The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMiscellaneous - Exception (296)I Z aio 3Im MI D MIM 0 C c D ' Z cic OiD Z N WICOI m C G7 i -;m m:m CI) r m Z m N n n z z aa�: n 0' vzLZ to ppl z-�i'-�i °io z. D umi� m z0 m. D ?� (n r a -.4 z c z,=. v 3 p:p O p m> a D ;um z U) av D' (01G)m ,p 00 (ola olr, 0 mC —;Ulu) M i y; cn O mlm = r0 0 rn' m w 0,_9 Q m m iia z vi r -'i r z' Z p m f7 T z O m m O cQ =0 -� z y m*v,v m -i DZ v � A ,r- 0' 10 c _ � C) N a 1>:r '� O y; 7fiD 0 o la -r Cr I m O Z i TI i jti 4 1 - INDOOR AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT PERFORMED AT: TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER TOWN HALL ANNEX 146 MAIN STREET NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS 01845 PERFORMED FOR: ROBERT NICETTA BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN OF NORTH ANDOVER 120 MAIN STREET NORTH ANDOVER, MASSACHUSETTS 01845 PERFORMED BY: HUNTER, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES 10 LEWIS STREET, P.O. BOX 284 LINCOLN, MASSACHUSETTS 01773 February 13, 1996 HES # 96-415.01R .- Irn n'inn TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................... 1 2.0 STANDARDS...................................................... 1 3.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES ............................................... 2 3.1 Temperature .................................... 2 3.2 Relative Humidity ............................... 2 3.3 Carbon Dioxide ................................. 3 3.4 Carbon Monoxide ................................ 3 3.5 Bioaerosols..................................... 3 4.0 AIR SAMPLING SUMMARY ......................................... 4 4.1 Temperature .................................... 4 4.2 Relative Humidity ............................... 4 4.3 Carbon Dioxide ................................. 5 4.4 Carbon Monoxide ................................ 5 4.5 Bioaerosols..................................... 5 5.0 CONCLUSIONS.................................................... 7 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................. 7 7.0 LIMITATIONS..................................................... 7 APPENDICES DIRECT READING AIR MONITORING SAMPLING DATA .........:... APPENDIX A BIOAEROSOL LABORATORY RESULTS ........................... APPENDIX B Town of North Andover ` Supplementary Indoor Air Quality Survey Town Hall Annex - February 29, 1996 HES # 95-415.0111 Page 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION At the request of the Town of North Andover (the Town), Hunter, Inc. conducted a series of measurements and air samples within the Town Hall Annex building located at 146 Main Street, North Andover, MA, for the purpose of evaluating limited indoor air parameters. The evaluation involved the measurement, sampling and assessment of temperature, relative humidity, carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide and airborne mold, fungi and bacteria within the facility. Temperature and relative humidity measurements were taken in order to determine whether ideal conditions for microorganic growth were present within the facility. Carbon dioxide was measured in order to qualitatively assess the efficiency of the ventilation system, and to qualitatively determine whether or not adequate amounts of fresh outside air were being supplied to building occupants as required by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Elevated carbon dioxide levels may aggravate the adverse effects of indoor bioaerosols. The field assessment activities took place on February 13, 1996. Prior to our site visit, it is Hunter's understanding that pond water had infiltrated the foundation and affected the basement level of the facility. A large, presumably biological mass (biomass) has formed in a crawlspace area of the basement near the West exterior wall. The assessment was performed in response to concerns issued by the Town in regards to possible adverse health effects to office occupants due to the presence of this biomass. In the report dated December 2, 1995, Hunter made several recommendations, some of which have been implemented at this time. For example, it is our understanding that the Town has installed new HVAC components, including air supply intake louvers which are situated above the building. Further, it is our understanding that the Town has sealed the area containing the biomass to the best of their ability, and installed exhaust ventilation for this area, in an attempt to prevent this biomass from adversely affecting building occupants. Hunter also understands that our recommendation to remediate, or remove this contamination was not implemented due to cost constraints on the part of the Town, and that the Town understands that this is not a perfect or permanent fix, and that there is no guarantee that this "quick fix" will not cause problems in the future. . Hunter's role in this supplementary assessment/investigation was to duplicate the testing performed during our initial site visit in October, 1995, with the exception of collecting a bulk sample of the biomass, and investigate the possibility of the need for additional remedial actions. 2.0 STANDARDS There are no federal or state laws or regulations which govern indoor air quality issues. