AGENDA REQUEST. November 7, 2016

Transcription

1 AGENDA HEADING: Unfinished Business AGENDA REQUEST COMMISSION MEETING DATE: November 7, 2016 AGENDA ITEM NO: BY City Auditor and Clerk Pamela M. Nadalini Tonya Erbland, CIAQP, Senior Environmental Scientist, Ardaman & Associates, Inc. VI.1. Originating Department SUBJECT: Department Head Presenter Approval Re: Limited Indoor Environmental Quality Report pertaining to the Central Records Facility COMMISSION PRIORITIES: Quality of Life EXPLANATION: This item has been placed on the Agenda at the request of Vice Mayor Freeland Eddie. At the request of the City Auditor and Clerk, an environmental assessment was conducted of the Central Records facility. The report has been received from Ardaman & Associates and is attached. ADMINISTRATION'S RECOMMENDATION: At the discretion of the City Commission. Recommended motion: To follow through with the recommendations of Ardaman & Associates and conduct a follow-up test once the remediations have been completed. APPROVAL SUMMARY: Approval Required Date Completed Completed By Status City Auditor and Clerk Approval Y 11/02/2016 Pamela Nadalini APPROVED

2 ADDITIONAL EXPLANATION: AGENDA REQUEST ADDITIONAL ADMIN RECOMMENDATION: FUNDING SOURCE: AMOUNT: HOUSING IMPACT (Per House): NEW CONSTRUCTION: REHABILITATION: $ 0 $ 0 SUPPORT DEPARTMENTS: - COMMISSION ACTION: Final Action Motion: Motion By: AGENDA DISPOSITION Second By: Vote: 2

3 Interoffice Memorandum October 11, 2016 To: From: Subject: Thomas Barwin, City Manager Pamela M. Nadalini, MijA, CMC ~. / City Auditor and Clerk. ~ Environmental Assessment This is to advise that I have a very serious and current concern about the air quality and office environment at the Central Records facility due to a situation in which an employee became very ill and had to be hospitalized while working with records which had been stored at Central Records. In November 2014, I had concerns about the air quality and office environment due to significant water intrusion from both the roof and the ground level into the Central Records facility which resulted in moldy ceiling tiles in several locations. The employees at the facility were temporarily relocated from Central Records to the Office of the City Auditor and Clerk for a period of almost two months while tests were conducted and repairs made so I could be assured the issue had been resolved. Therefore, I am requesting that an environmental assessment again be conducted on the Central Records facility to determine if any issues should be of concern to the health, safety and welfare of the two employees who are based at the Central Records facility as well as any other employees who may have been handling the records. In 2014, the assessment was limited to the office area of the facility. I would also like to have the warehouse area evaluated at this time as a concern relates to the very real possibility of contaminants in the records which are boxed and stored in the facility. I very much appreciate your immediate attention to this important matter. Please feel free to contact me if I may be of any assistance. c: City Commission Robert Fournier, City Attorney Marlon Brown, Deputy City Manager John Lege, Assistant City Manager Stacie Mason, Director of Human Resources Nick Dazio, City Records Manager Judy Dub~euil, Manager Risk Management File Office of tr11\l City Auditor and Clerk Street, ['i!oom Sarasota, Florida Office Number: (941) Fax Number: (941) Page 1 of 24

