Loading...
100 (JFK School) Complaint Records 2011 Date: 3©® game of Complainant: address: NAT RE A-1-‘)S, et.74 he COMPLAINT: . j .. d4✓ $ee,J Pr�ej,�uci rlroie ws � / eud�r/iP5 Cdh,/ � Caoo/ secw�c =anon: C1a SS/ppM )caner: 1ddress: U6 arz�d ,. rat�aken . : . CTORIN8•ffCTgR'8 REPORT: CtugA a NGN ciekA c�(n�,.k-�I-. flu, Paw v-,..b_ P d s ( ,5411. -df a.,rfr1,-.j Lion Taken: peotor Signature. Itera 11! I '.�rgau81e�goedaui eat,rt�, a yr r7 -,v 02 . No73.''.ur� /_,091/42_3 1 Sigoir'1, /22 wc/o o Lo .` ,)27° Aryl�r . o >A/57 >7 L.���.5572 • :Q� ,yL© as1aoi09,8N1 / . . • :.sn eey . d'J+ n/Qf/4,---?r/ l 6tR /' '4 :.IeuN dll (.. eo 71 ' 'S '7aSn3/ wS1_(;) • 7, G �7s �iana5 Ssf u. y' 5 ,x- A' :•+Nltl ldwoo do: �n ssa?� tansvv✓di0%r - anaa VN t • Riallil T nueupaidwop Jo ewi �ma ®Q :eai IAO Consulting Services IFK Middle Srhonl-Rnom 114 Page 2 Total Volatile Organic Compounds.(TVOC's) Volatile Organic Compounds )VOC's) are carbon-based compounds that evaporate. Common sources of VOC's in the indoor environment are combustion of organic materials,office equipment and supplies,consumer products such as perfumes and deodorants, pesticide applications, emissions from building materials, paint,adhesives, housekeeping compounds, etc. U.S. EPA and other studies have demonstrated that it is not unusual to find 250-300 VOC's present in offices and residential dwellings. Exposures to VOC's can cause sensory irritations, especially to mucous membranes. Experimental data published in technical papers indicates that irritations to the mucous membranes in the eyes, nose and throat can result in secondary, indirect effects such as tiredness, headache and difficulties in concentration. Although individual sensitivities to VOC's vary greatly,recent studies indicate that sensory related discomfort would be expected at concentrations above approximately 1 part per million (ppm). One (1) sample was collected over an 8-hour period using a whole air canister equipped with flow regulator. The sample was submitted for laboratory analysis using Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry, modified Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) Method TO-I5. In addition, the sample was further analyzed for tentatively identified compounds (TIC's) for a rough identification and quantification of additional compounds. Low levels of VOC's were identified in the sample.Total concentrations of VOC's identified using the TO-15 analytical method were at levels where irritation or discomfort is not expected. Additionally,the levels of compounds identified in the sample were significantly lower than applicable NIOSH and OSHA occupational exposure limits. Refer to the laboratory results provided in Attachment No. 2 for detailed descriptions of sample locations,individual sample results, as well as chain-of-custody records. Conclusion Chlorine concentrations were below the limit of detection for the method employed (c0.0055 ppm to <0.0068 ppm). The United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA's) current Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL) is 1 part per million as an eight-hour average. NIOSH's current recommended exposure limit (REL) is 0.5 ppm as a ten-hour average. Total concentrations of VOC's identified using the TO-15 analytical method were at levels where irritation or discomfort is not expected. I Green Environmental Consulting, LLC 296 Sylvester