, 31 Aug 2023 07:59:42 GMT

Navigating the Aftermath: Essential Steps After a Hurricane

In the wake of a hurricane, the challenges can seem insurmountable as communities grapple with the aftermath of the devasting storm. However, it is crucial to remain calm and composed while taking swift action to ensure safety, recovery, and restoration. In this blog, I'm going to provide you some guidance on the initial, essential steps to take after a hurricane, to help you navigate the path to recovery.

Is Rainwater Safe to Drink

Fri, 14 Jul 2023 18:50:19 GMT

Is Rainwater Safe to Drink?

While hired to perform a peer review of another assessor's recommendations, this question was asked of me. It had to do with a property damage insurance claim where an assessor had written an opinion stating that the wind driven rain, that entered the subject residence during hurricane Sally, was Category 3 water. To understand the assessor’s recommendation, one needs to have some perspective on the standards of care that governs water-damage restoration, namely the Institute of Inspection, Cleaning and Restoration Certification (IICRC) S500, Standard for Professional Water Damage Restoration . In the S500, it categorizes water-damage by whether the water is clean or contaminated. Here’s what the S500 has to say about the categories of water-damage:

The first is called Category 1 and means the water comes from a “clean” source (e.g., water from the kitchen sink or its water supply line) and has remained clean. Category 1 water is safe to handle and process (i.e., the water damage technician can go about drying the structure without concern of the water causing disease or serious illness or death).

Category 2 water isn’t clean, but it’s not pathogenic or toxigenic, either. It does have the potential to cause disease if ingested or absorbed (e.g., through cuts), so, for this reason, there are special procedures that a water damage restoration technician must employ when addressing such situations, for the safety and health of themselves and other building occupants.

Category 3 water is grossly contaminated and can contain pathogenic, toxigenic, or other harmful agents. These agents can cause serious illness and, even, death to those exposed to the contaminated water; as a result, these types of water damages require more complex and costly procedures and systems than those employed in Category 1 and 2 water damage restoration projects. The purpose of such procedures and systems is to ensure worker and other building occupants' health while protecting non-impacted areas while work is performed that will return the indoor environment to its normal condition.

The lawyer opposing the assessor’s findings asked me if rainwater was safe to drink because the assessor failed to adequately establish the cleanliness of the water in this case. (Was the water in this building contaminated? There, simply, was no evidence to support a conclusion either way.) In her mind, it was absurd to state a water damage is “grossly contaminated” containing “pathogenic, toxigenic, or other harmful agents” that “cause serious illness… to those exposed” without proof.

Before I continue, what’s your stand on this? Do you think wind driven rain is contaminated?

If you grew up like I did, you spent a lot of time outdoors – even during the rain. And, if you were like me, you tried to catch raindrops on your tongue. At no point did collecting those raindrops on your tongue cause “serious illness”. So, how do assessors conclude that wind driven rain is Category 3 water?

BUT, the IICRC S500 states that for any of these water sources to lead to Category 3 damage the water must be “grossly contaminated”. It doesn’t say these sources absolutely are “grossly contaminated” or that they absolutely “contain pathogenic, toxigenic, or other harmful agents” (although I think we all can agree we don’t want to handle the water and debris from a sewage backup without protection); it says they “can” be “if they carry trace levels of contaminants”. IF.

So, what’s the answer to the big question: Is rainwater safe to drink?

Environmental scientists state that in most cases – before the water interacts with the ground – it is safe to drink. However, once it mixes with other things, its cleanliness depreciates. Does that mean that once rainwater enters a building’s components (e.g., insulation and drywall) it becomes Category 3 water? No. I’ve tested water in a lot of different types of buildings after various weather systems, and many are not contaminated with Category 3 water. Some are Category 3 water damage; some are Category 2; others are Category 1.

So, what makes the difference? Why is rainwater clean in one building but “grossly contaminated” in another? It has to do with what it mixes with. I’ve seen buildings with animal feces on the floor. If the water enters and mixes with that, then, at least in that portion of the wet building, it is Category 3 water (most of the time I’ve sampled such areas). But some buildings are very new and very clean, so when the rainwater enters it does not mix with substances that contaminate it.

BUT, what about hurricane water? Where substantial amounts of debris have been disturbed and become airborne, it is possible for the rainwater to mix with these substances and deteriorate in cleanliness. To what degree it has and what risk it poses to workers and other building occupants varies.

Why Home Mold Sampling/Testing Kits Don’t Work

Fri, 23 Jun 2023 20:06:35 GMT

Why Home Mold Sampling/Testing Kits Don’t Work

Firstly, the data gained from the home mold sampling/testing kits is unreliable.

I can hear some of you saying, “But, Jason, there’s mold on the plate!” Sure, there is. Mold is a natural part of our environment. Every building that I assess has some combination and concentration of mold spores, skin fragments, fibrous particulate, pollen, and/or insect fragments on some surfaces; and some of those particles get airborne (i.e., can be found in the air most of the time).

So, what do the home sampling/testing kit test results mean?

It represents the dominant, viable (i.e., capable of living) mold spores that fell or were captured in the media while the media was exposed to air. It does not represent the actual quality or quantity of viable mold spores in the sampled building nor does it define risk-potential .

Does not control the capturing process. It relies on other local (to the media) mold spore manipulations (e.g., gravity) to capture mold spores from the air. IEPs use a controlled sampling process to calculate the potential hazards observed in the viable sampling process. The home mold sampling/testing kits do not provide for this type of sampling or analysis.
Requires that the spores in the air are alive. By itself, this would negate its ability to determine risk-potential, as non-viable mold spores can elicit an unwanted biological response (e.g., allergic responses).
Requires that the spores are capable of surviving the sampling process, germinate on the sampling media, and compete well with other species present on the growth media.
Provide limited data of a small portion of the room in which it was placed. Such limitations prevent it from telling you if there is surface growth somewhere, unseen mold growth somewhere, abnormal water activity somewhere that will lead to mold colonization in the future, and other important information required to answer questions like: “Do I have a mold problem in my home or office? If so, where? Is it safe? What do I do about it?”

With such limitations, some have spent money on a problem that doesn’t exist or spent too much money on a problem that does exist. There are even those who have missed a problem that does exist.

Difference Between Hazard and Risk Assessments

Tue, 23 May 2023 19:47:53 GMT

Difference Between Hazard and Risk Assessments

Often, I’m hired to review other assessors’ work to determine if conclusions are derived from proper, standardized methodologies, interpretations are based on proper models and evidence, and corrective action plans (or recommendations or protocols ) are justified by evidence. Sometimes, I’m asked to review responses to other assessors’ reports. In both cases, I am often struck by the number of people who don’t understand what a hazard assessment is and the difference between it and a risk assessment. This became evident as I received comments about a series of blogs that I’m currently in the middle of completing (by assessors, remediators, and building owners/managers). This is why I decided to write this blog. I hope to illustrate (in brief) what a hazard assessment is, what a risk assessment is, and the differences between the two. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at jason@gulfcoastiaq.com .

Why do I need a hazard and/or risk assessment?

The key to preventing accidents, injuries, and illnesses is identifying and eliminating hazards. A hazard is a condition or combination of conditions that, if left uncorrected, may lead to an accident, illness, injury, property damage, or worse: death.

Understanding the need to identify, communicate, and address hazards in the workplace, OSHA has dictated standardized requirements for hazard assessment, for example 29 CFR Part 1910.132 includes language such as, “The employer shall assess the workplace to determine if hazards are present, or are likely to be present, which necessitate the use of personal protective equipment (PPE)." The key word “shall” means this is a requirement of every workplace. Failure to perform the necessary hazard and risk assessments, therefore, are a violation of occupational safety and health laws.

What are hazard assessments?

Once the hazards have been identified, the next step is to look at each one and determine which one (or combination of hazards) present a risk of injury, illness, property damage, or worse: death. This last step is called a risk assessment .

What are risk assessments?

In conclusion:

As you can see, hazard and risk assessments are not the same thing. They are a part of an overall process that seeks to identify hazards and risks for the purpose of providing for the safety of workers and others who may become negatively impacted by the workplace activities. This process relies on competent persons to assure the known and suspect hazards are identified and risk determined before and during workplace activities. If they are not, we may become one of the statistics earlier discussed. No one wants that.

In a future blog I may share some examples of what prompted me to write this blog. (This one's getting long.) In the meantime, if you have a peer-review request or are dealing with a known or suspected indoor environmental stressor, contact Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services and let’s see how we may best serve you.

The Pros and Cons of Fogging During Mold and Fire Remediation

Mon, 22 May 2023 15:26:57 GMT

The Pros and Cons of Fogging During Mold and Fire Remediation

I can’t begin to tell you how many times I’ve been approached by someone who’s either used a fogging agent or another airborne environmental stressor (e.g., ozone) during mold or fire remediation or had a mold or fire remediator try to sell them on the use of such agents. In every case, complications and conflicts exist, which are negatively impacting all materially interested parties. That’s why this is such an important topic to cover - for everyone to understand. While I would like us to cover all types of agents and applications common to remediation today, to keep this blog as simple as possible I'll focus on fogging agents:

What is fogging?

During the process of fogging, the agents are left suspended in the air while the technician, who operated the fogging machine, leaves the work area. Then, approximately one hour after the fogging machine has been turned off and the mist has settled onto surfaces, the technician returns to clean all surfaces. This cleaning of all surfaces is important because all fogging process leaves a residue on surfaces.

Because the fogging process and residue cleaning process exposes workers to hazardous substances, occupational safety and health laws require the technician is properly evaluated and trained, is provided (and utilizes properly) all engineering controls and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) including but not limited to air supplied respirators and full-body protective gear, and other mandates.

What agents are used during fogging?

The agents used in the fogging process vary by remediation company and technician. Here is a short list of some of the agents that I’ve seen used during remediation:

Biospray D uses Isopropyl Alcohol at 55 – 75% concentration.
Mediclean Disinfectant Spray also uses Isopropyl Alcohol but at 10% concentration.
Viraclean uses Ethanol at 10% concentration.
Steramist uses Hydrogen Peroxide and Inert Ingredients at 13% concentration.
Odox-DF uses Propane – 1,2 Diol at 60 – 80% concentration with a 5 – 10% concentration of Hydrogen Peroxide

Are fogging agents safe for humans, pets, and plants?

The risk potential to exposed persons, pets, and plants varies based on several factors, including but not limited to:

the fogging agent(s) used,
the concentration of the fogging agent(s) used,
the dose exposure,
how one is exposed to the agent(s),
and one’s biological disposition in relation to:

the agent(s),
dose exposure, and
other factors.

An example may include an average sized and healthy adult exposed to hydrogen peroxide. According to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry:

"Hydrogen peroxide can be toxic if ingested, inhaled, or by contact with the skin or eyes. Inhalation of household strength hydrogen peroxide (3%) can cause respiratory irritation. Exposure to household strength hydrogen peroxide can cause mild ocular irritation. Inhalation of vapors from concentrated (higher than 10%) solutions may result in severe pulmonary irritation." ( source )

“Hydrogen peroxide is corrosive to skin, eyes, and mucous membranes at high concentrations (>10%); lower concentrations may cause irritation. Symptoms become more severe as the concentration of hydrogen peroxide increases.” ( source )

Important consideration before moving forward:

Whenever a product or device’s environmental stressor(s) is being utilized in an occupied space, it’s important to understand the potential risk(s) associated with the stressor(s), understanding that such determinations (by manufacturers as listed in sales documentation or Safety Data Sheets) don’t determine post-application potentials to cause unnatural air and environmental qualities and don’t determine risk potential to people, pets, and plants. I’ll give you a brief explanation of why:

“Hazard determination does not involve an estimation of risk. The difference between the terms hazard and risk is often poorly understood. Hazard refers to an inherent property of a substance that is capable of causing an adverse effect. Risk, on the other hand, refers to the probability that an adverse effect will occur with specific exposure conditions.” (OSHA, GUIDANCE FOR HAZARD DETERMINATION FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE OSHA HAZARD COMMUNICATION STANDARD (29 CFR 1910.1200) )

Unfortunately, most employers and their employees solely rely on the Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) and sales documentations that the manufacturer provides them with and translate their information into risk potential for employees and their clients. (To be fair, I’ve listened to salespersons who do the same.) Other employers ask for additional information (e.g., a research document) from the manufacturer’s salespeople and base their decisions on those documents. In a future blog (or blogs, we’ll see how this goes), I’ll cover one such research document to give you an example of (1) what is being provided, (2) what the information is saying, (3) and discuss what it means to all materially interested parties. In the meantime, if you have a question, please feel free to contact me directly at jason@gulfcoastiaq.com . If you’re dealing with a remediation, restoration, or IAQ need, contact Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services and let’s discuss how we can best serve you.