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has a set of general industry standards, which dlist the maximum 8 -hour daily allowed exposures to specific substances and physical agents under OSHA General Industry Standards, 29 CFR 1910. The substance specific standards under.29 CFR 1910.1000, are referred to as the Permissible Exposure Levels or PELs, and are used within general industry for evaluation of industrial exposures. OSHA regulations do not apply to public exposure, and therefore can not be applied to indoor air quality evaluations. Even though the PELs were not promulgated for application within indoor air quality studies, the PELs may be cited if the concentration of the contaminant within an office environment exceeds the value under the OSHA regulations. This, as a general rule, is rarely done. The standards cited in this report, other than 29 CFR 1910, are national Town of North Andover Supplementary Indoor Air Quality Survey Town Hall Annex February 29, 1996 HES # 95-415.01R Page 2 consensus guidelines, promulgated and supported by various national consensus organizations such as the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air -Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) and the Massachusetts State Department of Public Health. These national consensus guidelines are voluntary and followed by companies on a selective basis. Within this report, a number of guidelines are referred to based upon their support and acceptance within the indoor air quality professional community. These national guidelines are based on well documented indoor air quality studies and when followed, have been shown to reduce employee discomfort. Not all national organizations that publish IAQ guidelines have guidelines for all indoor air pollutants or physical parameters. Many of these organizations adopt and reference guidelines from other sources within their publications. These sources include federal and state governments. The primary IAQ guideline sources referenced in this report are: o American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air -Conditioning Engineers, Inc., (ASHRAE) 62-1989, "Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality". o Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) indoor air quality recommendations. o Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Labor and Industries (DLI), Division of Occupational Hygiene, "Fresh Air Ventilation and Air Quality Complaints: Discussion and Recommendations". o . American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) "Guideline for the Assessment of Bioaerosols in an Indoor Environment". o ACGIH "Industrial Ventilation" Guidelines. 3.0 SCOPE OF SERVICES 3.1 Temperature Temperature was monitored as an indication of relative comfort and an indication of whether ideal conditions exist for the growth of indoor microorganisms. Temperatures were monitored at one location on each floor, coinciding with the location of the bioaerosol sampling. All temperature measurements were taken using a Vaisala electronic thermohygrometer. 3.2 Relative Humidity High humidities can support the growth of pathogenic or allergenic organisms. These organisms include molds, fungi and dust mites. The construction materials used in office buildings may contain the nutrients required to support microbial growth as long as the humidity levels are above the 60 percent relative humidity level. Materials that support mold and fungi growth include materials with a high cellulose content such as fiberboard, dust, lint, hair, and skin particles. Pollen can be an allergen, as well as, a nutrient for microbial growth. One of the most effective methods of controlling the growth of molds and fungi is to maintain the relative Town of North Andover Supplementary Indoor Air Quality Survey Town Hall Annex February 29, 1996 Page 3 HES # 95-415.0111 levels between 30 and 60 percent. Also, even within this range of humidity, it is still possible to exceed the dew point on cold surfaces such as exterior walls when the building is not adequately or correctly insulated or there is a failure in construction. Under these conditions, moisture may condense onto these cold surfaces with the possible resultant growth of molds or fungi. However, when the relative humidity becomes too low, such as below 30 percent, employees may experience discomfort due to the drying of skin and mucous membranes. Relative humidity was measured at one location on each floor, coinciding with the location of the bioaerosol sampling. Measurements were taken using a Vaisala electronic thermohygrometer. Outdoor temperature and relative humiditywas also measured at the time of our site visit. All temperature and relative humidity measurements are tabulated in Appendix A. 3.3 Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Carbon Dioxide (CO2) measurements were made to determine if adequate volumes of outside air were being delivered into the work space to dilute the quantity of CO2 that the employees are generating through their exhaled breath. Carbon dioxide acts synergistically with other indoor contaminants to seemingly exacerbate their effects. Accumulation of CO2 is prevented by introducing fresh outside air into the work environment in quantities adequate to lower the CO2 concentration below a pre- established guideline. General area and specific site measurements of carbon dioxide allow an assessment the introduction of fresh outside air, both from generalized building air and from individual spaces where air mixing may be incomplete. Carbon dioxide measurements were obtained using a GasTech model RI -411A direct reading meter, which uses an infrared cell to detect the presence of carbon dioxide. The direct reading meter was calibrated according to the manufacturers recommendation prior to use. These measurements were made at selected locations throughout the first and second floors, and the basement. ASHRAE recommends that indoor CO2 levels remain below 1000 ppm as an eight- hour time weighted average. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Public Health recommends a more stringent action level for carbon dioxide, and suggests that CO2 levels be maintained below 800 parts per million (ppm) throughout the work day. 3.4 Carbon Monoxide (CO) Carbon Monoxide (CO) is a by-product of incomplete combustion and can be found indoors as a result of automobile exhaust, damaged gas-fired heating furnaces, stoves, and cigarette smoke. In general, indoor carbon monoxide levels are expected to be equivalent to outdoor levels, except where leaking heating furnaces, cigarette smoke, or other combustion sources are producing this gas indoors. ASHRAE recommends that indoor carbon monoxide levels not exceed 9 parts per million (ppm) in any 24 hour period. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) also Town of North Andover Supplementary Indoor Air Quality Survey Town Hall Annex - February 29, 1996 Page 4 HES # 95-415.O1R mandates that CO levels be maintained below 35 ppm in any occupational environment. ASHRAE recommends that indoor CO levels be maintained below 9 ppm as a 24 -hr time -weighted average (TWA). 3.5 Bioaerosols The bioaerosol samples were collected through the use of an Anderson bioaerosol impactor attached to an air sampling pump. This instrument allows airborne fungal and bacterial colonies to impact the surface of a petri dish which is partially filled with a nutrient Agar solution. The samples are taken at a sufficient volume and flow rate to allow the fungal and bacterial colonies to become embedded in the Agar. This Agar solution then sponsors the growth of these microorganisms as they are incubated in a controlled, warm and humid environment in a laboratory. When the viable microorganisms develop into visible colonies, they can be identified, allowing for an assessment of their potential harm or impact to humans. Generally, most of the microorganisms found in an indoor environment are considered to be "common environmental isolates" (C.E.I.$). C.E.I.s are generally not considered to be a problem in low concentrations to individuals whose immune system has not been compromised or suppressed. However, some species of mold are considered to be toxic, and some bacteria are pathogenic and both need to be managed appropriately. Large concentrations of any type of bioaerosol are considered to present potential hazards because these bioaerosols may overload the body's immune system. Further, persons who are sensitive (allergic) to specific species of bacteria or fungi may not be able to tolerate those bioaerosols, even at low concentrations. Because of the difficulty in assessing the effect of total indoor bioaerosols on the general public, no guidelines for the maximum concentration of bioaerosols in the indoor air have been established. An assessment of the effect of indoor bioaerosols on a facility's indoor air quality should include: 1) an examination of the total concentration of indoor bioaerosols; 2) a comparison of the total indoor concentration of bioaerosols to the total outdoor concentration of bioaerosols; 3) identification of bioaerosols which are known or suspected to be toxic or pathogenic; and 4) identification of bioaerosols which are predominant in the indoor air of a facility, and are known to cause allergic reactions in a large percentage of the population. 4.0 AIR SAMPLING SUMMARY AND RECONIl4INDATIONS 4.1 Temperature The recorded temperature on the first and second floor locations was between 71 and 72°F, while the indoor temperature in the unoccupied basement area was 59°F at the time of our site visit. ASHRAE recommends that indoor temperatures remain between 68 and 75°F during the winter months to maximize thermal comfort for building inhabitants. They have also Town of North Andover Supplementary Indoor Air Quality Survey Town Hall Annex February 29, 1996 Page 5 HES # 95-415.0111 established the "Optimal Operative Temperature" at 71°F. The Optimal Operative Temperature is defined as the "temperature that satisfies the greatest number of people at a given clothing and activity level". Although thermal discomfort does not constitute a health problem, it may be mistaken for illness by office occupants. It is our experience that most people correlate warm "stuffy" air with poor air quality. For this reason, we recommend that indoor temperatures be maintained within the recommended comfort zone. The outdoor temperature was 22°F. 4.2 Relative Humidity The recorded relative humidity measurement on the first and second floors of the facility was between 18 and 20%, while the relative humidity in the unoccupied basement area was 18%. ASHRAE recommends that indoor relative humidity levels be maintained between 30 and 60% year-round in order to maximize building occupant comfort levels. Further, data has shown that relative humidity levels above 60% with warm indoor temperatures provide an excellent breeding ground for bioaerosols, and support the growth of fungal spores which may have been lying dormant. It is important to note that the outdoor relative