4 Interoffice Memorandum To: Pamela Nadalini, City Auditor and Clerk From: Stacie Mason, HR Director ~ Subject: Environmental Assessment Response Date: 10/12/2016 RECEaVED ~OCT \ Cferk In response to your concerns about any environmental issue at the Central Records building noted in your October 11, 2016 memo, Risk Management along with the Facilities department will coordinate with a certified vendor to assess this location. I would request that you isolate the box of records that you referred to in your memo so that this can also be evaluated by the certified vendor. On October 09, 2014, an assessment had been performed for this building by Certified Mold Assessments (CMA) in which a detailed thirty-one-page report was provided to the City. This report did not indicate any risk to the health and safety of our employees. The wellbeing and safety is the utmost concern to me and all of City Management. We would not condone nor support an unsafe environment. Preventing employee injuries and illnesses is one of our main priorities and concerns. Our Risk Manager is in constant contact with our Worker's Compensation Third Party Administrator and did note that a report of an incident which occurred on October 5, 2016, but was not filed until October 10, 2016, was received in which an employee at the City Hall Pension office had some incident while at City Hall that may have exacerbated an already existing condition. The City's Worker's Compensation Third Party Administrator will be following up on any and all specifics of the incident. We will expedite this request with a certified vendor for a detailed assessment that encompasses your requested scope of work. We will be in communication with your office regarding the scheduling of this assessment. Please ask your office to provide the budgeted charge code so we may process the invoice upon completion of the scope of work and receipt of the detailed report findings. Cc: City Commissioners Thomas Barwin, City Manager Robert Fournier, City Attorney Marlon Brown, Deputy City Manager John Lege, Assistant City Manager Nick Dazio, City Records Manager Judy Dubreuil, Risk Manager 032.C055.I 096 Page 2 of 24

5 33 Limited Indoor Environmental Quality Report Central Records Building D th Street Sarasota, Florida Client: City of Sarasota 111 South Orange Avenue, Suite 207 Sarasota, Florida Prepared By: Ardaman & Associates, Inc Coconut Palm Drive, Suite 115 Tampa, Florida (813) Ardaman File No October 26, 2016 Page 3 of 24

6 October 26, 2016 File Number City of Sarasota 111 South Orange Avenue, Suite 207 Sarasota, Florida Attention: Ms. Judy Dubreuil Subject: Limited Indoor Environmental Quality Report Central Records Building D th Street Sarasota, Florida Dear Ms. Dubreuil: Ardaman & Associates, Inc. (Ardaman) is pleased to submit this Limited Indoor Environmental Quality Report for the subject property. Ardaman personnel visited the site on October 13, 2016 to conduct limited microbial observations and limited moisture measurements of the Central Records facility at the above-referenced address. This report includes a summary of our site observations and our recommendations. PROJECT INFORMATION The subject project consists of the Central Records facility, located at th Street, Building D in Sarasota, Florida. The subject structure is a two-story, pre-engineered metal building. Interior wall finishes include gypsum wallboard in the office areas. In the Records Storage area, the vinyl-wrapped fiberglass insulation of the exterior walls is exposed. We understand that water intrusion and microbial growth was discovered in the building approximately two years ago, and that remediation activities to address these issues were completed. It is also our understanding that a City employee recently reported respiratory symptoms after opening boxes which had been stored in the Central Records Building. It was requested that Ardaman address any potential microbial growth and evaluate the indoor (environmental) air quality of the building. SITE OBSERVATIONS Ardaman personnel met with City of Sarasota personnel on October 13, 2016 to perform site observations for any visible microbial growth and/or moisture concerns. The three boxes of concern had been returned to the record storage area and were placed on a cart. We were directed to the original storage location of the boxes in the record storage area. No obvious indications of water intrusion or potential microbial growth were noted in this area Coconut Palm Drive, Suite 115, Tampa, Florida Phone (813) FAX (813) Florida: Bartow, Cocoa, Fort Myers, Miami, Orlando, Port St. Lucie, Sarasota, Tallahassee, Tampa, West Palm Beach Louisiana: Alexandria, Baton Rouge, Monroe, New Orleans, Shreveport Page 4 of 24