Biocide Applications vs Surface Cleaning During Mold Remediation

Thu, 04 May 2023 17:56:04 GMT

Biocide Applications vs Surface Cleaning During Mold Remediation

With the growing number of cleaning products on the market advertising themselves appropriate for use during mold remediation, some mold remediators have begun to rely more and more on the products and less and less on the cleaning process (e.g., HEPA vacuuming surfaces and wiping surfaces down to remove residues and dust). Most of these remediators claim the products do the remediation work for them; that they remove the need to HEPA vacuum or, otherwise, clean the surfaces. Several have told me that the products (i.e., “enzymes”) used “break down the [mold] body of the organism”, so cleaning isn’t necessary.

It's not the purpose of this blog to get into the strengths and weaknesses of biocides. That’s been done and can be read here . What I want to focus on in this blog is this: What happens when the cleaning phase of mold remediation is ignored or left out of the remediation process in favor of chemical biocides? That said, one should remember that surface cleanliness does impact the effectiveness of any biocide.

What did we find?

What does this tell us?

Firstly, it tells us that meticulous surface cleaning is important on mold remediation projects. One cannot rely on chemicals or biocides alone to remove an abnormal presence of mold (whether in visible or invisible form).

Secondly, and an often-overlooked component of these findings, air sampling, by itself, is not a good indicator of whether the work area has been successfully remediated. While it is a common request that surface samples not be taken during a post-remediation assessment, it is clear, from these findings, that when they are excluded – especially in cases where surfaces are not visibly clean –abnormalities in the mold populations may be overlooked.

Finally, while it wasn’t a component of this study, these results suggest that there could be a mold-related hazard associated with dust generated from demolition that if not contained to the work area could lead to contamination in rooms/areas adjacent to the work area. (In a future blog I may get into how to prevent that kind of cross-contamination and what to do if you think this has happened to your home or office.)

If you have a mold-related need that requires a mold assessor, contact Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services and let's explore how we may best serve you.

Should Chemicals Be Used in HVAC Remediation

Wed, 26 Apr 2023 19:04:14 GMT

Should Chemicals Be Used in HVAC Remediation?

A lot has been made about my past blogs related to chemical use on mold remediation projects and water-damage projects, mostly by contractors who like to use those products. Of the comments that I receive, one comes up often: Can I use biocides in the remediation of Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems?

What is the position of the National Air Duct Cleaners Association (NADCA) regarding the use of chemicals in ductwork?

NADCA does not recommend the use of chemicals within ductwork unless there is a specific need.

Is sanitizing ductwork legal?

NO. The EPA has not registered any products for sanitizing or disinfecting ductwork. Further, no fungicides are registered for use in ductwork. As noted earlier in this document, IT IS A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL LAW TO USE A PRODUCT IN A MANNER INCONSISTENT WITH ITS LABELING. For antimicrobials, this law is the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Therefore, any claims of sanitizing or disinfecting ductwork would require the use of a product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling, which is a violation of FIFRA. Violations of FIFRA can result in fines and criminal penalties from the EPA.

This is a short answer. For a more comprehensive explanation of this complex issue, please refer to the “Antimicrobial Products” section of this document.

When is a chemical application acceptable?

The application of chemicals in an air conveyance system is acceptable only when the product is legally approved for the application for which it will be used. At this time, the EPA has not accepted any disinfectant, sanitizer or fungicidal products for use in the ductwork of HVAC systems. However, some of these products are registered and accepted by the EPA for use on certain components in other parts of HVAC systems.

Ask for any copies of NADCA training they may have. If a person in their organization has such training, ask how involved that person will be in the process of cleaning your system.
Ask if they use chemicals in their processes. If so, ask for the Safety Data Sheets (SDS) associated with each product that they use; furthermore, ask for the EPA registration for use in HVAC systems for the purpose of cleaning the specific contamination you want removed.
If chemicals are to be used in their process, ask what measures the contractor takes in evaluating the product’s impact on the Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) and if they guarantee that process to be safe and without bias.

Knowing what chemicals are being used and how they will be used (e.g., fogging or direct spray applications) helps you and your doctor (when applicable) make decisions if the product is an appropriate, safe product for use in your home or office. Knowing if the product is EPA registered for the specific application you need it to perform allows you to decide (1) if the product is a justifiable cost to you and (2) if the product will work.

I hope this helps both consumers and contractors. As always, if you have any questions or require an IAQ assessment, reach out to us and let’s discuss how we can best serve you.

Local Business Person of the Year

Fri, 24 Feb 2023 20:20:01 GMT

Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services' Jason Yost Wins Local Business Person of the Year Award!

Are Mold Odors Harmful

Thu, 23 Feb 2023 20:25:12 GMT

What Are Mold Odors, And Can They Be Harmful?

One of the key things to understand about these mold-related odors is that, in general, MVOCs and their odors are indicators of microbial growth and may reflect microorganism presence – even when the growth is hidden. While odor thresholds for many of these compounds has been determined, the minimal amount of microbial growth needed to generate detectable concentrations of MVOCs is not known and testing for these gases is extremely limited in indoor air quality applications. (We'll touch on the later point again later in this blog.)

1-octanol can be produced by Alternaria species (sp.), Cephalosporium sp., Fusarium sp., Penicillium (P.) Chrysogenum, P. citrinum, P. funiculosum, P. raistrickii . . .

Aspergillus sp. have been known to produce one or more of the following: 1-octen-3-ol, cis-2-octen-1-ol, 3-methyl-butanol, 4-methylbenzaldehyde, 2-methylphenol, + 46 other aliphatic aldehydes, ketones, and aromatic compounds. . .

Acremonium sp. have been known to produce one or more of the following: ethanol, acetone, 2-butanone, methyl benzene, cyclohexane, 2-ethyl hexanol, benzene, . . .

Some Chaetomium sp. are known to produce 2-methyl isoborneol and geosmin. . .

The greatest occurrence of MVOC production (especially terpenes and sesquiterpenes) seems to coincide with spore formation and mycotoxin production as observed in species of Aspergillus and Penicillium , two common types of molds in the United States.

If you’re dealing with a known, potential, or suspect mold issue in your home or office, give Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services a call, and let’s discuss how we can best serve you.

Human Approach to a Sustainably Effective Safety Culture

Tue, 21 Feb 2023 18:26:56 GMT

The Human Approach to a Sustainably Effective Safety Culture at Work

Some restoration and remediation professionals (employers and managers) and I were, recently, discussing an article found in EHSToday magazine, called Safety Culture - It's About the People . In this article the authors, Scott Falkowitz and Grace Herrera, point out, "A simple way of building and sustaining an effective safety culture is by taking a human approach and focusing on the people of the organization." But, some of the professionals, whom I spoke with about this article, disagreed on what that meant; in fact, two main points of view arose: The first pointing fingers at employees for incidents in the work place; and, the second pointing the fingers at the employers or regulators. In this blog, I want to share my response to that discussion, or at least some of its principles.

1. Arbitrarily directing funds and resources doesn't work.

By arbitrarily directing funds, these employers and managers expected a reduction in frequency and severity of workplace accidents, injuries, and illnesses. However, this method of addressing workplace safety and health can lead to high employee turnaround and a lack of goal achievement; all of which cost money, reduce productivity, hurt one's competitiveness, can lead to citations, injuries, illnesses, or death. No one wants to see these things happen, but not everyone accepts their potential. Consequently, they ignore real risks and hazards, fail to respond to current incidents in a corrective way, and are constantly struggling with the list of negatives I just outlined.

2. Treating incidents as someone else's responsibility is a formula for disaster.

John Doe Restoration recently had someone get sick while working on cleaning out a crawl space exposed to a sewage back-up. This employee, after seeking medical attention herself and reporting to the medical staff that exposure (she believed) had occurred at work, found herself standing before her supervisor and the business owner - being blamed for the exposure. Management had decided: Had she worn her Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) as she must have known to have worn (although there were no records of training this employee) she would not have gotten sick; therefore, it was her fault the illness happened.

Management moved this person to "off-duty" status and placed her into an arbitrarily funded training program. Until such time as she completed this training, she would not return to "work-duty" (meaning she was getting paid minimum wage instead of her regular $19/hour). Management believed, by doing this, that they would send a strong message to the rest of their employees; however, after everyone returned to work two things happened: (1) everything went back to the way it was before the incident and (2) some employees became irate and distrustful of their employer.

This is an example of pacification, and an example of how its negative consequences begin.

3. Behavior safety becomes an issue when it is the only means used to derive comprehensive preventive solutions.

4. How do I convert my incident investigation process into a corrective action tool?

My first bit of advice would be this: Establish a mindset that says: All outcomes are the result of processes. Some of these processes are positive, desirable; while, others are negative, and not desirable. Then, and only then, are you ready to look at an incident and investigate it properly.

Secondly, a good incident investigation will be performed by a competent person. Depending on the circumstances, different competencies will be necessary. Where a competent person is lacking in-house, a contract safety and health professional, like Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services , will be necessary. This will assure the investigation is performed properly, in a way that will meet your company goals for a sustainable remedy, and provide for compliance with occupational safety and health laws.

A good incident investigation should ask key questions for specification determinations. To accomplish this, the investigator should look at all avenues of known, suspect, and potential causal factors. This will illuminate the necessities for corrective action, thus providing justification in corrective action expenditures. For example, ask things like: What processes where identified and what changes can be made to those processes that will prevent this incident from happening again? The answer to that question should lead you, your safety and management teams, and other teams' members to act together, a part of a unified mindset of business personnel. One body and resource for sustainable, safe, effective, desirable growth and service.

In Closing:

In every industry there are, inevitably, those who will (1) continue to ignore corrective action, choosing, instead, to a point finger at someone else, (2) and, in the process, jeopardize themselves and others. These types of businesses are stuck in a settled condition of complacency. They are lackadaisical to the costs to themselves and others; because, they've either (1) gotten away with it for so long they don't believe in the risks or hazards anymore or (2) they are content with their income verses cost ratios. For consumers and these business' team members, I challenge you: Don't settle, yourselves, for this mindset and for these risks and hazards. It's unnecessary.

Solving Florida’s Property Insurance Woes Part 3

Tue, 07 Feb 2023 19:37:40 GMT

Solving Florida’s Property Insurance Woes Part 3: TPAs

Major factors influencing Florida's property insurance woes has to do with the cost of handling claims and the cost of insuring properties. But this factor isn’t as simple as you may have heard. It involves many parties and many variables. In this blog I want to touch on an example of things that have led to Florida’s property insurance woes.

Third Party Administrators (TPAs):

TPAs are just one part of the insurance industry. They provide administrative expertise for Insurers trying to keep operational costs low. Their roles vary state to state and Insurer to Insurer, but there’s one role that has grown over my 30+ years in this industry: Claims administration.

1.) Insurance policies are contracts between an Insurer and the Policy Holder. It lays out things like what coverages the Insurer will provide the Policy Holder under what circumstances and limitations, as well as the responsibilities of the Policy Holder if he/she ever has property damage, and other pertinent information. When a claim is filed, the TPA’s desk adjuster will continuously review data as it comes in to determine if the Insurer is responsible to cover damages and fees for restoration as per the insurance policy. That’s understandable.

When a restoration or remediation technician or Indoor Environmental Professional (IEP) goes to the claim-site, they aren’t dictated by the policy the same way the Insurer is. They are bound by other federal, state, and local regulations, statutes, and ordinances, codes of conduct, industry-based knowledge, etc.; because, you see, (1) the policy isn’t a contract that these contractors have entered into with the Policy Holder and (2) the Insurer and contractor are regulated by different governing bodies, regulations, statutes, and ordinances.