humidity level was 15%. From an industrial hygiene point of view, the lower relative humidity levels recorded throughout the building are good in that the drier air is less likely to support the growth of viable microorganisms that may be generated by the surrounding vegetation, pond water, or the biomass. In addition, during our first assessment, it was noted that the indoor relative humidities were much higher than the outdoor levels, particularly in the basement area. It was suggested that this may be due to the infiltration of pond water into the building. The fact that the indoor relative humidity levels recorded in the basement of the facility were the same as those recorded in other areas may suggest that the remedial actions taken by the Town, and described in the introduction of this report, may be helping in this regard. It is important that relative humidity levels within the facility be monitored periodically. Conversely, extremely low relative humidity levels may dry out mucous membranes and make people more susceptible to other indoor contaminants. Please note that the indoor relative humidity measurements recorded at the time of our site visit were below the ASHRAE guideline range. However, due to the potential for the increase in microorganic growth at this facility, it is not recommended that the Town increase indoor relative humidity levels by artificial means. �, .1 S. \NINA �o Town of North Andover Supplementary Indoor Air Quality Survey Town Hall Annex February 29, 1996 Page 6 HES # 95-415.0111 4.3 Carbon Dioxide (CO2) The carbon dioxide (CO2) levels on the second floor was 650 ppm with approximately five people occupying that area. The CO2 level on the 1st floor reception area was also 650 ppm (parts per million) with about four people in that area. Offices along the perimeter of this area had carbon dioxide levels ranging between 625 and 675 ppm, with one or two persons in these offices. The unoccupied basement area's CO2 level was measured to be 425 ppm at the time of our site visit. It was noted that the HVAC system was supplying air into these indoor locations throughout the duration of our site visit. ASHRAE recommends that indoor CO. levels be maintained below 1000 ppm. As mentioned earlier, high levels of CO2 will act synergistically with other indoor contaminants to seemingly exacerbate their effects. Given these readings, it would appear that the augmented ventilation system is working well, and that indoor CO2 levels have improved since our last assessment, when it was found that indoor CO2 levels were two times those found during this assessment. There does not appear to be a need for corrective actions in this regard at this t1me. At the time of the field investigations, the outdoor carbon dioxide level was 350 ppm. Please note that a summary of the temperature, relative humidity, and carbon dioxide levels found at each location can be found in Appendix A of this report. 4.4 Carbon Monoxide (CO) The indoor and outdoor carbon monoxide (CO) levels measured during our site visit were between 0 and 1 ppm. Outdoor CO levels in any urban area is expected to be between 0-2 parts per million. Since outdoor air is continually being introduced to the indoor environment of the building, similar levels of CO should be present indoors. Given this, there does not appear to be a CO problem in the Town Hall Annex at this time. The outdoor CO level recorded at the time of.our site visit was 0 ppm. A summary of the CO measurements taken at this site can be found in Appendix A. 4.5 Bioaerosols Most of the microorganisms found inside and outside the facility are considered to be "common environmental isolates"(C.E.I.$). C.E.I.s are generally not considered to be a problem in low concentrations to individuals whose immune system has not been compromised or suppressed. However, Aspergillus versicolor and other types of the Aspergillus fungal species were detected in the basement, 1st and 2nd floors. Since Aspergillus versicolor was found in the bulk sample of the biomass taken during our original site 1l Town of North Andover Supplementary Indoor Air Quality Survey Town Hall Annex rl Uv r February 29, 1996 Page 7 HES # 95-415.0111 investigation, it ' is very likely that this contamination is present due to the construction activities performed in order to seal the area containing this biomass. No Aspergillus species were found in the samples taken of the air outside the building. Although it was found in very low concentrations, Aspergillus species have been found to cause adverse health effects in humans, particularly in individuals who have become infirmed or immuno -suppressed. Asr:nllus versicolor was also the predominant fungal species found in the settled dust sample collected in the basement of the facility. This would seem to support the theory that the contamination was created during the construction activities mentioned above. Hunter made several recommendations in the report for the first investigation, dated December 4, 1995. Since Hunter was not present during the construction activities performed in an attempt to seal - off the area containing the biomass, no statements can be made which will qualify whether or not this work was done properly. Further, it is Hunter's understanding that non -porous surfaces throughout the building were disinfected, and porous surfaces were HEPA (High -Efficiency Particulate Air) -vacuumed prior to the start of these