7 Central Records, Sarasota, Florida October 26, 2016 Limited Indoor Environmental Quality Report File Number Page 3 Two heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems were noted in the building: one for the records storage, and one for the offices area. What appeared to be microbial growth was noted on the supply vents in the records storage area of the building. The fire sprinkler system was leaking onto the concrete floor in the southeast area of the records storage area. We observed a hole in the exterior metal wall panel in this area. The metal was rusted and allowed the infiltration of water and warm moist air into the interior of the building. We were informed that the leak and the hole in the wall will be fixed prior to the submission of this report. Some minor tears were noted in the insulation on the walls in the records storage area. These tears should also be repaired. We understand that a separate water intrusion event occurred approximately two years ago in the manager s office and that the source of the water intrusion was subsequently repaired. No obvious signs of water intrusion were noted in the office area at the time of our site visit. Moisture Measurements Moisture measurements of building materials were recorded in several areas using a Delmhorst moisture meter (Drywall Scale: Green 0-0.5% Dry, Yellow % Slightly Elevated, and Red >1% Elevated). An evaluation of the moisture contents in the building materials assists in identifying the extent of moisture intrusion and/or water damage. No elevated moisture readings were detected in the gypsum wallboard at the time of our site visit. The moisture levels that were recorded in the building are summarized in the following table. Table 1: Moisture Measurements Location Percent Moisture Wall in Records Storage 0.3, 0.4, 0.4, 0.4, 0.4, 0.5, 0.5, 0.5 Wall in Office 0.4, 0.4 Wall in Manager s Office 0.2, 0.3 Relative Humidity and Temperature Relative humidity and temperature measurements were recorded in the building using a Fluke 971 Temperature Humidity meter. Relative humidity and temperature readings were measured to determine whether the interior environment was conducive for microbial growth. The relative humidity guidelines proposed by the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) are between 30 to 60 percent. The temperature guidelines proposed by ASHRAE range from 68 to 74.5 F for winter and 73 to 79 F for summer. The following table presents the temperature and humidity data: Page 5 of 24

8 Central Records, Sarasota, Florida October 26, 2016 Limited Indoor Environmental Quality Report File Number Page 4 Table 2: Relative Humidity / Temperature Readings Location Relative Humidity (%) Temperature ( F) Records Storage (South) Records Storage (North) Records Storage (Central) Office (West) Office (East) Office (Central) Office (Manager s) Outside At the time of our site visit, the relative humidity values in the Records Storage area were outside of the limits recommended by ASHRAE. Since elevated humidity values were noted in the Records area, additional observations were made regarding the building s HVAC system. A fresh air supply was connected to the air handling unit in the ceiling of the storage and the location of the air handling unit was adjacent to the roll-up door in the warehouse. As is typical, the roll-up door was not air-tight and would allow for additional warm moist air to infiltrate the interior area. The standard door adjacent to the roll-up door had a loose mail slot which would also allow for warm moist air to enter the building. During our site visit, warm, moist air was noted to be entering the Records area at these locations. Microbial Sampling Five microbial air and four surface samples were collected to identify any potential microbial concerns. An outdoor air sample was collected for comparison to the interior samples. The air samples were collected via spore trap method. All microbiological samples were submitted to EMLab P&K in Marlton, New Jersey for laboratory analysis. The following table summarizes the sample type, location, and results of the samples collected. Please see the attachments for complete microbial results and sample locations. Sample No. CR-1 CR-2 Table 3: Air Samples Location Type Fungal Type Record Storage (North) Records Storage (South) Fungal Structure Air Cladosporium 4 Air 1: Cladosporium 2: Basidiospores CR-3 Office (east) Air Basidiospores 8 1: 4 2: 4 Fungal Structures/m 3 53 All Species Total: 80 1: 53 2: 53 All Species Total: All Species Total: 210 Page 6 of 24