So, when a TPA or other insurance-based third-party management service or adjuster, attempts to regulate the contractors on a claim via the policy alone – and the contractors agree to be regulated as such – the applicable work is usually missing during the claims handling/processing. Here’s an example of what I’m talking about:

2.) In Florida we see a lot of insurance carriers (hereafter referred to as Carriers) advertise that they handle claims as per the Institute of Inspection, Cleaning, and Restoration Certification’s (IICRC) standards; then, when the assessment or contractor generates a protocol or writes an estimate for remediation, the Carrier’s TPA will deny claims (as I exemplified a moment ago). This is a form of fraud: Advertising one thing; providing another. Of course, there are situations where contractors and assessor perform poorly, providing the TPA terrible information and recommendations (see the previous blog on that subject), but the TPAs aren’t exempt from fault in every case.

3.) TPAs charge contractors on every claim a percentage of the service estimate approved. (This is often called a network referral fee.) Not only does this impact the contractor’s estimating projects, but it impacts how much money is applied to the Insured’s claim. Here’s a real example: One TPA charges contractors 5.5% network referral fee plus another $9.95 assignment fee on each invoice. Let’s look at how that plays out for the Insured:

Let’s say you have a $10,000 estimate for repairs.

5.5% is $550.00, which leaves us $9,450.

Subtract the assignment fee and you’re left with $9,440.05.

So, now, in addition to having to cover your deductible, you’re having to make up the $559.95 difference to the TPA in order to cover the actual cost of the claim. And this doesn’t include all of the software fees, administrative fees, annual renewal fees, and other expenses that have to be made up by the Insurer and contractor before money can be applied to your claim or may be applied to the annual policy costs.

Solving Florida’s insurance woes goes beyond just the advertised “bad players” and includes some who weren’t identified or addressed in the recent legislation. And that’s why I started this series. If we’re going to honestly address the issues plaguing Florida, we must be honest about who is being impacted, how they’re being impacted, and what the causal factors are for those negative impacts. While there's more to it than these three installments have covered, this should suffice to prove that there are many issues that need to be addressed to solve our insurance woes in Florida. Not to be too repetitive (but I can't help but reflect on what got Cyndie and me started with Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services), the issues that we've discussed - all the fraud and abuse - are why Cyndie and I organized Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services the way that we did. We don’t sign onto contracts that may compromise our ability to provide honest, scientific analysis or limit our ability to report our findings; we adhere to the AIHA and ACAC code of ethics; and, we have a strict no conflict of interest policy that will not be ignored by employees or infringed upon by outside parties. We did this to provide Floridians a source for reliable, honest, scientific assessment and consultation services – because that’s what every one of us in this great State deserves, whether Insurer or Insured or contractor, etc. If you have questions about how we can serve you, contact us for a no-obligation review of your circumstances.

If you’d like to share your insurance experience(s), write to me at jason@gulfcoastiaq.com . Have a blessed day.

Solving Florida’s Property Insurance Woes Part 2

Mon, 06 Feb 2023 23:32:04 GMT

Solving Florida’s Property Insurance Woes Part 2: Fraud & Abuse

A major factor influencing Florida's property insurance woes has to do with the cost of handling claims and the cost of insuring properties. But this factor isn’t as simple as you may have heard. It involves many parties and many variables. In this blog I want to touch on a few examples of things that have led to Florida’s property insurance woes.

Fraud & Abuse:

You’ve probably heard that the cost of handling and processing insurance claims in Florida has been inflated due to the increase in lawsuits brought against Insurers by opportunistic lawyers. It’s been all over the news. And, sure, that’s a problem. But it’s not the only source of fraud and abuse. Here are a few examples that I’ve seen during my career in legal peer-reviewing and expert consultations and testimony:

But not all lawyers practiced this conflict of interest. For as many that I witnessed who did, there were three others who didn’t. And for those that did there were those who worked at those restoration, remediation and/or assessment companies who were doing the bidding of the lawyer (i.e., the lawyer wasn’t acting alone). Which brings me to my second example:

2.) I’ve performed thousands of peer reviews of mold assessors, mold remediators, and structural drying technicians’ work, reports, estimates, monitoring logs, communication logs, etc. While most companies in Florida are attempting to provide a professional service, there are many who are engaged in fraud and abuse. Here’s a couple of examples:

ii) For each mold assessor that I’ve witnessed working for the Insurers, there’s one that focuses on providing services to public adjusters, lawyers and/or restoration or remediation companies; assessors who are focused on inflating the cost of the claim for their client(s). And not just assessors, restoration technicians, mold remediators, structural drying technicians, etc. do the same. One such assessment company is owned by a guy whose brother owns a restoration company. Together, they pass work back and forth to help the other profit from the insurance claim.

iii) There are many mold assessors, mold remediators, structural drying technicians, etc. who sign onto contracts with Insurers, lawyers, public adjusters, and others that agree to perform services without regard to occupational safety and health laws, industry-based standards of care, and other important federal, state, and local regulations, codes, and ordinances. One such mold assessor told me “that it doesn’t help anyone to put [containment] requirements in a [mold remediation] protocol, because insurance companies won’t pay for it anyway… so until I see someone enforcing mold remediation projects the way that they do asbestos, I’m not going to write that into my protocols.”

As it pertains to the last three examples, when such behaviors are exercised, property owners, managers, and other occupants as well as other materially interested parties find themselves in the middle of conflict that inflates the cost of the claim, prolongs the claims handling/processing time, and leads to all of the previously mentioned liabilities (in bullet 1).

Solving Florida’s Property Insurance Woes Part 1

Mon, 06 Feb 2023 19:55:41 GMT

Solving Florida’s Property Insurance Woes Part 1: Introduction to This Series

The goal of this and the following blogs can’t be to cover every issue that exists; rather, to highlight enough of each to make known to the reader what’s really going on in the industry of insurance claims handling/processing; after all, if we can’t see the overall issues surrounding Florida’s insurance woes, we can’t effectively solve those issues.

OSHA Announces Significant Expansion of “Instance-by-Instance” Citation Policy

Sat, 28 Jan 2023 19:37:34 GMT

OSHA Announces Significant Expansion of “Instance-by-Instance” Citation Policy

Why it matters to you

Late on January 26, 2023, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) issued a press release concerning a long-standing policy related to instance-by-instance (IBI) issuance of citations. I realize that some of you are reading this thinking, “What does it have to do with me?” Well, I’ll touch on that later in the blog, but before I do, I want to touch on the policy change, expressed in this press release.

Firstly, understand that this isn’t a new law. I’ve, already, read many lawyers and business owners, who believe this is an over-reach (i.e., OSHA is acting without legal grounds for their actions). Unfortunately, that’s not true. The practice of issuing citations on an IBI basis has been around since 1990; for example, OSHA Instruction CPL 02-00-080 , issued on October 21, 1990, describes the policy, criteria for application, and the penalties that go along with enforcement of the policy.

In short, this means employers could see more citations and/or penalties from OSHA beginning in late February of 2023.

If you’re not a business owner or manager, you may be asking, “What does this have to do with me?”

Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services provides third-party, accredited assessment, documentation, consultation, protocol generation and other relevant services to help you and your contractors eliminate unwanted liabilities. To learn more about how we can serve you, contact us for a free, no-obligation review of your circumstances.

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) Assessments

Thu, 19 Jan 2023 19:34:45 GMT

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) Assessments

I was hired by the FBI to work in two of their offices. These offices had received several occupant complaints of Building Related Symptoms (BRS). (BRS are symptoms that one experiences only while inside a given environment.) Both buildings had been newly constructed within three years of my assessment; both buildings’ construction crews performed normal moisture monitoring and met the Army Corp of Engineers’ specifications for construction design and integrity; and, both buildings were experiencing the same complaints: headaches, nausea, and eye irritation. And regardless of where the occupant was inside the building the symptoms were the same.

Agents, like 4-PCH, are generally referred to as Volatile Organic Compounds (or VOCs). VOCs refer to a board classification of thousands of organic gases found indoors and outdoors. According to the EPA’s Total Exposure Assessment Methodology (TEAM), studies have found that levels of about a dozen common organic pollutants may be 2 – 5 times higher inside homes than outside, regardless of whether the homes were in rural or highly industrial areas. This is due to several factors, including but not limited to (1) the differences in how the closed indoor environments are artificially ventilated as compared to the varying means and ways the outdoor environment is ventilated and (2) the concentration of building materials indoors that emit VOCs.

Over the past 20 years the EPA has authored a series of “Toxic Organic Compound” sampling methods of the ambient air. These methods are more commonly referred to as the “TO methods”. The early methods of analysis were cumbersome, but times have changed with the TO-15 method. TO-15 uses more sophisticated canister technology, capable of detecting parts per trillion of certain VOCs. The GC/MS instrument also makes it possible to look at “unknown compounds” and make tentative identifications. It is this versatility that makes TO-15 one of the most powerful tools that an investigator can use for any initial evaluation.

United States Standards Recognize Gulf Coast IAQ's Credentials in Mold Assessment

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Mon, 02 Jan 2023 18:56:23 GMT

The United States Government Recognizes Gulf Coast IAQ’s Credentials in Mold Assessment & Remediation

These guidelines specifically state:

“The Contracting Officer must require that the microbial assessor provide documentation proving that the assessor meets at least one of the following criteria:

“1. Bachelor's degree from an accredited university or college with a major in engineering, architecture, building construction, occupational health, microbiology, occupational safety, or a related natural or physical science. Additionally, two years experience in conducting microbial investigations is required.

“2. Associates degree from an accredited university or college with a concentration in environmental, natural or physical sciences. Additionally, four years experience in conducting microbial investigations is required.

“3. Certification as an industrial hygienist (CIH) as certified by the American Board of Industrial Hygienists, safety professional (CSP) as certified by the Board of Certified Safety Professionals or engineer (PE). Additionally, one year experience in conducting microbial investigations is required.

“4. Certification by the American Council for Accredited Certification (ACAC) as a Council-Certified Indoor Environmental Consultant (CIEC), Council-Certified Indoor Environmentalist (CIE), Council-Certified Microbial Consultant (CMC), Council-Certified Microbial Investigator (CMI), Council-Certified Residential Mold Inspector (CRMI), Council-Certified Microbial Remediation Supervisor (CMRS) or Council-Certified Microbial Remediator (CMR).”

Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services (Gulf Coast IAQ) is proud to offer professional assessors who surpass these requirements: college-educated, accredited, board-awarded, Council-certified professionals.

Firstly, our professionals have college-degrees in one or more of the following:

In addition to these degrees, our professionals hold up to four of the ACAC Council-certifications:

In addition to the college-degrees and certifications, our professionals are required to prove a minimum of 40 hours of continuing education every year in the subject matter related to their employment and hold all State of Florida licenses required of them in their respective employment activities.

And they must do their work without exercising a conflict of interest .

This is just one way Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services stands out from all the other indoor environmental assessment companies. So, who do you want handling your assessment and consultation needs? To learn more about how Gulf Coast IAQ can best serve you, contact us here . A qualified professional will go over your needs and provide you details of the assessment process at no cost or obligation to you.

Building Biology and Occupant Disease

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Fri, 30 Dec 2022 21:07:29 GMT

Building Biology & Occupant Disease

There are a lot of people suffering with terrible property damages all the time. The outcomes of these damages are sometimes quick, involving emergency response and restorative efforts that bring people back to their homes or offices safely, other times they are not so simple. What I would like to discuss here are those situations where people begin to feel sick inside their homes or offices after one of these tragedies and put into perspective things to consider and ways to respond to those disasters.

Of course, a topic that covers such a broad category of potential subject matter could be a novel. To keep things simple, let’s focus on the fundamentals of building biology and what it means when you begin to sense something is unhealthy with the building and/or yourself.

Often, we receive calls from clients who are experiencing ill symptoms while inside a building but not outside of it. When we get these calls, we must determine what the potential contaminant(s) may be. Which leads to my first thing to remember:

Not everything is a result of mold – even on water damages.

It is very important that causative agents (of ill health) are identified as part of the assessment and restorative process.

It is sad say, but this is not a process commonly performed during normal disaster restoration and most assessment services. Which leads me to two more things to remember:

Don’t assume the experience and training of your contractor – make sure it fits your needs and expectations before you hire them.