construction activities. At this time, Hunter recommends that all non -porous horizontal surfaces through the building be again disinfected with either a 1-5 percent aqueous solution of chlorine bleach (sodium hypochlorite), or a 3-6% solution of hydrogen peroxide, as recommended by the ACGIH. Cleaning operations should be performed after normal work hours to prevent the vapors from the bleach or disinfection solution from adversely affecting workers. Extensive cleaning using this solution should be performed through the use of a qualified professional firm specializing in this type of work, and under proper conditions to protect workers and other building occupants from exposure to either chlorine vapors, or the microorganic colonies which may be disturbed during the cleaning operations. This should include, but not be limited to the use of proper Personal Protective Equipment, and partial or full enclosure of the work area with adequate ventilation. Commercial disinfectants or biocides are not recommended by the ACGIH, and should be avoided so that harmful organic vapors are not introduced to the indoor environment. Chlorine vapors should dissipate quickly, if used properly and under adequate ventilation. If a water from this area should infiltrate the basement, or any other area of the building, all non -porous surfaces which are affected should be immediately cleaned using one of the disinfecting solutions, and methods described above. All porous water -damaged building materials and furnishings should be discarded. Carpets may be dried and cleaned with a HEPA- filtered vacuum, unless they cannot be dried properly. Please note that a special wet -vac HEPA vacuum may be used to vacuum water. Microorganisms will usually lay dormant in porous materials until the correct environmental conditions for their growth are met. For this reason, as part of the remediation, the file storage boxes in the basement should be repackaged, and the area cleaned with a HEPA filtered vacuum. These Town of North Andover Supplementary Indoor Ak Quality Survey Town Hall Annex February 29, 1996 Page 8 HES # 95-415.0111 activities should be conducted under controlled conditions byaprofesasional organization specializing in this work, so that p Y hu microorganisms which may be present in the biomass are not allowed to infiltrate the rest of the building, or infest the outdoors. Hunter, Inc. can help you with the management of these activities if you should decide to proceed with these recommendations. The other microorganisms foundin the � ationsf asair othis wouldfacility be expected. found outdoors, in relatively the same con en It should be noted that the overall amounts of microorganisms detected in the indoor air of the facility has decreased since our first IAQ assessment. in outdoor microorganic growth in the This is partly due to the decrease Winter, and may be partially due to the relocation of the fresh air intake louvers for the facility. Finally, Actinomycetes was detected both in the outdoor bioaerosol sample, and the bioaerosol sample taken in the basement, near the area containing the biomass. This particular microorganism has been known to produce a musty odor, and may be the cause for the odors that are detected indoors use this microorganism was isolated from from time to time. Note that beca the outdoor air samples, it may not be possible to prevent the infiltration of this microorganism into the indoor environment of the building. A description of the types of bioaerosols found at each location can be found in the laboratory report which is appended. The locations of these samples are as follows: samples are as follows: Samples Mi and B1 were taken and the 2nd floor offices, M2 and B2 were taken in the 1st floor offices, B4 were taken in the basement, near the files, M3 and B3 were taken in the basement, near the crawlspace which contains the pond water and the biomass, while M5 and M6 were taken outdoors. 5.0 CONCLUSIONS In summary, we observed the following: 1) Evidence of microorganisms which were detected in the biomass were also detected throughout the building. 2) In general, all other indoor air quality parameters tested did not show the need for immediate corrective actions. Town of North Andover Supplementary Indoor Aii Quality Survey Town Hall Annex February 29, 1996 HES # 95 415.O1R Page 9 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS In summary, we recommend the following: 1) As stated earlier, all non -porous horizontal surfaces throughout the building should be disinfected using the methods and materials described earlier in this report. All carpets and other affected porous surfaces should either be discarded, or thoroughly HEPA-vacuumed in order oeajntaminate them. ed before NEPA- a�uumingrous r Note that porous es which have become wet should be thoroughly surfaces that have become wet are very difficult to decontaminate, 7.0 LIMITATIONS This IAQ assessment report is limited in its Scope of Work to the observations made during one site reconnaissance assessment of the Town of North Andover Town Hall Annex., limited sample collection and analyses, and the conditions stated herein. Due to the potential for errors, omissions or inaccuracies which may exist, there is some risk associated with reliance on such information. Although there may have been some corroboration provided by multiple sources, Hunter, Inc. cannot be held responsible for the accuracy or completeness