9 Central Records, Sarasota, Florida October 26, 2016 Limited Indoor Environmental Quality Report File Number Page 5 Sample No. Table 3: Air Samples Location Type Fungal Type CR-4 Office (West) Air CR-8 Outside Control Air 1: Cladosporium 2: Basidiospores 1: Cladosporium 2: Basidiospores 3: Penicillium/Aspergillus 4: Ascospores Fungal Structure 1: 4 2: 4 1: 12 2: 60 3: 24 4: 16 No regulatory limits currently exist for the fungal structures concentrations presented in Tables 3 and 4. Fungal Structures/m 3 1: 53 2: 53 All Species Total: 7,300 1: 160 2: 800 3: 320 4: 210 All Species Total: 1,900 The inside air samples identified the same species that were detected in the outside control sample. The visual observations and sample results in the building at the time of the site visit are not indicative of a microbial concern in the building and appear to represent the influx of outdoor air into the interior of the building. Table 4: Surface Samples Sample Location Type Fungal Type* General Lab Impression No. Shelf <1+ Cladosporium CR-5 Tape Minimal Mold Growth (by original box storage area) <1+ Penicillium/Aspergillus CR-6 Original Box (with Files) Swab None No Mold Spores Detected CR-7 Original Box (empty) Swab None No Mold Spores Detected CR-9 A/C Supply Vent Swab 4+ Cladosporium Mold Growth * The fungal type is graded on a scale of <1+ to 4+ by the laboratory with 4+ denoting the highest numbers. No regulatory limits currently exist for the fungal structures concentrations presented in Tables 3 and 4. Two of the surface samples that were collected identified Cladosporium and/or Penicillium/Aspergillus in the samples and indicated mold growth. No mold growth was detected in the storage boxes of concern. The results did not identify Stachybotrys in the samples. Stachybotrys is what is sometimes referred to as black toxic mold in the public sector. Most molds will colonize in just one or two days and can grow in an environment with elevated humidity and/or a water source. Mold also requires a food source, such as cellulose in building materials. Stachybotrys was not detected in any of the samples collected, however, Cladosporium was identified on the supply vents in the records area. The HVAC system in this area will need to undergo remediation activities. OPINIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is our opinion that the visual observations and air sample results are not indicative of an air quality microbial concern. However, microbial growth was detected on the supply vents in the records storage area. Due to complaints from City employees in regards to the three boxes of concern, we recommend that a Page 7 of 24

10 Central Records, Sarasota, Florida October 26, 2016 Limited Indoor Environmental Quality Report File Number Page 6 contractor properly trained in mold abatement conduct the isolated remediation in the records storage area. The remedial activities should be performed in accordance with industry standards and the protocol included in this report. It is recommended that the HVAC system be evaluated and modified to efficiently address the records storage area of the building. A review of the HVAC return/supply vent locations and the fresh air intake should also be included in this evaluation. It is also recommended that the roll-up door and weather stripping be evaluated and repaired to minimize the outside weather elements from entering the building. Remedial/Restoration Activities The following restoration activities are recommended after an evaluation is completed and associated modifications to the HVAC system are made. The weather stripping around the doors in the Record storage area will also need to be repaired: 1. The contractor(s) should implement professional judgment regarding personal protection for restoration employees as per their company guidelines. Personal protection equipment should be maintained until all microbial contaminated materials are removed and the restoration area has been cleaned. Tracking of debris and microbial contaminants inside should be minimized by the placement of a temporary floor covering in traffic areas, i.e. plastic sheeting or paper. 2. Use a HEPA blower(s) in the containment area to create a negative work area environment to minimize any potential cross-contamination from the renovation activities to the office area. 3. HEPA-vacuum the restoration area, especially all horizontal surfaces, to remove all debris and dust from the removal of building materials. This includes the shelving and sides/tops of boxes throughout the restoration area. This can be done in place without moving the boxes to another storage location. 4. Damp-wipe the non-porous surfaces in the restoration areas with a mild detergent solution. 5. The HVAC system supply and return vents in the records storage area should be HEPA-vacuumed, then damp-wiped with, at a minimum, a mild detergent solution. The supply vents in the office area should also be damp-wiped at this time. 6. The HVAC system and associated ductwork should be cleaned by a contractor specializing in duct cleaning and air handling unit cleaning. 7. Install new filters and operate the HEPA blowers as air scrubbers inside the restoration area for at least 24 to 48 hours prior to post-remediation verification sampling. In the restoration areas only, an electric fan can be used to suspend any residual particulates into the air. The blowers should be turned off approximately 12 to 24 hours prior to post-remediation verification sampling. 8. Contact our office to conduct post remediation verification sampling to confirm that the restoration activities were completed. Page 8 of 24