AND

Don’t delay getting a professional risk assessment performed on any property damage by a qualified risk assessor.

A lot of people do delay the risk assessment, trusting that a restoration company will be performing these types of assessments and remediating problems associated with found contamination, but this is not the case; in fact, restoration standards of care and authoritative associations and institutes of learning state that restoration companies that perform their own pre- and post- restoration assessments are operating within a conflict of interest . Be that as it may, remember this:

There are, usually, complications with doing these assessments after restoration takes place.

Even the best indoor environmental assessor cannot see through history and restoration processes already performed. Having the indoor environmental assessor involved throughout the restorative processes allows you an expert with specific expertise to empower you. I'll give you an example of what I'm talking about:

By the time the indoor environmental assessors arrive, two years have passed since the initial repairs and a year and a half have passed since Mr. Doe’s repairs. Yet, everyone wants to know: “Do you think all of this came from the roof?” And “Don’t you think I’m sick because of this mold?” You don’t have to be an indoor environmental scientist to see how difficult answering those questions can be after all that time and effort.

Had the indoor environmental assessor been involved initially everyone would have known things like:

Where the moisture was coming from and to what extent it was impacting the building
The condition of the windows, doors, roof, and other building components
The actual and immediate impact of the roof damage and water intrusion(s) on the indoor environment
Gained an independent protocol (for corrective actions) with goals and direction for restorative, remediative, and health and safety processes to secure the actions of all parties on the claim
Received a valuable, in-time, review of post-restoration/remediation processes and their effectiveness at meeting the protocol’s goals and procedures

There wouldn’t have been all this confusion, chaos, discomfort, disease, heartache, and expensive litigation. This leads to the next thing to consider:

Why take chances with everyone’s health and safety during and after the building’s restoration when you can gain solutions to your actual needs, reduce risk, and provide for guidance toward a successful restorative process the first time around?

Contact Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services to learn more about how we can serve you when responding to a building-related disaster or suspected building related illness/symptoms.

Does Dust on Furniture Mean Mold Contamination?

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Thu, 29 Dec 2022 17:16:13 GMT

Does Dust on Furniture Mean Mold Contamination?

Over the 30+ years that I’ve been doing this, I’ve performed countless peer reviews (i.e., reviews of other mold assessors and mold remediator’s reports) and worked on legal cases involving indoor environmental hazards (e.g., mold). The question of “Do the contents need cleaned?” comes up often. Sometimes assessors are inclined to assume things based on limitations on their work; sometimes assessors make assumptions (for several other reasons); and sometimes the assessors sample the dust on furniture to determine if abnormal or elevated accumulations of mold spores are present. In the later case, it’s easy to answer the question “Do the contents need cleaned?”; the former two situations, not so much. And this is where people can get into trouble.

Scroll through the pictures below. These were taken in an apartment where mold colonization was observed around the air supply grilles, in the laundry room floor covering, in the kitchen sink cabinet, and in the living room ceiling. If you were to assume whether mold contamination exists on these surfaces, would you say it did or didn’t? Cleaning of these contents necessary or not?

Well, we sampled these and other surfaces where such dust accumulation was visible and sent those samples to an independent, accredited laboratory for analysis. The laboratory’s findings reported trace amounts of a few mold spores in the dust. What did this mean for the contents in this apartment? They weren’t contaminated with mold (i.e., the mold colonization that we observed had not negatively impacted the contents in the apartment) and mold remediation of the contents wasn’t necessary.

Sure, this isn’t the case every time. There are times we sample surfaces and find an abnormality in the mold spore populations, that do require contents cleaning during mold remediation. This just goes to show that the need to clarify the Condition of the environment is important before assuming (1) contamination exists, (2) assuming the cost of mold remediation, (3) determining potential sources of airborne mold spore populations, and other important questions that come up during a mold assessment.

If you’re dealing with a known, suspect, or potential mold hazard in your home or office, contact us to discuss how we can best serve you.

All of that said, are you asking yourself, “So, what was in the dust that you sampled”?

Dust, something we often call particulate matter, is made up of varying combinations of things, like skin fragments, insect fragments, fibrous particulates, pollen, mold spores, etc. When determining the composition of dust accumulation, material data analysis is the best analytical methodology. Such an analysis breaks down the components of the dust, providing a clear picture of what is present. While this apartment didn’t have us perform such a test, our laboratory did provide some perspective into what was in the dust: pollen, fibrous particulates, and insect fragments made up most of the dust, followed by the trace amount of mold spores previously mentioned.

How Long Do Bacteria Live After an Indoor Sewage Backup?

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Fri, 09 Dec 2022 16:09:25 GMT

How Long Do Bacteria Live After an Indoor Sewage Backup?

When you’ve worked in the indoor environmental industry as long as I have, you hear all kinds of opinions. One large mold assessment company in Florida contends that Category 3 water (i.e., grossly contaminated water) doesn’t require the removal of any building materials because bacteria die once the building has dried. Their theory is that a structural drying company should be able to dry out a building without removing any building materials exposed to such water. Another Florida-based company believes that the bacteria remain indefinitely until removed from the indoor environment. What’s the truth?

Escherichia coli (E. coli) in water > 100 days, in lettuce > 9 – 11 days, and in soil > 60 days.

Enterococcus in dry surfaces > 24 hours

Staphylococcus aureus in dry hospital surfaces > 9 – 11 days

This research indicates that without some form of remediation to reduce the population, the bacteria will remain for a long time. But does that mean building materials should be removed because of high concentrations of these organisms? There are several factors to consider when making that decision, including but not limited to:

The type and concentration of bacteria in the water and the accessibility to that water for safe and effective removal.
The bacteria’s ability to negatively impact the indoor environment when building materials are left in place. (Once a contaminated water incident has occurred, the bacteria are not confined to the wet places. They could be on other, higher surfaces, making it important that all surfaces be addressed on such water damages.)
Occupants’ biological disposition in relation to the environmental stressors and the risk potential. (It should be noted that risk potential can’t be determined by a simple hazard assessment. Testing alone doesn’t indicate risk. It’s a component of risk assessments, but not the single variable in determining risk. In a later blog I’ll touch on the differences between hazard and risk assessments.)
Public health and environmental and occupational safety and health laws and/or their use of industry-based knowledge.
The goals of remediation (e.g., the acceptable bacterial load upon completion of remediation).

Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services’ employees are college education, peer-reviewed, Council-certified, and board-awarded in assessment, testing, remediation supervision, and emergency operations and response, so, if you’re faced with the question of whether contaminated water is present in your home or office, or if a conflict, limitation, complexity, or complication arises during the water damage restoration project, contact us and let’s discuss how we can serve you.

Determining the Category of Water Damage Part 3

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Wed, 07 Dec 2022 20:12:40 GMT

Determining the Category of Water Damage Part 3

Other Contamination in Category 2 & 3 Water

Oil. During a hurricane, a building’s oil tank was damaged, resulting in a leak of oil from the tank. When the water entered the building, it carried with it the oil. The result was an oil-based contaminated water that released oil-based fumes into the atmosphere.

Pesticides. Many buildings located along agricultural fields have been exposed to water carrying pesticides (used in the agricultural process) into the building. The result is the water has varying levels of chemicals which release fumes into the atmosphere.

Toxic Organic Substances. Often flood waters mix existing contaminants in soil and waterways forming a soup of substances that, directly or indirectly (e.g., in the form of emissions), pose varying levels of risk to building occupants exposed to them.

As you may have gathered from reading these few examples, there are secondary types of indoor environmental hazards associated with some water damaged environments; those in the air. These environmental stressors don’t determine the Category of the water damage in and of themselves, as they aren’t specifically related to the water’s cleanliness. They have more to do with the indoor air quality (IAQ) associated with the water damaged building, which could be related to water cleanliness or stand apart from it.

Whatever the known, suspect, or potential hazards associated with water damage, the IEP is required to be competent in determining the sampling methodology necessary to answer specific questions related to his or her assessment service, because the IEP will be making these decisions while performing the assessment and utilizing the laboratory analysis to make key decisions (e.g., whether the water is clean or not, whether the water poses a hazard to building occupants, and whether remediation is necessary). This is not the same as mold assessments, so, please, don’t confuse the qualification to perform mold assessments as the same as performing Category determination assessments. So, if you find yourself in a situation where a preliminary determination can’t determine the Category of water damage in your home or office, contact Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services and let’s discuss how we can serve you. Our assessors have the necessary college education, industry training, and peer-reviewed accreditations to perform Category determination assessments; furthermore, our assessors have been peer-reviewed and accredited to write protocols for remediation (i.e., corrective action plans) if the need arises. What does this mean for you? It means you have a qualified, unbiased professional at your service who can help you protect the well-being of all building occupants and justify the cost of water damage restoration and water damage remediation projects.

Determining the Category of Water Damage Part 2

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Wed, 07 Dec 2022 19:21:31 GMT

Determining the Category of Water Damage Part 2

Are Tests Available to Determine the Category of Water Damage?

In this blog, I’ll touch on a few of the available tests for the determination of water cleanliness and its relative risk to building occupants.

Heterotrophic Plate Count (HPC). Heterotrophic bacteria are those microorganisms requiring organic compounds of carbon and nitrogen for nourishment in the water tested. The IEP will collect a water or surface sample and submit that sample for laboratory analysis. The laboratory, then, proceeds to perform what’s called the HPC (formerly known as the standard plate count). HPC is a procedure for estimating the number of live heterotrophic bacteria in water collected in the sample. This test can provide useful information about water cleanliness and supporting data on the significance of coliform test results.

Bacteria Genus ID per organism (BGI): BGI is a procedure that is used when more specific information is required to determine the source of contamination in the water, its risk to building occupants, potential to have caused a specific bacterial infection reported by building occupants, and other pertinent information. As the name suggests, the laboratory analysis identifies and enumerates the bacterial sp. observed in the sampling media (i.e., the sample submitted by the IEP).

Whatever analytical process employed by the laboratory, the IEP is required to be competent in determining the sampling methodology necessary to answer specific questions related to his or her assessment service, because the IEP will be making these decisions while performing the assessment and utilizing the laboratory analysis to make key decisions (e.g., whether the water is clean or not, whether the water poses a hazard to building occupants, and whether remediation is necessary). This is not the same as mold assessments, so, please, don’t confuse the qualification to perform mold assessments as the same as performing Category determination assessments. So, if you find yourself in a situation where a preliminary determination can’t determine the Category of water damage in your home or office, contact Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services and let’s discuss how we can serve you. Our assessors have the necessary college education, industry training, and peer-reviewed accreditations to perform Category determination assessments; furthermore, our assessors have been peer-reviewed and accredited to write protocols for remediation (i.e., corrective action plans) if the need arises. What does this mean for you? It means you have a qualified, unbiased professional at your service who can help you protect the well-being of all building occupants and justify the cost of water damage restoration and water damage remediation projects.

Determining the Category of Water Damage Part 1

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Wed, 07 Dec 2022 18:12:36 GMT

Determining the Category of Water Damage Part 1

Preliminary Determination vs. Assessment & Testing

When a water damage restoration company responds to a call for service, one of the first things they attempt to do is determine if the water is contaminated. This is called a preliminary determination inspection, and, in the water damage restoration industry, they Categorize water damages as one of the following:

The first is called Category 1 and means the water comes from a “clean” source (e.g., water from the kitchen sink or its water supply line) and has remained clean. Category 1 water is safe to handle and process (i.e., the water damage technician can go about drying the structure without concern of the water causing disease or serious illness or death).
Category 2 water isn’t clean, but it’s not pathogenic or toxigenic, either. It does have the potential to cause disease if ingested or absorbed (e.g., through cuts), so, for this reason, there are special procedures that a water damage restoration technician must employ when addressing such situations, for the safety and health of themselves and other building occupants.
Category 3 water is grossly contaminated and can contain pathogenic, toxigenic, or other harmful agents. These agents can cause serious illness and, even, death to those exposed to the contaminated water; as a result, these types of water damages require more complex and costly procedures and systems than those employed in Category 1 and 2 water damage restoration projects. The purpose of such procedures and systems is to assure worker and other building occupants' health while protecting non-impacted areas while work is performed that will return the indoor environment to its normal ecological disposition.