of the information, or lack of the IAQ investigation. Hunter, Inc. thereof, reviewed or received during the course cannot be held responsible for information or data withheld during its assessment. Hunter shall not be held responsible for errors in analytical data or analytical procedures of the laboratory whose performance criteria are developed and certified by others. Conclusions are limited by these observations and limited analytical data gathered from the one site visit to the facility. Additional site investigations and analytical results could result in different conclusions. The purpose of this report was to assess the IAQ in selected areas roven the the Toubjt property. of North Andover (TNA), an entity which exercises care, custody or control No specific attempt was made to check on compliance of present or past owners or operators of the site with Federal, State or Local regulations, environmental or otherwise. This preliminary IAQ assessment was prepared for the exclusive use of TNA. The conclusions and recommendations drawn by Hunter, Inc. are based solely on the information gathered to date. Information that may be gathered in the future may modify certain conclusions and opinions reported herein. Town of North Andover Supplementary Indoor Air Quality Survey Town Hall Annex February 29, 1996 Page 10 HES # 95-415.0111 Summaries of the actual measurements taken at the facility during our site visit, along with the laboratory's report on the microorganism samples taken at the facility are appended for your review. Please feel free to call us at 617-259-0800 if you have any questions or concerns. You can also page me at (617) 945-5039. � C Report written by: O. Joelkz ru, E.I.T. Project Manager/Senior Industrial Hygienist 1 Report reviewed by: alter F. Jackson ' Certified Industria Hyglenist Date signed: / APPENDIX A DIRECT READING AIR MONITORING SAMPLING DATA APPENDIX A SAMPLE LOCATIONS AND TEMPERATURE ,.RELATIVE HUMIDITY CARBON DIOXIDE AND CARBON MONOXIDE MEASUREMENTS Town of North Andover. Town Hall Annex North Andover; MA.. February 13, 1996 HES # 95-415.01R Location Carbon Monoxide Temperature Relative Humidity Carbon Dioxide (ppm) OF % Ppm Second Floor Offices 1.0 71 20 650 First Floor Offices 1.0 71 18 625 Reception Area First Floor, 0.0 71 18 650 Anne -Marie Tucchiarone's Office First .Floor, 0.0 71 20 675 Conservation Planning Administrators First Floor, Board of 0.0 72 19 675 Health Basement, near 0.0 59 18 425 Storage Files Basement, near 0.0 59 18 425 Biomass Outside building, 0.0 22 15 350 approximately 15' from fresh air intake louver �I APPENDIX B BIOAEROSOL LABORATORY RESULTS ~t - P & K Microbiology Services, Inc. Tel: 609-427-4044 The Environmental Microbiology Specialists Fax: 609-427-0232 1950 Old Cuthbert Road Unit L, Cherry Hill, New Jersey 08034 February 22, 1996 Mr. Joe Azpuru Hunter, Inc. 10 Lewis Street, P. O. Box 284 Lincoln, MA 01773 Dear Mr. Azpuru: Enclosed you will find an invoice and a report of Andersen and bulk samples (Hunter Project #: 96-415.02) taken and submitted by your office for microbiological analyses. P&K Report No.: Hunter -24 (Hunter Project No.: 96-415.02) Low fungal and low to moderate bacterial levels were detected in Andersen samples. Sample #021396-M5 had a higher fungal level than other MEA plates. Aspergillus versicolor and Penicillium were detected in samples #021396-M1 thru M4. Sample #021396-M4 contained one colony of Stachybotrys chartarum. Look into possible water damage and fungal contamination. Sample 021395-B5 had a higher bacterial level than other TSA samples. Human associated bacteria, primarily Micrococcus and Staphylococcus, were the common bacterial types. Actinomycetes were detected in samples #021396-B3 & B5. They are filamentous bacteria and may produce musty, earthy odors when in active growth. The bulk sample yielded a moderate fungal and a low bacterial level. Aspergillus versicolor was the dominant fungus. For more information on fungi and bacteria identified, please refer to the P&K literature sent to your office earlier. If you have any questions regarding this report, please feel free to contact me at (609) 427- 4044. Sincerely, Chin S. Yang, Ph.D. President Enclosures P & K Microbiology Services, Inc. Tel: 609-427-4044 The Environmental Microbiology Specialists Fax: 609-427-0232 1950 Old Cuthbert Road Unit L, Cherry Hill, New Jersey 08034 (� Client: Hunter, Inc., 10 Lewis Street, P. O. Box 284, Lincoln, MA 01773. ■� Date sampled: February 13, 1996. Date of inoculation: February 13, 1996 (Andersen); February 14, 1996 (Bulk). Proj. No.: 96.415.02. Samples submitted by: Joel Azpuru. Date characterization completed: February 20, 1996. Sampling method: Andersen sampler. Media used: malt extract agar (MEA) & tryptic soy agar (TSA). P&K Report No.: Hunter -24. Andersen samples: Sample #021396-M1, MEA; Air vol. 141.5 L: 1. Aspergillus versicolor (2*) *Colony counts CFU/m3 (fungi) = 14 Sample #021396-B1, TSA; Air vol. 141.5 L: 1. bacteria (27) Identification: Bacillus (1) Micrococcus (4) Rhodococcus (1) Staphylococcus (5) gram negative bacteria and others (16) CFU/m3 (bacteria) =191 Sample #021396-M2, MEA; Air vol. 141.5 L: 1. Aspergillus versicolor (1) 2. Cladosporium (1) 3. Penicillium (1) 4. sterile fungi (1) CFU/m3 (fungi) = 28 1 page 2 Hunter -23 Sample #021396-B2, TSA; Air vol. 141.5 L: 1. bacteria (13) Identification: Bacillus (1) Micrococcus (1) Staphylococcus (1) gram negative bacteria and