11 Central Records, Sarasota, Florida October 26, 2016 Limited Indoor Environmental Quality Report File Number Page 7 Once post-remediation verification determines the restoration activities have been completed and no additional restoration tasks are deemed necessary, periodic monitoring of the Records Storage area should be conducted by City personnel. This monitoring will include visual observations for excessive dust accumulation on the supply vents, shelves, and boxes, along with observing the walls for any holes or gaps where moist/warm air could enter the building. Observations should also include verification that the fire suppression system is not leaking. CLOSURE This report was prepared based upon our judgment, related work experience, and industry standards. Should any additional data become available, please provide the information for our review so that we can assess the new data s influence on the project. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. Should you have any questions in regards to this report, or if we can be of any further assistance, please contact this office. Very truly yours, ARDAMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Florida Certificate of Authorization No Tonya Erbland, CIAQP Senior Environmental Scientist Philip P. Schlossnagle, P.E. Senior Project Engineer Florida License No G:\Projects\2016\ Central Records\01-Limited IEQ Report.docx Distribution: Attachments: 2 - Addressee 1 - File Figure 1 Sample Location Plan Photographs (8) Microbial Results Page 9 of 24

12 FIGURE Page 10 of 24

13 Geotechnical, Environmental and Materials Consultants Page 11 of 24

14 PHOTOGRAPHS Page 12 of 24

15 Central Records, Sarasota, Florida October 26, 2016 Limited Indoor Environmental Quality Report File Number Photograph 1: View of Office Area Photograph 2: View of Record Storage Areanote the proximity of the return air to the roll-up door. Page 13 of 24

16 Central Records, Sarasota, Florida October 26, 2016 Limited Indoor Environmental Quality Report File Number Photograph 3: View of original storage area of three boxes of concern Photograph 4: View of current storage area of three boxes of concern Page 14 of 24

17 Central Records, Sarasota, Florida October 26, 2016 Limited Indoor Environmental Quality Report File Number Photograph 5: View of fire suppression system leak and corner where hole in exterior wall panel was observed. Photograph 6: View of microbial growth on supply vent in Records Storage Page 15 of 24

18 Central Records, Sarasota, Florida October 26, 2016 Limited Indoor Environmental Quality Report File Number Photograph 7: View of tear in wall insulation Photograph 8: View of mail slot in standard door near roll-up door Page 16 of 24

19 MICROBIAL RESULTS Page 17 of 24

20 Report for: Ms. Tonya Erbland Ardaman & Associates 3925 Coconut Palm Dr. Suite 115 Tampa, FL Regarding: Project: Central Records; Building D EML ID: Approved by: Dates of Analysis: Spore trap analysis: Technical Manager Ariunaa Jalsrai Service SOPs: Spore trap analysis (EM-MY-S-1038) AIHA-LAP, LLC accredited service, Lab ID # All samples were received in acceptable condition unless noted in the Report Comments portion in the body of the report. Due to the nature of the analyses performed, field blank correction of results is not applied. The results relate only to the items tested. EMLab P&K ("the Company") shall have no liability to the client or the client's customer with respect to decisions or recommendations made, actions taken or courses of conduct implemented by either the client or the client's customer as a result of or based upon the Test Results. In no event shall the Company be liable to the client with respect to the Test Results except for the Company's own willful misconduct or gross negligence nor shall the Company be liable for incidental or consequential damages or lost profits or revenues to the fullest extent such liability may be disclaimed by law, even if the Company has been advised of the possibility of such damages, lost profits or lost revenues. In no event shall the Company's liability with respect to the Test Results exceed the amount paid to the Company by the client therefor. EMLab P&K's LabServe reporting system includes automated fail-safes to ensure that all AIHA-LAP, LLC quality requirements are met and notifications are added to reports when any quality steps remain pending. EMLab P&K, LLC EMLab ID: , Page 1 of 3 Page 18 of 24