Assume the worst and potentially pay for it;
Assume the least and potentially pay for it; or,
Hire an IEP and have the Category determined through a series of tests.

In a future blog, I’ll touch on what an IEP assessment might look like. Suffice it to say, for now, that the process is multifaceted to determine things like the water’s cleanliness, the water’s location, the type of building materials impacted, the potential for risk to workers and other building occupants, and the protocol for remediation (i.e., a corrective action plan) where contaminated water is observed. Such a determination of water cleanliness and its potential to cause harm to occupying persons may include a single-phased laboratory analysis of sample(s) collected by the IEP or may include a multi-phase laboratory analysis... For example, when a known sewage backup has occurred and the extent of its impact on the indoor environment is needed, a simple sewage-screening analytical method may be appropriate; however, if a question arises over whether a Category 1, 2 or 3 water damage exists due to a potential or suspected source or deterioration of water (e.g., water entering through the roof during a hurricane ), a multi-phase laboratory approach (e.g., sewage-screening, Heterotrophic Plate Count (HPC), and/or Bacteria Genus ID per organism (BGI)) may be required to reliably determine whether the waterborne pathogens are present, to what extent, and to what risk exists in the impacted rooms.

If you find yourself in a situation where a preliminary determination can’t determine the Category of water damage in your home or office, contact Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services and let’s discuss how we can serve you.

Less Than 10 Square Feet of Mold (Rule?) Part 2

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Mon, 05 Dec 2022 21:40:12 GMT

Less Than 10 Square Feet of Mold (Rule?) Part 2

When I first moved to Florida, I heard many mold assessors and mold remediators state that “if there’s less than (<) 10 continuous square feet of mold growth you don’t need a mold assessment”. Other mold assessors and mold remediators went so far as to say Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and engineering controls (e.g., air filtration devices and containment barriers) aren’t necessary if there’s <10 square feet of continuous mold growth. Are these claims true? And what does the answer to that question mean to you? In my first blog we looked at the Florida Mold-Related Services Licensing Law (hereafter referred to as The Law) and answered the first claim, concerning the need for mold assessments. In this blog, let’s look at the second claim, concerning the use of PPE and engineering controls.

The Law:

The first thing one needs to understand is what The Law is and isn’t. It isn’t a procedural standard (i.e., it doesn’t provide principles or procedures for mold remediation or assessment), like the Institute of Inspection, Cleaning, and Restoration Certification (IICRC) S520 Standard for Professional Mold Remediation . It is a law that establishes the following:

Circumstances whereby a license is required to perform a mold assessment or mold remediation;
The criteria and process to license someone as a mold assessor or mold remediator;
Processes for departmental review and revocation of one’s mold assessor or mold remediator license; and,
Places the responsibility for daily execution of The Law to the DBPR’s construction division.

Nowhere in The Law does it state anything about PPE, air filtration devices, containment barriers, or other engineering controls.

The Question of PPE & Engineering Controls:

(1) A workplace condition presented a hazard , (2) the employer or its industry recognized the hazard, (3) the hazard was likely to cause serious physical harm, and (4) there was a feasible and useful means of abatement that would eliminate or materially reduce the hazard.

The threshold inquiry in evaluating whether a General Duty Clause obligation exists is whether there is a hazard. A hazard “is not defined in terms of the absence of a particular abatement method.” Rather, it is defined “in terms of the physical agents that could injure employees.” (Chevron Oil Co., 11 OSH Cas.) The employer doesn’t have to know the hazard or hazardous conduct exists, either. The courts and Review Commission have established that the industry in which the employer engages only needs recognize the known, potential, or suspect hazard. Many term this “industry-based knowledge”.

So, what does all of this mean in terms of engineering controls and PPE on mold remediation projects?

Remediators should prevent cross-contamination and shall use engineering controls to help ensure worker safety and health during structural mold remediation projects. When performed in accordance with generally accepted industrial hygiene principles and standards, engineering controls eliminate or reduce the hazard.

Do you see the key terms used in this standard that ties into what we’ve discussed in occupational safety and health law? The hazard, as defined by the standard, is mold (thus its name), and its states that “engineering controls eliminate or reduce the hazard” something we’ve seen the courts and Review Commission seeks to enforce through the General Duty Clause.

The S520 goes on, from there, to discuss air filtration devices, containment barriers, PPE, and other forms of administrative, engineering, and PPE controls.

Why the State of Florida Excluded PPE & Engineering Controls in The Law:

I can only speculate on the reasons why. My inclination is to believe that it has to do with federal laws that restrict a state’s right to establish its own safety and health laws. For example, under 29 USC 667, federal law has established States’ jurisdiction and procedures for establishing and maintaining its own plans. The requirements provide legislatures the challenge of meeting the on-going supervision and critique of OSHA while attempting to meet local political demands. Another possibility is that there weren’t the time or professional body to establish a state-specific replacement for the General Duty Clause and S520. Whatever the reason, the language isn’t there. So, when someone tells you that the extent of continuously visible mold growth indicates no engineering controls or PPE are necessary, seek out a competent indoor environmental consultant (e.g., Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services) to provide a site-specific mold assessment and protocol (i.e., corrective action plan for mold remediation) and consultation for everyone’s safety and health. To learn more about how we can serve you, contact us here .

Less Than 10 Square Feet of Mold (Rule?) Part 1

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Mon, 05 Dec 2022 20:18:12 GMT

Less Than 10 Square Feet of Mold (Rule?) Part 1

When I first moved to Florida, I heard many mold assessors and mold remediators state that “if there’s less than (<) 10 continuous square feet of mold growth you don’t need a mold assessment”. Other mold assessors and mold remediators went so far as to say Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and engineering controls (e.g., air filtration devices and containment barriers) aren’t necessary if there’s <10 square feet of continuous mold growth. Are these claims true? And what does the answer to that question mean to you? In this and my follow up blog, I’ll answer these questions.

Are these claims true?

No.

Where these claims originated, I can’t say. But I’ve heard them by more licensed mold assessors and mold remediators than I haven’t. I’ve, even, sat through a couple of very popular continuing education courses for licensed mold assessors and mold remediators, who stated the very same things. That said, let’s look at what The Law says and doesn’t say about these things:

The Law:

Circumstances whereby a license is required to perform a mold assessment or mold remediation;
The criteria and process to license someone as a mold assessor or mold remediator;
Processes for departmental review and revocation of one’s mold assessor or mold remediator license; and,
Places the responsibility for daily execution of The Law to the DBPR’s construction division.

Nowhere in The Law does it state that if there’s <10 square feet of continuous mold growth a mold assessment isn’t required by the State of Florida.

<10 Square Feet of Mold

So, logically, when one is concerned about the condition of the home or office, one wants to understand several things, such as but not limited to the presence, type, and extent of mold contamination in the building. In some cases, this can only be understood by having a professional mold assessment performed. (See my previous blog on what makes for a professional mold assessment and the standard that governs that process.) Allow me to share with you a real example:

The Question of PPE & Engineering Controls:

This leads us to the later part of the Florida mold industry’s claims: That when there is <10 square feet of continuous mold growth PPE and engineering controls aren’t necessary. Because this blog is getting long, I’ll write on this topic in my next blog post. In the meantime, if you have questions and would like to learn more about how Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services can serve you, contact us here .

Maintain Acceptable Indoor Environmental Quality During Construction and Renovation Projects Part 3

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Thu, 01 Dec 2022 21:48:14 GMT

How Can I Maintain Acceptable Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) During Construction and Renovation Projects? Part 3

In Part 1 and Part 2 of this discussion, we looked at the who did what research that provided a means to the answer of how. While it’s impossible to cover all means of performing construction and renovation work without compromising the IEQ, in this blog I want to touch on some practical recommendations that may be useful in doing so.

Outdoor Activities: Grind, cut, and sand as much as possible outdoors, away from windows and doors. Respirable particulate (or particles) can be an irritant, may be an allergy and asthma trigger, and could cause disease (e.g., cancer). Also, they absorb gasses, fumes and vapors in the atmosphere and carry them into the lungs. By removing these materials from the indoor environment, we reduce the risk of exposure to these environmental stressors.

HEPA Vacuuming: Sometimes one can't grind, cut, or sand outdoors. Some work has to be done indoors. When grinding, cutting, sanding, or, otherwise, creating dust indoors, utilize HEPA-grade vacuuming at the source of dust generation (e.g., HEPA grade sanding devices).

Cleaning: Clean the work area before moving onto each new phase of construction and before leaving the work area at lunch or the end of the day, utilizing as little chemicals as possible in the process.

Moisture Control: Keep the work area dry and well ventilated. If an accident occurs that leads to excess water in building materials or in the atmosphere, professionally dry the area promptly.

Temperature Control: Part of a well ventilated space is prevention of heat and cold stress hazards. During construction or renovation, if the building's Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) system cannot be used or isn't sufficient in providing protection from these stressors, temporary HVAC system(s) may be necessary.

Stay In Your Lane: If you or a team member is unsure how to prevent poor IEQ or how to respond to a known, suspect, or potential IEQ problem, have a plan in place to contact an Indoor Environmental Consultant (e.g., Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services) to assure no one is working or occupying an unsafe environment and/or no activities will lead to poor IEQ. We, all, can’t be mechanical engineers, electricians, plumbers, industrial hygienists, etc. We need each other. Operating as a team provides for the best opportunity of success in anything we do.

Dirty Humidifiers Can Cause Health Problems

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Tue, 29 Nov 2022 21:18:14 GMT

Can Dirty Humidifiers Cause Health Problems?

The United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has found that bacteria and fungi often grow in tanks of portable and console room humidifiers; furthermore, these microorganisms can be released in the mist emitted from the humidifier.

Several things to look for include:

Film or scum anywhere in the humidifier and on its water;
Crusty deposits or scale are minerals that have settled from the water and can house bacteria and fungi; and,
White dust can be a sign of mineral accumulation.

To reduce your exposure to possible contamination you can:

Do not allow film and scale to develop in your humidifier. If possible, change the water in your room humidifier daily. Empty the tank before you fill it. If the tank is not removable, clean it often according to manufacturer's instructions.
Use distilled or demineralized water in your room humidifier to reduce the buildup of scale and the release of dust. Do not use tap water because it contains more minerals. Use demineralization cartridges or filters if supplied or recommended for use with your humidifier.
Drain and clean the tank of your room humidifier before you store it. Clean it after summer storage. Remove dust on the outside of your unit.
Clean your room humidifier well and often during the heating season. Be sure to unplug the humidifier before cleaning. Follow the manufacturer's suggested cleaning methods. If chlorine bleach or other cleaning product or disinfectant is used, make sure to rinse the tank well to avoid breathing harmful chemicals. Use a brush or other scrubber to clean the tank. Be careful not to damage the motor or to scratch the inner surface. Clean or replace sponge filters or belts when needed.
Maintain the relative humidity in your home between 30% and 50% if possible. Humidity levels above 60% may allow moisture to build up indoors and condense on surfaces, where bacteria and fungi can settle and grow. You can measure humidity with an instrument called a hygrometer, available at your local hardware store.

Should A Mold Remediator Perform Mold Assessments?

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Tue, 29 Nov 2022 20:30:16 GMT

Should A Mold Remediator Perform Mold Assessments?

There are many reasons why the answer to this question is no, but let’s look at the most obvious: The Institute of Inspection, Cleaning, and Restoration Certification’s (IICRC’s) S520 Standard for Professional Mold Remediation and its companion book, the IICRC R520 Reference Guide for Professional Mold Remediation , define such practices as a “conflict of interest”. What does this mean?

Well, the Standard and the Law see these practices as unethical; in fact, the Law established that conflict of interest doesn’t have to be proven, in and of itself, only its potential need be established. Therefore, actual and potential conflicts are against the law. Here are two examples of conflict of interest commonly practiced in Florida:

The mold remediator who performs an assessment prior to remediation may sway or misrepresent his or her findings in favor of extensive, costly mold remediation because they have something to gain by saying such a problem exists.
The mold remediator who performs a post-mold remediation verification assessment (PRVA) may falsely report findings to show remediation was successful just to get paid.