others (10) CFU/m3 (bacteria) = 92 Sample #021396-M3, MEA; Air vol. 141.5 L: 1. Aspergillus versicolor (2) 2. Penicillium (2) CFU/m3 (fungi) = 28 Sample #021396-B3, TSA; Air vol. 141.5 L: 1. bacteria (12) Identification: Bacillus (1) Actinomyces (3) gram negative bacteria and others (8) CFU/m3 (bacteria) = 85 Sample#021396-M4, MEA; Air vol. 141.5 L: 1. Cladosporium (1) 2. Penicillium (3) 3. Stachybotiys chartarum (1) CFU/m3 (fungi) = 35 Sample #021396-B4, TSA; Air vol. 141.5 L: 1. bacteria (3) CFU/m3 (bacteria) = 21 Sample #021396-M5, MEA; Air vol. 141.5 L: 1. Alternaria (1) 2. Aureobasidium (4) 3. Cladosporium (2) 4. Exophiala (2) 5. Penicillium (1) 6. Phoma (2) 6. Rhodotorula (1) 7. yeasts (6) 8. sterile fungi (1) CFU/m3 (fungi) = 141 J BO -ARD OF HEALTH 120 MAIN STREET TEL. 682-6483 NORTH ANDOVER, MASS. 01845 Ext23 MEMORANDUM DATE: February 2, 1995 TO: George Perna FROM: Sandy Sta�'�. RE: Air Quality in the Stone Building I spoke at lerigth today to DPH representative, Peter Gagnon concerning the indoor air quality and possible contaminants in the stone building. I stated that I believed there were biological contaminants present in the building. (These include bacteria, mold, mildew, fungi, viruses, dust mites and pollen.) He stated that filtering alone cannot alleviate the problem. His suggestions were as follows: i) Disinfect and clean the basement and all areas that may be reservoirs for contaminants. Possible areas would be any area that had received any water damage, especially around -- --' air intakes, dehumidifiers and cooling coils...Ca.rpets which have been wet for -any prolonged period are also suspect. 2) Have the HVAC: system evaluated by a contractor and make sure that the system is adjusted and balanced. (The latter and apparently very important.) There should always be fresh air being circulated through the system. Fresh air exchange is the key to keeping biologicals down and the air quality up. Make sure the HVAC system is cleaned and disinfected, preferably before the building is occupied to minimize occupant exposure. 3) Do mold and/or additional air quality testing. DPH and/or DLI may be able to help with this. 4) If in the opinion of the HVAC contractor filters would help with the problem, the filters should be sized for the smallest micron particles. He could not really comment on the efficacy of individual air purifiers; said they might work but he has no assurance that they do. I told him we were planning on cleaning the HVAC system and that I had receommended disinfecting with chlorine. He said that was the direction to go and recommended that I call DLI, Division of Occupational Hygiene since we are employees and this is a work environment. He also said that DPH would probably be willing to come out when we were in the building and do some testing for CO2 and possibly other contaminants. So, there we are. My symptoms of Tuesday after about 10 to 15 minutes in the building of headache, dizziness, watering eyes, coughing, nausea and mental confusion lasted for about four hours. I took an anti -histamine at 5:00, as soon as I got home and by about 7:00 P.M. was able to function. My headache was mostly gone, nausea - completely, coughing was greatly lessened and the mental confusion was down to normal levels. I sincerely hope that we can make this building safe for occupancy. Town of North Andover OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES 146 Main Street North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 M E M O R A N D U M DATE: January 26, 1996 TO: Anne Marie Tucciarone, Personnel Mgr. A. FROM: Sandra Starr, Health Admin' or RE: Cleaning of Basement Level I have received and read the enclosed memo from the Building Inspector concerning the organization and removal of the loose records, etc. in the basement of the Town Hall Annex. I have some serious concerns about these directions. 1- First of all, over 500 of the workforce on this floor alone have already been negatively impacted by the poor indoor air quality; a number have been actively sick because of it. According to the Hunter environmental report, the bottom floor of the building has a worse air quality problem than the two top floors. It would be foolhardy and dangerous to allow, never mind direct, already at -risk personnel to "clean" this area and handle "contaminated" material. 2-. The Hunter report states that the repacking of the file. storage bare: and the cleaning of this area with a HEPA filt eercci� - vacuum "should be conducted under controlled conditions by a professional organization specializing in this work, so that potentially harmful microorganisms which may be present in the biomass are not allowed to infiltrate the rest of the building, or infest the outdoors." (See page 7.) It should not be necessary to point out that if the rest of the building is unduly contaminated, then any monies spent to solve the problem downstairs will be wasted. I would hope that the Hunter recommendation is sufficient alone to prevent any untrained personnel from handling the materials in the basement and thereby running the risk of further building contamination. BOARD OF AFFEAL-S 688-9541 BUTMDGtiG 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 Town of Forth Andover t NORTH OFFICE OF 3� 0 •` �° COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND SERVICES a 146 Main Street KENNETH R. MAHONY North Andover; Massachusetts 01845 9SSACNUSEt Director (508) 688-9533 BOARD 