21 Client: Ardaman & Associates C/O: Ms. Tonya Erbland Re: Central Records; Building D SPORE TRAP REPORT: NON-VIABLE METHODOLOGY Lab ID-Version Location Air vol. (L) Background Debris Counts of Fungal Structures EMLab P&K 3000 Lincoln Drive East, Suite A, Marlton, NJ (866) Fax (856) Date of Submittal: Date of Receipt: Date of Report: Fungal Structures/m3 Presumptive Fungal ID (raw counts*) Percentage /17/ Cercospora (1) 17 CR Cladosporium (1) 67 Records (N) 1 13 Curvularia (1) 17 Total: Hyphal fragments (3) N/A 1 13 Pollen (1) N/A Comments: /17/ Basidiospores (1) 33 CR Cercospora (1) 8 Records (S) 4 53 Cladosporium (1) Curvularia (3) 25 Total: 160 Comments: /17/ Ascospores (1) 25 CR Basidiospores (2) 50 Office (E) 4 53 Cladosporium (1) 25 Total: 210 Comments: /17/ Basidiospores (1) 50 CR Cladosporium (1) 50 Office (W) Total: 110 Comments: Background debris indicates the amount of non-biological particulate matter present on the trace (dust in the air) and the resulting visibility for the analyst. It is rated from 1+ (low) to 4+ (high). Counts from areas with 4+ background debris should be regarded as minimal counts and may be higher than reported. It is important to account for samples volumes when evaluating dust levels. The analytical sensitivity is the spores/m^3 divided by the raw count, expressed in spores/m^3. The limit of detection is the analytical sensitivity (in spores/m^3) multiplied by the sample volume (in liters) divided by 1000 liters. *All AIHA accredited laboratories are required to provide raw counts of fungal structures in spore trap reports. These counts are defined by AIHA as "Actual count without extrapolation or calculation". The number in parentheses next to the fungal type represents the exact number (or raw count) of fungal structures observed. A "Version" indicated by -"x" after the Lab ID# with a value greater than 1 indicates a sample with amended data. The revision number is reflected by the value of "x". Total has been rounded to two significant figures to reflect analytical precision. EMLab P&K, LLC EMLab ID: , Page 2 of 3 Page 19 of 24

22 Client: Ardaman & Associates C/O: Ms. Tonya Erbland Re: Central Records; Building D SPORE TRAP REPORT: NON-VIABLE METHODOLOGY Lab ID-Version Location Air vol. (L) Background Debris Counts of Fungal Structures EMLab P&K 3000 Lincoln Drive East, Suite A, Marlton, NJ (866) Fax (856) Date of Submittal: Date of Receipt: Date of Report: Fungal Structures/m3 Presumptive Fungal ID (raw counts*) Percentage /17/ Ascospores (4) 12 CR Aureobasidium (1) 3 Outside Basidiospores (15) Cercospora (3) Cladosporium (3) Curvularia (2) Epicoccum (2) Ganoderma (2) Nigrospora (3) Penicillium/Aspergillus types (6) Smuts, Periconia, Myxomycetes (5) 4 Total: 1, Hyphal fragments (6) N/A 6 80 Pollen (6) N/A Comments: Background debris indicates the amount of non-biological particulate matter present on the trace (dust in the air) and the resulting visibility for the analyst. It is rated from 1+ (low) to 4+ (high). Counts from areas with 4+ background debris should be regarded as minimal counts and may be higher than reported. It is important to account for samples volumes when evaluating dust levels. The analytical sensitivity is the spores/m^3 divided by the raw count, expressed in spores/m^3. The limit of detection is the analytical sensitivity (in spores/m^3) multiplied by the sample volume (in liters) divided by 1000 liters. *All AIHA accredited laboratories are required to provide raw counts of fungal structures in spore trap reports. These counts are defined by AIHA as "Actual count without extrapolation or calculation". The number in parentheses next to the fungal type represents the exact number (or raw count) of fungal structures observed. A "Version" indicated by -"x" after the Lab ID# with a value greater than 1 indicates a sample with amended data. The revision number is reflected by the value of "x". Total has been rounded to two significant figures to reflect analytical precision. EMLab P&K, LLC EMLab ID: , Page 3 of 3 Page 20 of 24