Allow me to show you a chart, found in the IICRC R520 ( Chapter 8: Inspection and Preliminary Determination , pg. 99), that describes who does a mold assessment and who does the mold remediation: (Note: the term "Remediator" refers to a person or company who performs mold remediation while the term "IEP" stands for an independent (of the mold remediator) Indoor Environmental Professional.)

You'll notice that the only professional who should perform "Pre-remediation assessment", "laboratory data interpretation and report", and "Post-remediation verification" is the independent IEP.

What the R520 states just prior to this chart is this: “It is important that individuals who perform the tasks listed below have sufficient training and experience for those specific tasks, and that conflicts of interest between parties performing remediation processes and assessment activities be avoided.” (With this in mind, I plan on writing a follow-up blog describing what to look for in a mold assessor.)

Inevitably, there will be mold remediation companies out there who will disagree with this blog. In response (and for the protection of my readers), I will point out two things:

Firstly, the resources that I've shared in this blog are not of my own opinion. They are industry-based standards of care that govern the mold remediation industry.
Secondly, the law is clear that, while a company's intention may be good, a conflict of interest isn't defensible. There are good reasons for this, some of which I'll cover in another blog .

If you're dealing with a known, suspect, or potential mold problem and would like to speak to someone about having a mold assessment performed, contact us for a free, no-obligation review of your situation.

Maintain Acceptable Indoor Environmental Quality During Construction and Renovation Projects Part 2

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Mon, 28 Nov 2022 21:43:43 GMT

How Can I Maintain Acceptable Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) During Construction and Renovation Projects? Part 2

In Part 1 of this discussion, we looked at the who did what research that will provide a means to the answer of how. In this blog I want to touch on some recommendations based on NIOSH’s research, scientific literature, my 30+ years of investigation findings, and other pertinent resources.

The Means:

Let’s break down some of the important components of this collaborative effort:

Initial Planning & Assessment:

This should be the initial stage of any construction or renovation project, thus the title. During this phase, a specific plan to identify and control known, suspect, or potential environmental stressors is developed that includes: (1) the identification and qualifications of key personnel responsible for addressing construction or renovation activities and airborne contaminant identification and control, as well as other personnel such as building owners and managers, engineers, and subcontractors, (2) indoor environmental consultants perform hazard assessments (i.e., determine the indoor environmental quality prior to construction or renovation), (3) impact assessments are developed describing anticipated work activities and their associated air contaminants, generation points, and potential areas impacted by those contaminants, (4) and a detailed plan and budget for contamination controls are generated. When contamination is present prior to construction, the indoor environmental consultant should provide a detailed protocol (i.e., corrective action plan) in their report and on-going follow-up communication to materially interested parties.

Review of Options & Development of the Construction Plan:

Whether the initial phase determines preliminary contamination or the possibility of contamination during construction, the review of control and procedural options should be discussed by all materially interested parties. The idea is to assure that all materially interested parties understand the needs of the job, are clear on the options and their cost-benefit analysis, agree on a strategy to address tasks, building configures, and indoor- and outdoor- generated contaminants.

Quality Controls During Construction:

The assessments, communications, and strategizing don’t stop once construction starts. Competent personnel should have authority to provide ongoing determinations of how the plan is working during construction activities; for example, occupational safety and health laws dictate that a safety professional evaluate the workplace to assure none of the construction activities create an environment where the initial Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) is no longer effective. While knowing this need up front may provide for a credible construction plan, no one can anticipate all hazards; for example, often mold isn’t discovered until after demolition begins – especially if that mold is a result of a past water incident inside a wall or ceiling cavity. Having a competent person on-site during the construction phase assures that such contamination is observed, communicated, and follow-up measures are made sufficient to provide for the safety and health of all materially interested parties.

Quality Controls After Construction:

Sometimes the indoor environmental consultant and engineers are called upon to assure construction was successful in achieving all goals and regulations and haven’t created poor IEQ prior to normal building occupancy and use. It is my professional opinion that this should be understood prior to construction and re-evaluated during construction to assure all materially interested parties that the end-product meets all regulatory and other goals.

Maintain Acceptable Indoor Environmental Quality During Construction and Renovation Projects

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Mon, 28 Nov 2022 20:39:17 GMT

How Can I Maintain Acceptable Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) During Construction and Renovation Projects? Part 1

To answer this question, I want to look at the who did what research and what it means to the answer, itself. To accomplish this in a digestible way, I want to break this conversation up into small parts. These parts will look at the who, what, and means, beginning with the who; because the who allows us to investigate the what and its meaning with reasonable assurance.

The Who:

The United States (U.S.) Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reports that millions of construction-related illnesses are reported each year; the top five are usually related to asthma, cancer, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), dermatitis, and musculoskeletal disorders. So, it should be of no surprise that the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (or NIOSH) was mandated to research and recommend corrective actions.

NIOSH, as we know it today, didn’t start as NIOSH. Its earliest predecessor was the U.S. Public Health Service Office of Industrial Hygiene and Sanitation, established in 1914. It went through several name changes, most notably becoming the Division of Industrial Hygiene and later the Division of Occupational Health before NIOSH was created by the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. NIOSH was originally part of the Health Services and Mental Health Administration before being transferred, in 1973, to the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), where it has remained to this day.

The What:

NIOSH has conducted a lot of HHEs in workplaces with reported health concerns associated with construction and renovation. While it’s beyond the scope of this blog to cover everything related to these HHEs, I want to highlight what NIOSH investigators observed during these evaluations that could affected the IEQ. According to their own reports, NIOSH states that many activities “during construction, renovation, demolition, or repair projects can release airborne dust, gases, organic vapors, microbiological contaminants, and odors as well as produce high noise levels”; additionally, outdoor airborne hazards (also known as environmental stressors) can be brought into the building. When workers occupy spaces adjacent to construction projects, these environmental stressors can trigger health complaints, including but not limited to “headache, sinus problems, congestion, dizziness, nausea, fatigue, and irritation of the eyes, nose, or throat.” These symptoms may be related to direct exposure to known environmental stressors or a perceived risk from exposure to unknown environmental stressors. For example, one research paper, called Current Asthma and Asthma-like Symptoms Among Workers at a Veterans Administration Medical Center, found an association between exposures to mold, dampness, and construction materials to asthma and asthma-like symptoms.

The Means:

As we’ll see in Part 2, foresight and planning will reduce or eliminate IEQ-related hazards and symptoms during construction, demolition, renovation, or other related activities.

The Fire Damage Case Study 2: Inhalation Hazards After the Fire

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Fri, 25 Nov 2022 20:23:20 GMT

The Fire Damage Case Study 2: Inhalation Hazards After the Fire

The following is a true story that demonstrates why it is so important that fire damage restoration technicians understand the hazards associated with the environments they work and the cost on their health due to their lack of training.

John Doe (real names will not be used in my blogs out of respect for those who share their stories with me) came into the restoration industry as many other do: fresh out of school with no real, practical experience. On the job training was the way to do it back then, and “I was totally dependent on the protocols of my employer.”

During this time, Mr. Doe came across a situation where he was asked to work with a crew on a “smoke damage”. There was no indoor environmental evaluation prior to mitigation and restoration. “We were told that this was just a smoke damage” and to “clean it as we would any other structure with heavy debris.” He goes on to share:

We were not told to wear Personal Protective Equipment (PPE—and we didn’t);
We were not debriefed on potential hazards or cleaning procedures;
We were given concentrated chemicals and empty bottles (with no labels) to work with;
We were instructed not to use Air Filtration Devices (AFDs) during cleaning, but to wait until after cleaning to install an ozone machine; and,
We were instructed not to remove any of the building components for substrate cleaning.

At the time “I was very young and did not know better than to just do what I was told, so I did what I was told to do.” While working inside the structure one of Mr. Doe’s cleaning partners became fatigued and found it hard to breath, saying they felt a tightness in their chest. (“This guy was a five-year veteran with this company”, an important note to remember later in this discussion.) Mr. Doe suggested his colleague take a break, “not saying what the proper break would be (I didn’t know what that was then)”. His colleague removed himself from the structure, choosing to rest in the company van (“which was full of our concentrated cleaning products”, another important note to remember later in this discussion).

Well, his colleague’s symptoms never improved. While his colleague tried to return to work (“fifteen minutes later”), the tightness in his chest persisted (“within and without the structure, during breaks”). “He mentioned that he thought he was having a heart attack and called the main office for permission to leave the property, which we did upon authorization.”

“This guy had to lay off work for three weeks while he took medication to break up the deposits in his lungs. I was not told about the long-term effects of his exposures, but I am certain that the breaking up of this blockage meant that (to whatever medically altered state) the clogging debris had to be processed by his body to completely rid it of this debris.”

This is a great example of why indoor environmental consultants or industrial hygienists shall be engaged in determining workplace hazards and risks. Had such a person been employed and a plan to eliminate or reduce exposures (to safe levels) been implemented, this man wouldn't have had to go through this terrible situation.

The Fire Damage Case Study 1: The Fire After The Fire!

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Fri, 25 Nov 2022 19:59:16 GMT

The Fire Damage Case Study 1: The Fire After The Fire!

Late one night a call came into a local restoration company from a person that had experienced a house fire. They wanted to secure the structure while they waited for their insurance company’s clearance of coverage; they also wanted an estimate for the restoration of their home. That night the “on-call technician” responded with plywood boards, screws and his battery powered drill to “board-up” the house.

While water was used to put the initial fire out, the quick boarding up of this structure created an encapsulated environment where, once the heat was trapped indoors (for it could no longer exchange its heat with the external environment without passing through the building components), the ambient air’s thirst rose – that is, it was able to hold more moisture in grains of moisture per pound of air. This increased the rate of evaporation. The quicken rate of evaporation began to pull moisture from all the building components. The release of this moisture created a situation where oxygen levels were increasing without outside exchange. All of this took place around the boards used to secure the home, causing the fire to rekindle.

This is a good example of what happens when an undirected technician responds to a fire without foreknowledge of the potential hazards and the resulting property damage. In our next Case Study, we will look at an example of physical harm because of a lack of professional direction when responding to a fire damage.

Biocide Usage When Cleaning Sewage Backups

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Fri, 25 Nov 2022 19:20:48 GMT

Should Biocides Be Avoided During Sewage Cleanups?

Someone wrote to me, asking about my previous blog on biocide usage on water damage and mold remediation projects. He, rightfully, points out that the conversation was focused on their use on mold. He, then, goes on to explain that he’s a water damage restoration technician, who gets called out to remediate sewage backups. He asks, “Should biocides be avoided during sewage clean ups too?” This is a great question.

The process of sewage remediation involves several things, including but not limited to the following:

The removal of sensitive building materials. These materials can include those that won’t hold up to the cleaning process. These can include those worn or compromised in ways that prevent cleaning without damaging them further or those materials sensitive to cleaning (e.g., drywall and insulation).
The removal of building materials obstructing the cleaning process. Often there are materials that obstruct the cleaning process (e.g., drywall that prevents access to the wall cavity where the backup took place). The only way to access the debris for removal is to remove the obstruction.
Extraction/physical removal of excess water. This is, often, achieved in two stages. The first is the extraction process where the technician utilizes an extraction machine to remove standing water. The second involves structural drying (e.g., negative air machines, dehumidifiers, and/or air moving/filtration devices).
Physical cleaning of surfaces within the work area. This involves processes whereby particulate debris is removed by HEPA vacuuming, steam cleaning, damp wiping, and/or other processes applicable to the removal of debris (visible and microscopic).

That said, the use of biocides can’t be haphazard. They must be specific to (1) the organisms one is removing (2) the micro-climates applied (i.e., those services applied), (3) and its potential toxicity to the building occupants. (For more on the toxicity and limitations of biocides, read my previous blog .) For example, most sewage backups include organisms like Escherichia coli (E. coli), Enterococcus, Staphylococcus aureus, and Bacteroides. Products that have not been developed to kill these organisms won’t be applicable for your cleaning needs. Additionally, if you’re cleaning a surface with a sticky substance on it, the product should be such that it aids in the liberation of that substance. Products that don’t aid in that process aren’t applicable to the cleaning process.

So, based on this description of biocide use, it should be clear that the use of biocides is to (1) aid in the liberation and removal of unwanted, sewage-based bacteria from the surfaces being cleaned (2) and increase the bacterial decay (i.e., death) rates, so that, when the professional technician has completed their work, it is immediately safe for re-occupancy.