01: EN2'gs � MEMORANDUM TO: Kathleen Bradley Colwell, Town Planner Sandra Starr, Health Administrator ./ Michael Howard, Natural Resource/Land Planner Julie Parrino, Board'of Appeals Secretary FROM: 63bert Nicetta, Building Commissioner DATE: January 23, 1996 RE: Records - Basement Level - Town Hall Annex The air quality improvement contractor anticipates receiving the necessary equipment so that work may begin on January 29th. I have had conversation with the Town Manager, Kevin Mahoney, concerning the removal of the books, records and drawings strewn about the floor of the lower level. The Hunter, Inc. "Environmental -Report"= requires ---that these be disposed of as they may be contaminated. it _is-?'er^jested that', each Department separate and designate what is to be saved or disposed. Prior to the work being performed and completed no later than January 30th, an attempt will be made to find storage space for what is to be saved at either the Safe and Sound Facility on Rte 114 or the basement of the Fire Station. Your cooperation is appreciated. drn/gb c/Kevin Mahoney, Interim Town Mgr. BOARD OF :APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDCIG 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 Julie Parrino D. Robert Ni etra �iichatl Howard Sandra Starr Kathl= Bradley ColweU January 2,1996 D. Robert Nicetta, Building Commissioner Town of North Andover 146 Main Street North Andover, Ma. 01845 Dear Mr. Nicetta, Concerning your recent letter for Repair and Maintenance Permits for electrical work, Ftp Software Inc does not do any of this work in house. The company hires independant Electrical contractors to perform repair or maintenance work and requires the contractor to obtain any and all permits required for the repair or maintenance work. Ftp Software Inc is responsible for ensuring that the Electrical contractor does obtain the required permits. Please if you have any further questions feel free to contact me at (508)684-6404. Sincerely, Thomas Lane Facility Manager JM 4 a December 26, 1995 D. Robert Nicetta, Building Commissioner Town of North Andover, Ma. 146 Main Street North Andover, Ma. 01845 Dear Mr. Nicetta, Concerning your recent letters for Repair and Maintenance Permits for plumbing, gas and electrical work, Ftp Software Inc does not do any of this work in house. The Company hires contractors to perform all this work and requires the contractors to obtain any and all permits required for the work they perform. The office of James Diozi informed me that one letter stating our policy would be sufficient to cover all three Repair and Maintenance Permit notices I received. If there is anything else I must do please contact me at 508-684-6404. DEC 2 8 Sincerely, Thomas Lane, Facility Manager GREATER LAWRENCE SANITARY DISTRICT (b RICHARD S. HOGAN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR LAWRENCE ANDOVER CLEMENTE ABASCAL ROBERT E. McQUADE LEONARD DEGNAN JAMES SHANNON NORTH ANDOVER GOODLOESUTTLER METHUEN MICHAEL J. COSTA SALEM, N.H. CHARLES F. THOMPSON December 29, 1.9 9 5 EVERETT McBRIDE Mr. James Decola Electrical Inspector Community Deveiopment & Services Town of North Andover 146 Main Street North Andover., MA 01845 Dear Mr. DeCola: The purpose of this letter is to follow-up on our phone conversation regarding the Repair and Maintenance Permit. We will be unable to pay the $250.00 fee until our Board of Commissioners meets and approves the monthly warrant. We hope to have our next meeting the week of January 15, 1996. Sincerely, GREATER LAWRENCE SANITARY DISTRICT "& ," /'0/ieAt ', -- Barbara Whidden Finance Director BW: alr JAN -- 2 240 CHARLES STREET - NORTH ANDOVER, MASS. 01845-1649 - TEL. 508-685-1612 FAX: 508-685-7790 C m ql3 6-0 8 - 2,5-0 _ ?//// z9� /� KENNETH R MAHONY Director 05cC-) 146 Main Street North Andover, Massachusetts 01845 (508) 688-9533 PROCESSED DEC 2 9 1995 Batch #.....--.gy On September 18, 1995 the North_dover Board of Selectmen adopted a new Electrical Fee Sc edule. A scecial Fee/Permit known as a Reaair and Maintenance __=nit was established, reading as follows: REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE PERMIT for condominium(s), townhouse(s), commercial, industrial and educational, up to two (2) electricians (must have licensed electrician on staff) $250.00 per quarter Per pair over two electricians $ 75.00 per quarter A Log must be kept fo= inspection when permit is renewed each quarter, or as requested by the Electrical Inspector. Please fill out the enclosed Electrical Permit application and return it with a $250.00 check for the first quarter of 1996 (January 1 through March 31) by De__n-' 15, 1995. Sia. K--k.LA- If your company hires Electrical contractors on an hourly or contractual basis, t=;e Electrical contractor must obtain the necessary repair and maintenance oe=it(s) or individual permits) for any electrical work being performed. Please direct any questions to James DeCola, Electrical Inspector, at 508-688-9545. Yours truly, D. Robert Nicetta, Building Commissioner BOARD OF APPEALS 688-9541 BUILDING 688-9545 CONSERVATION 688-9530 HEALTH 688-9540 PLANNING 688-9535 Julie Parrino D. Robed Nioetta Michael Howard Sandra Starr Kathleen Bradley Colwell 13 41 MC Q W V CO2 co LDz z ® °J .n. QW Y J z a U A o co Z 94 O LL INC r Q f f Q '„per � J In CID A .S3do �4 o a) 0 �c 4-) a) Q) s4 4-) $ 0 �4 4.) 0m0 z w •4 Ord LID �4 0v 0 H -4 z 13 41 MC Q W V CO2 co LDz z ® °J .n. QW Y J z a U A o co Z 94 O LL INC