23 Report for: Ms. Tonya Erbland Ardaman & Associates 3925 Coconut Palm Dr. Suite 115 Tampa, FL Regarding: Project: Central Records; Building D EML ID: Approved by: Dates of Analysis: Direct microscopic exam (Qualitative): Technical Manager Ariunaa Jalsrai Service SOPs: Direct microscopic exam (Qualitative) (EM-MY-S-1039) AIHA-LAP, LLC accredited service, Lab ID # All samples were received in acceptable condition unless noted in the Report Comments portion in the body of the report. Due to the nature of the analyses performed, field blank correction of results is not applied. The results relate only to the items tested. EMLab P&K ("the Company") shall have no liability to the client or the client's customer with respect to decisions or recommendations made, actions taken or courses of conduct implemented by either the client or the client's customer as a result of or based upon the Test Results. In no event shall the Company be liable to the client with respect to the Test Results except for the Company's own willful misconduct or gross negligence nor shall the Company be liable for incidental or consequential damages or lost profits or revenues to the fullest extent such liability may be disclaimed by law, even if the Company has been advised of the possibility of such damages, lost profits or lost revenues. In no event shall the Company's liability with respect to the Test Results exceed the amount paid to the Company by the client therefor. EMLab P&K's LabServe reporting system includes automated fail-safes to ensure that all AIHA-LAP, LLC quality requirements are met and notifications are added to reports when any quality steps remain pending. EMLab P&K, LLC EMLab ID: , Page 1 of 2 Page 21 of 24

24 Client: Ardaman & Associates C/O: Ms. Tonya Erbland Re: Central Records; Building D DIRECT MICROSCOPIC EXAMINATION REPORT Background Debris and/or Description Miscellaneous Spores Present* EMLab P&K 3000 Lincoln Drive East, Suite A, Marlton, NJ (866) Fax (856) Date of Submittal: Date of Receipt: Date of Report: MOLD GROWTH: Molds seen with underlying mycelial and/or sporulating structures Other Comments Lab ID-Version : , Analysis Date: 10/17/2016: Swab sample CR-6: Original Box-Files General Impression Moderate None None None No mold spores detected Lab ID-Version: , Analysis Date: 10/17/2016: Swab sample CR-7: Original Box-Empty Moderate None None None No mold spores detected Lab ID-Version: , Analysis Date: 10/17/2016: Swab sample CR-9: A/C Supply Moderate Very few 4+ Cladosporium species (spores, hyphae, conidiophores) Lab ID-Version: , Analysis Date: 10/17/2016: Tape sample CR-5: Shelf Moderate Very few < 1+ Cladosporium species (spores, hyphae, conidiophores) < 1+ Penicillium/Aspergillus group (spores, hyphae) None None Mold growth Minimal mold growth * Indicative of normal conditions, i.e. seen on surfaces everywhere. Includes basidiospores (mushroom spores), myxomycetes, plant pathogens such as ascospores, rusts and smuts, and a mix of saprophytic genera with no particular spore type predominating. Distribution of spore types seen mirrors that usually seen outdoors. Quantities of molds seen growing are listed in the MOLD GROWTH column and are graded <1+ to 4+, with 4+ denoting the highest numbers. Some comments may refer to the following: Most surfaces collect a mix of spores which are normally present in the outdoor environment. At times it is possible to note a skewing of the distribution of spore types, and also to note "marker" genera which may indicate indoor mold growth. Marker genera are those spore types which are present normally in very small numbers, but which multiply indoors when conditions are favorable for growth. A "Version" indicated by -"x" after the Lab ID# with a value greater than 1 indicates a sample with amended data. The revision number is reflected by the value of "x". The limit of detection is < 1+ when mold growth is detected. EMLab P&K, LLC EMLab ID: , Page 2 of 2 Page 22 of 24