Can One Use A Particle Counter As Indicators Of Mold Spores?

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Tue, 22 Nov 2022 20:22:10 GMT

Can One Use A Particle Counter As Indicators Of Mold Spores?

Particle counters are devices that function primarily using the principles of light scattering, although other technologies may also be employed. Light scattering by particles use instrumentation comprising a high-intensity light source (e.g., a laser), a controlled media flow (e.g., air, gas, or liquid), and highly sensitive light-gathering detectors (a photo detector). While the technologies vary by device and intended function, basically these devices rely on light obscuration by particles. This is the principle that states the presence of particles blocks some of the light from the photodetector, typically through either absorbance or light scattering. The photodetector records the obscuration of light and converts this to an electrical signal, this signal is then correlated to a specific sized particle using a pulse height analyzer, reporting these findings as particle counts. These devices have become increasing popular on some mold related assessments and remediation projects. But how reliable is this technology when attempting to understand the airborne mold spore populations and in determine if those populations are normal or abnormal (i.e., if a mold problem exists)?

To understand the answer to this question one must come to a general understanding of the device’s capabilities and limitations. As described above, these devices divide findings into various particle counts. With today’s technology, these particle counts can be divided into relatively narrow ranges. The problem with the use of these devices in mold assessments is they count those particles with specific characteristics such as fluorescence, not all mold spores fluoresce, and those mold spores that do often do so irregularly; consequently, mold spores generally make up a relatively small portion of the particles in the size range reported.

My professional opinion is that a mold assessor should seek to provide as much technically accurate and specific information as possible before drawing a conclusion on whether a mold problem exists or not. Shortcuts, like the one I described above, may be quick and convenient to some, but may not provide an honest, scientific description of the environment being assessed.

Are The Chemicals Used During Water Damage Restoration and Mold Remediation Safe And Necessary?

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Tue, 22 Nov 2022 19:14:30 GMT

Are The Chemicals Used During Water Damage Restoration and Mold Remediation Safe And Necessary?

Biocides are toxic chemicals or physical agents capable of killing or inactivating one or more groups of microorganisms, such as vegetative bacteria, vegetative fungi, bacterial spores, fungal spores, mycobacteria, parasites, and viruses. Some examples of these may include chlorine, ethanol, or isopropyl alcohol.

Today, there are over 8,000 biocides for environmental use that are registered as pesticides with the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These biocides are mostly aqueous formulations (i.e., formed of matter deposited in or by water) that function as sanitizers, disinfectants, or sterilants designed to kill microorganisms to varying degrees.

But is the use of these biocides enough to rid you of a mold infestation; are they safe; and are they necessary on mold remediation and water damage restoration projects? Let’s look at these questions by educating ourselves on what biocides are and what they do:

When a biocide gets registered with the EPA, the product will have a label providing useful information regarding usage, ingredients, safety, and precautionary statements, claims the manufacturer makes for the product, among other things. Label claims are approved following EPA review of efficacy data generated using standard methods such as those by the Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Since testing is standardized, claims by the manufacturer are not based on in-use evaluations on the variety of materials and surfaces that may be found in buildings.

While it is true that biocide usage may be effective in killing microorganisms if applied properly and can be easy to apply, topical applications, there’s even more to consider… Biocides are toxic chemicals, which means they have low to high toxicity to humans; after all, they are life-killing (bio-life; cide-kill) agents. And re-emissions can be harmful (e.g., aldehydes and chlorine emissions).

Additionally, biocides can be inactivated by organic material; have limited efficacy against a broad range of microorganisms; may react with or damage some building components; left-over organics may be a nutrient source; and they are not capable of neutralizing the antigenic properties, endotoxins, or mycotoxins left over by bacteria or mold.

Think of it like this: You go into your living room and see what appears to be mold on the drywall. There is some greenish-blue and black growth here and there. You go to clean it with bleach, but the bleach is only effective in suppressing one of the mold types there. The suppression of the one organism may give the other organism(s) an advantage, leading to different control problems.

You treat the mold with your chlorine, and it kills the mold growth you see, leaving behind the dead bodies, spores, and potential toxins. In other words, the source of indoor air quality damage has not been removed and the potential for exposure to allergens or other infectious agents may remain even after a successful treatment with a biocide.

With that in mind the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) states, “Effective remediation of water-damaged or microbially contaminated buildings involves (a) the use of appropriate techniques to promote rapid drying, and (b) complete removal of contaminated materials rather than the applications of biocides without these steps.” (ACGIH, Bioaerosols: Assessment and Control)

Are these products necessary during remediation work? Not usually. Technology today has made it possible to use safe processes to remove mold colonization (i.e., mold growth). (In the future, I’ll talk more about what mold remediation should focus on instead of treating environments with known, suspect, or potential mold growth.) That said, let’s look at what some other standards and guidelines have to say about biocide usage:

The Institute of Inspection, Cleaning, and Restoration Certification (IICRC) standards of care are the go-to standards in the industries of water damage restoration and mold remediation. These standards state, “Source removal of mold contamination should always be the primary means of remediation. The indiscriminate use of antimicrobial products, coatings, sealants, and cleaning chemicals is not recommended.”
Before the IICRC’s standards, many professionals turned to the New York City Department of Health’s guidelines, which include statements like, “The use of gaseous, vapor-phase, or aerosolized biocides for remedial purposes is not recommended. The use of biocides in this manner can pose health concerns for people in occupied spaces of the building and for people returning to the treated space if used improperly.”
For decades the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) has been considered one of the best resources to go to when looking for scientifically based information on safety and health. The AIHA has come out with guidelines that state, “The goal of remediation is removal of mold and the moisture source because: a) biocides do not alter mycotoxins or allergens; b) it is generally not possible to get 100 percent kill with biocides; and c) because of the newly deposited spores, re-growth will occur after the biocides if moisture returns.”
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has authority to regulate workplace safety and health (e.g., workers on water damage and mold remediation projects). They have come out with guidelines that state, “The use of a biocide, such as chlorine bleach, is not recommended as a routine practice during mold remediation, although there may be instances where professional judgment may indicate its use (for example, when immuno-compromised individuals are present). In most cases, it is not possible or desirable to sterilize an area, as a background level of mold spores comparable to the level in outside air will persist. However, the spores in the ambient air will not cause further problems if the moisture level in the building has been corrected. Biocides are toxic to animals and humans, as well as to mold.”

A professional Indoor Environmentalist or Hygienist can help you identify the nature of the organism and the extent of contamination, some even write protocols (i.e., a corrective action plan) in their reports. When looking for one of these professionals to help consult you through a problem, look for someone that has the following credentials:

Make sure they do not remediate their own work, as this is a conflict of interest.
Make sure they are insured.
Other than compliance with Florida’s license laws, third-party accreditation is strongly recommended.
Understand what to expect from their work.
Make sure to get a protocol written into your report; otherwise, you may walk away with incomplete information and contractor controversy.

For more on what to look for in a mold assessment, check out my previous blog on the subject. And contact us to learn more about how Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services can serve you with your mold assessment and consultation needs.

How Long Does It Take For Mold To Grow?

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Mon, 21 Nov 2022 22:33:54 GMT

How Long Does It Take For Mold To Grow?

Over the 30+ years that I’ve worked in the indoor environmental assessment and consulting industry, I’ve seen all kinds of opinions on how long it took for this or that mold to grow in someone’s home or office. Nearly all these opinions are extrapolations on limited research, either performed by the assessor or someone else who hasn’t had their work peer reviewed. Why these assessors choose to do this is a subject I’m not going to cover in this blog. What I’d like us to focus on today are two things: (1) What “mold growth” means, and (2) how long it takes for mold to grow.

So, the better way of understanding what we can see is this: Visible colonies of mold growth are indications that mold growth has occurred or mold continues to grow.

According to the Foundation of the Wall and Ceiling Industry (FWCI) research paper, Mold: Cause, Effect and Response , “Some fungi can germinate in as little as 4 to 12 hours, and, if left undisturbed, fungi can grow and spread in 24 to 72 hours.” But just because it can doesn’t mean it will. The timing of the growth cycle is dependent on the species of mold, temperature, available water, substrate, and other environmental conditions. In the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) book Bioaerosols: Assessment and Control , a collaborative body of experts writes on the facts of this life cycle, the impact of the various conditions necessary for mold to grow, and the complications that it poses to those seeking to determine how long it takes for mold to grow in a given structure:

The best approach to a known, suspect, or potential mold problem in your home or office is to have a professional mold assessment performed, as I discussed in a previous blog .

If you need help with a known, suspect, or potential mold problem, contact Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services to discuss how we can best serve you.

Are All Molds Toxic?

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Mon, 21 Nov 2022 21:23:45 GMT

Are All Molds Toxic?

Mold comes in many unique and individual classes called species. To-date there are over 180,000 different identified species of mold. And, via something in environmental science called the biodiversity principle, many scientists believe there may be as many 1,000,000 species. All haven’t been identified, yet.

While certain species can produce toxins, generally called mycotoxins, not all can nor will just because they are in your home or office. You see, these toxins are used by producing molds for a specific purpose: the defense of the mold from other organisms and chemicals. It is their way of protecting themselves.

It’s beyond the scope of this blog to list all the toxins produced by all the mold species. Sufficient for this blog are the following examples: aflatoxins, ochratoxins, deoxynivalenol (DON, vomitoxin), T-2/HT-2 toxins, zearalenone, fumonisins, mycophenolic acid, cyclopiazonic acid (α-CPA) and ergot alkaloids.

Molds can release these toxins individually or part of an airborne fragment or spore and can be released during active times of production or during times of agitation, as during cleaning and remediation.

“Although some mycotoxins are well known to affect humans and have been shown to be responsible for human health effects, for many mycotoxins, little information is available” says the U.S. EPA.

So, what is known about the health effects of mycotoxin exposure? According to the World Health Organization’s (WHO) guidelines on indoor air quality: moisture and mould: “Although mycotoxins can induce a wide range of adverse health effects in both animals and human beings, the evidence that they play a role in health problems related to indoor air is extremely weak.” In other words, ingesting these toxins in foods or through the skin can cause ill health effects, but there isn’t enough research right now to determine what is true about exposure to indoor airborne mycotoxin exposures and subsequent health effects. Don’t take this the wrong way, that doesn’t mean all the effects of mold exposure are hypothetical.

According to the Institute of Medicine (IOM, “Damp Indoor Spaces and Health” 2004) they found sufficient evidence of associations between the presence of mold in damp indoor environments and upper respiratory tract symptoms, cough, wheeze, and asthma symptoms in sensitized persons. The IOM also found limited or suggestive evidence of an association between the presence of agents in damp indoor environments and lower respiratory illness in otherwise healthy children.

Those considered sensitized were children whose immune systems had not fully developed yet, the elderly whose immune systems were weakening, those with pre-existing medical conditions like asthma or immune system disorders, and those with allergies.

The best way to control exposure is to control the thing necessary for mold growth to begin with: moisture.

In general, “moisture control in buildings includes measures for choosing building materials and measures for controlling indoor humidity through ventilation.” (WHO) In a moist climate certain building practices may be effective that would injure a similar structure in a dry climate—one method does not protect all! Knowing the effects of building design on building science and mold growth can go a long way in protecting your remodeling, restoration, remediation, or other building investments.

Keep in mind that moisture control doesn’t mean the elimination of water. “Many materials can get wet, as long as they dry quickly enough.” (WHO) With that in mind, you should always have any water damage properly and professionally mitigated to assure that your home or office is protected from microbial infestation.

To summarize:

Some molds can produce toxins, but even those that do require the perfect environment to produce those toxins.
Health effects of indoor airborne mycotoxins have not been extensively studied and more research is needed to determine its effects on human health.
Mold, whether it can produce toxins or not, is considered “a public health problem” (IICRC S520 Standard for Professional Mold Remediation) because it can cause allergy and asthma responses, infections, and other health complications.
Rather than fearing whether a mold is toxigenic or not it is better to practice good building hygiene and maintenance, controlling moisture and ventilation, and processing any water damages quickly to avoid elevated mold concentrations indoors.

What's Inside A Fire And Smoke Damaged Building?

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Mon, 21 Nov 2022 16:30:53 GMT

Indoor Hazards Associated with Fire and Smoke Damaged Structures

There are many types of fire and smoke damages, ranging from outdoor sources, indoor sources, total loss of the structure, to localized damage like a kitchen fire. In all cases, there are things that can be harmful and a proper procedure to follow to restore your home or office from fire and smoke damage. Understanding the hazards, how to protect occupants from those hazards, and determining the proper restoration procedure requires insight into the specific fire and smoke damage. In this blog, we’ll touch on some of the basic dynamics of a fire and the hazards analyzed during a fire and smoke damage assessment that provide for that kind of understanding.

The particulate matter associated with fire and smoke damages are a combination of living (bioaerosols) and non-living matter and is a mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air. Some of the particulate matter is large enough to be seen, like the large deposits of soot and ash you see settled onto your furniture and building components, while other particulate matter is so small, they can be seen only with the help of an electron microscope.

Of the living particulate matter, microorganisms (e.g., mold and bacteria), their fragments, and their toxins, as well as their particulate waste products can be of concern.

As with any damaged environment, understanding the condition of that environment is key in providing for the health and safety of all the occupants, as well as developing a scope of work that will restore the structure to a safe and secure status. Sometimes the damage can extend far beyond what you can see. For example, during the California wildfires many structures miles away from the physical fire experienced smoke, char, ash, and indoor air quality damage invisible to occupants. Obviously, in those situations, cleaning of the visible areas of soot and fire damage is not enough to secure the structure’s integrity and indoor air quality.

Today, there are tests that can be performed by qualified assessors (like those at Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services) to ensure that the hazards are defined, a detailed scope of work is generated, and health and safety issues are addressed prior to cleaning and restoration; equally, those same tests are available for a post-restoration verification assessment. The post-assessment provides for a scientifically-sound closure to any restoration process.

For more information, contact Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services to learn how we can serve you.

Should Laboratories Determine If A Mold Problem Exists?

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Tue, 15 Nov 2022 19:01:12 GMT

Given the complexity of interpreting laboratory results, can one really rely on the laboratory determining whether a problem exists in the sampled building?

Indoor air quality as a scientific discipline is evolving as our knowledge of the subject increases. For example, when people first began to take air samples for mold, they believed an indoor/outdoor comparison of mold spore levels was sufficient in determining if and where a problem existed. Today, the indoor air quality industry knows this isn’t true.

So, given the complexity of interpreting laboratory (lab) results, can one really rely on the laboratory determining whether a problem exists in the sampled building?

Here are a few reasons one shouldn’t:

2. Mold counts have spatial, geographic, local land use, seasonal and diurnal variability just to name a few. This variability can be orders of magnitude different in samples that are taken a few minutes apart! An interpretation of one’s samples that is based on subjective, invalidated internal criteria developed by a laboratory is a great way to make incorrect conclusions. Here’s one example:

4. The process by which the sample was collected can positively or negatively impact the laboratory's analysis of the sample. You see, whenever a mold assessor seeks to interpret the laboratory's results, they will look at the column listed spores/m3. There are many reasons for this, but the most important is that when interpreting laboratory results, one should do so in a way that is standardized. The raw count column is not standardized; therefore, it is best to utilize the spores/m3 column. Here's where a problem arises for the laboratory. The laboratory will extrapolate - from the raw count (i.e., the actual amount of spores counted by the laboratory technician) - the spores/m3 via a mathematical formula that doesn't take into account how the sample was collected - only the amount of air that passed the sampling media. It assumes that the only spores captured by the sampling media were those directly drawn in by the sampling pump; however, something as simple as how the sampling media faces (e.g., up or down) could impact that variable. When facing up, the sampling media will collect those spores drawn into it as well as those settling from the air (like dust settling on our furniture); when facing down and the surfaces below the sampling media aren't disturbed, it will only collect those spores drawn in by the sampling pump. The laboratory doesn't know how the samples were collected and may report findings that cannot be relied upon by themselves to determine if a problem exists in your home or office.

With all of this in mind, you may be asking: What are you really getting with mold sampling and laboratory analysis? The sole purpose of a laboratory is to provide the mold assessor with independent, objective, and scientifically defensible data to be interpreted through the lens of a professional, site-specific mold assessment. When performed and utilized properly by the mold assessor, they provide the mold assessor with additional information for technically accurate determinations and reporting of your building's condition relative to mold.

However, when the mold assessor relies on laboratories that offer him or her “statistical data interpretation”, a "score", or tell him or her whether their samples have elevated mold levels, they aren't providing you an honest, scientific analysis of your home or office. Rather, these mold assessors are jeopardizing their reputation and exposing themselves to professional liability. Such service fails to deliver technically accurate mold assessment determinations (e.g., is the indoor air quality compromised due to elevated mold spores or not?). No one can afford that kind of service, nor should they receive such service.

The Misclassification of Storm Water Damage

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Mon, 14 Nov 2022 17:54:11 GMT

Is Storm Water Entering Through the Roof Contaminated?

Perhaps you're reading this because you or someone you know has been told by a restoration contractor that the water damage to your home or office is "a Category 3 water damage", requiring extensive demolition and expensive and time-consuming remediation. If you are, you aren't alone. Here, in Florida, we deal with storm related water damage events constantly. And, constantly, I witness contractors misclassify the water damage.

Classification of water damage isn't something contractors made up. It is something in the Institute of Inspection, Cleaning, and Restoration Certification's (IICRC) S500, Standard for Professional Water Damage Restoration . To summarize, this standard recognized that not all water is the same and some types of water pose a threat to those who contact it while others do not. So, what the standard did was categorize the water by the presence or absence of contamination and the level of contamination. Category 1 is clean water; Category 2 is water that has some contamination and can cause discomfort or sickness if contacted or consumed by humans; while, Category 3 water is grossly contaminated and can contain pathogenic, toxigenic, or other harmful agents.

Well, their contractor told them that this was a Category 3 water damage. Why? Because, they claim, the S500 says wind-driven rain is an example of Category 3 water. Well, let's take a look at what the S500 says:

Examples of Category 3 water can include, but are not limited to: sewage; waste line backflows that originate from beyond the trap regardless of visible content or color; all other forms of contaminated water resulting from flooding from seawater; rising water from rivers or streams; and other contaminated water entering or affecting the indoor environment, such as wind driven rain from hurricanes, tropical storms, or other weather related events if they carry trace levels of contaminants (e.g., pesticides or toxic organic substances) .

Key to this definition isn't that wind driven rain from hurricanes constitutes grossly contaminated water; rather, it is the last part of this sentence: "if they carry trace levels of contaminants" (e.g., pesticides or toxic organic substances). The IF has to be defined and exist before such sources of water constitute Category 3 water. So, while it may be possible for wind driven rain to enter a building and mix with something that causes it to become contaminated or be exposed to other environmental conditions (e.g., time and temperature) that cause it to deteriorate in cleanliness, the assumption that wind driven rain is Category 3 water is, well, just that: an assumption .

So, don't let someone tell you that just because storm water entered your home or office from the sky it is grossly contaminated. It's one thing to express a concern and have that concern assessed by an independent Indoor Environmental Professional (IEP); it's another to assume something that costs people their homes and offices without justification. In future blogs I'll discuss how professionals determine the Category of water damages. In the meantime, if you find yourself in a situation where a preliminary determination can’t determine the Category of water damage in your home or office, contact Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services and let’s discuss how we can serve you.

The Mold Assessment Process

183:937035853 (Jason Yost) — Fri, 11 Nov 2022 19:32:30 GMT

What should a properly performed mold assessment look like?

To answer your question: There's no one-size-fits-all approach to performing a mold assessment. That's because each environment and its occupants and systems vary, requiring the mold assessor to go about data-gathering and interpretation differently (that is, if they want to provide you with specifics about your home or office's environment). That said, there are a few things that every mold assessment should include as a foundation:

Determination of Causal Factors. More than knowing what type of mold is present, knowing what caused a mold problem (i.e., mold growth or elevated spores in the air) is key in remedying (i.e., remediating) a building of mold contamination; after all, if the causal factors aren't addressed during the removal of moldy building materials or the cleaning of the contaminated environment, the mold problem will return. So, a professional mold assessor should be competent in determining the causal factors for any found mold growth or contamination in your home or office and communicate those causal factors in their report.
Determination of Location & Extent of Mold: This requires the mold assessor be able to study the environment to determine variables related to air movement, building use, ventilation, moisture activity (i.e., where in the air or building materials is the moisture elevated and why), types and extent of building materials and contents with mold colonization/growth, areas where the air quality has been compromised by an abnormal airborne fungal population (i.e., elevated mold spores in the air), and other pertinent factors; because, during the course of a mold assessment, the mold assessor should be looking at those things necessary for him or her to write a site-specific protocol for mold remediation (i.e., corrective action plan). When the mold assessor doesn't possess such competency, they may overlook issues in your home or office, may not provide a detailed report (instead just hand you a copy of the laboratory's report), and provide a poor protocol for mold remediation, which may compromise the mold remediation process.
Avoidance of Conflict of Interest Practices: This is an area that gets debated, but is quite simple if you look at the legal precedent set, the Institute of Inspection, Cleaning and Restoration Certification's (IICRC) S520, Standard for Professional Mold Remediation , and the IICRC R520, Reference Guide for Professional Mold Remediation . There are many ways " conflict of interest " may be practiced during the mold assessment, too many to get into in this blog. Suffice it to say, if the mold assessor has a potential interest (e.g., financial or relational) that could compromise the integrity of his or her mold assessment, it has, legally, been defined as a conflict of interest. (Perhaps, in a future blog, I can share some examples with you and discuss this in greater detail?)
Detailed Reporting Based on Science-based Evidence: While this may sound like a no-brainer, it's something I see lacking, often, in my peer-reviews of other mold assessor's work. Ask your mold assessor to provide an honest, scientific analysis of your home or office, recording and photographing their findings for detailed reporting; make sure the assessor will write the report him or her self and not provide you a copy of the laboratory's report only; make sure they are going to include a protocol for mold remediation that is specific to what needs to be done, where, by whom, and with what (e.g., do air filtration devices need to be installed, containment erected, and building materials removed?); make sure they include an answer to the question "Can I occupy the building while mold remediation is being performed?"; make sure any limitations on the assessment process be documented; and, make sure they include resources in their report that defends their conclusions. Why? It provides you value for your mold assessment investment; it provides you a clear understanding of what needs to be done where and why; it provides for your safety and health in the form of their protocol for mold remediation; it provides justification for costs associated with their protocol for mold remediation; and so much more.
Competent Person: What do I mean by competent person? Well, it's a person who can demonstrate, by his or her education and accreditation, that he or she can provide for those things you need them to do during the mold assessment. In Florida, many rely on the license law, for mold assessors and mold remediators, to protect them from fraud and abuse; however, the requirements to become licensed falls short the industry's base-knowledge for mold assessment and remediation. Therefore, a competent person should be able to provide you copies or other confirmation of accreditation beyond the license requirement, itself. This includes such certifications as Council-certified Indoor Environmental Consultant (CIEC), Council-certified Indoor Environmentalist (CIE), Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH), and Certified Safety Professional (CSP) for mold assessors and Council-certified Microbial Remediation Supervisor (CMRS) and Council-certified Microbial Remediator (CMR) for mold remediators. (Depending on the assessor or remediator's involvement in other duties, other certifications may be requested.) You can learn more a by reading this blog .

The good news is that Gulf Coast Center for Indoor Air Quality Services provides all of this and more , and at a cost-competitive rate with great turnaround times. To learn more contact us about how we may serve you.

Here are some questions you can ask of your potential mold assessor to help you with the information in this blog:

Are you licensed by the State of Florida?
Do you or anyone in your organization or family perform mold remediation ?
Will you be conducting a visual inspection or just mold testing?
Will I be getting a detailed written report from you or the laboratory ?
How do you interpret the laboratory results?
Will you be performing the mold assessment in accordance with the ASTM D-7338 Standard Guide for Assessment of Fungal Growth in Buildings ?
Are you familiar with the IICRC S520?
What qualifications do you have to perform mold inspection?
What certifications do you have?
Do you have references from clients?