25 Client: Ardaman & Associates C/O: Ms. Tonya Erbland Re: Central Records; Building D MoldRANGE : Extended Outdoor Comparison Outdoor Location: CR-8, Outside EMLab P&K 3000 Lincoln Drive East, Suite A, Marlton, NJ (866) Fax (856) Date of Submittal: Date of Receipt: Date of Report: Fungi Identified Outdoor Typical Outdoor Data for: Typical Outdoor Data for: data October in Florida (n =5362) The entire year in Florida (n =54699) spores/m3 very low low med high very high freq % very low low med high very high freq % Generally able to grow indoors* Alternaria Aureobasidium < < 1 Bipolaris/Drechslera group Chaetomium Cladosporium , ,100 2, Curvularia Epicoccum Ganoderma < < 1 Nigrospora Penicillium/Aspergillus types , Stachybotrys Torula Seldom found growing indoors** Ascospores , , Basidiospores ,400 4, ,500 3, Cercospora Rusts Smuts, Periconia, Myxomycetes TOTAL SPORES/m3 1,900 The 'Typical Outdoor Data' represents the typical outdoor spore levels for the location and time frame indicated. The last column represents the frequency of occurrence. The very low, low, med, high, and very high values represent the 10, 20, 50, 80, and 90 percentile values of the spore type when it is detected. For example, if the frequency of occurrence is 63% and the low value is 53, it would mean that the given spore type is detected 63% of the time and, when detected, 20% of the time it is present in levels above the detection limit and below 53 spores/m3. These values are updated periodically, and if enough data is not available to make a statistically meaningful assessment, it is indicated with a dash. Total Spores/m3 has been rounded to two significant figures to reflect analytical precision. * The spores in this category are generally capable of growing on wet building materials in addition to growing outdoors. Building related growth is dependent upon the fungal type, moisture level, type of material, and other factors. Cladosporium is one of the predominant spore types worldwide and is frequently present in high numbers. Penicillium/Aspergillus species colonize both outdoor and indoor wet surfaces rapidly and are very easily dispersed. Other genera are usually present in lesser numbers. ** These fungi are generally not found growing on wet building materials. For example, the rusts and smuts are obligate plant pathogens. However, in each group there are notable exceptions. For example, agents of wood decay are members of the basidiomycetes and high counts of a single morphological type of basidiospore on an inside sample should be considered significant. n = number of samples used to calculate data. Interpretation of the data contained in this report is left to the client or the persons who conducted the field work. This report is provided for informational and comparative purposes only and should not be relied upon for any other purpose. "Typical outdoor data" are based on the results of the analysis of samples delivered to and analyzed by EMLab P&K and assumptions regarding the origins of those samples. Sampling techniques, contaminants infecting samples, unrepresentative samples and other similar or dissimilar factors may affect these results. In addition, EMLab P&K may not have received and tested a representative number of samples for every region or time period. EMLab P&K hereby disclaims any liability for any and all direct, indirect, punitive, incidental, special or consequential damages arising out of the use or interpretation of the data contained in, or any actions taken or omitted in reliance upon, this report. EMLab P&K, LLC EMLab ID: , Page 1 of 1 Page 23 of 24

26 Page 24 of 24