Road • Florence, MA,01062 • Tel/Fax (413) 341-3416 January 27, 2011 Michael Diemand Director of School Maintenance Memorial Hall 240 Main Street Northampton, MA 01060 Re: Chlorine and TVOC Air Sampling JFK Middle School-Room 114 Dear Mr. Diemand: chorine and total request, olatile organic ncompounds TVOC s} LLC he(abEov'e-referenced location. for Background Information In response to occupant concerns regarding an unknown odor in Room 114,GEC performed air sampling for chlorine and NOC's for comparison to current regulatory standards and guidelines. Fieldwork associated with the sampling was performed on January 13,2011. Air Sampling and Results Chlorine Chlorine is an upper respiratory im}ant,especially to the mucous membranes of the eyes and respiratory tract. Sampling to characterize airborne chlorine levels was conducted in a manner consistent with the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Standard Method 6011. Airborne concentrations of chlorine were below the limit of detection for the method employed. Refer to the laboratory results provided in Attachment No. I for detailed descriptions of sample locations,individual sample results,as well as chain-of-custody records. GreenEnvironmentaConsulting.com Attachment No.1 Chlorine laboratory Results IAQ Consulting Services IRK Middle School-Room 114 Page 3 GEC has been pleased to be work with you on this important project. If you have any questions regarding this report or the sampling and/or analytical techniques employed, please contact us at (413) 341-3418. Sincerely, Green Environmental Consulting, LLC Adam Lesko President FS1S,INC. DBA Environmental Health laboratory Om of tic MT onatetOmmtiela ZOO SebMC Drive Suite A-5 Cromwell CT 06416 (860)635-6475 or(800)2434903 FAX 096063s-6950 REQUEST FOR ANALYTICAL SERVICES tr,.m w m aao,m taw.,dm anmy Send INVOICE To (REQUIRED) Nun AOP • UiSi:O tandard TAT i_Iii_II O 3Day RUSH TAT O Nat Day RUSH TAT Cl O Sue Day RUSH TAT FOR INTERNAL UTZ ONLY °; ,Qa OU.d OSRF OAR OFSIS OZ OCi#R, Cern Na Cupay: ia aa a ecw-LA_Xuac Malllee Address: -20110 L jC418.6-C-0� City,Statq Zip: t,c 2g,..Ge w- Or 06`)r. Aorta.Payable Phone No: 4\"i_31/4i\ -21y1g Acts.Payable Fax No: 4r'3 -7,Rk' Adds.Payable E-mail: `(.w.(a gaty.nv r r0 Cam PO#,Ref#(IfRepr4ed): 003.4 40 Soapbox(anti,':c.v, er..00:11�� FU-SCfloOr_. s.yrlQ. Conned by . . ,Q.m/d®f�se, ar !Seams Red(Of kAy-- M 4.w ttAc CHAIN OF CUSTODY tunes CORT KAM or 1/ "1Hi ?St-\ .A022) 65nn CI 1h49h.Y. 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 Send RESULTS To (REQUIRED) Nan Apaw. Leucc, CoaPaay: GFxA-) FIJULFu-, CDtfiuSWOS-C. Mitt Address: 966.0 City,State,Zip: ecutO Fret 'Oa O LO(e'a Phone No:y\3 Fax No: H•-; -314 1-.3`-l\ E-.all: a\Lc tt J Division: 4 y 0 kao red °' �(b1r1 Iate: 4131 M,LYHIefA•n samettematamatanacasaatematatts cateactitifta astir Taal smutted : Yards Loh by. -21 S Upna ao.m eWmrarf. Sawa e+s.rwearb.r nTs .r.1.r�r.�rn.ita4 rr.wo CH\::R, 1^4.. r.,,o's1 Gin%) %HE--Prrm. \VA II 3111 31n - '50041(ja �,uwk ev n:• 1-14}11 *Unacceptable AO Tana Ina aams. Watt alma -w .Wca tL\ 1"aS 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 FOR NOTES ONLY: WHITE-LAB COPY YELLOW-CUSTOMER COPY Par 20)041 ORATORY ANALYSIS REPORT To: Adam Lesko Green Environmental Consulting,LLC 296 Sylvester Rd. Florence,MA 01062 PSIS E0vimnmdml Health Laboratory 100 Sebele OI1V4 Suite A-5 Cromwell CT 06616 (80)635-6495 or(808)2434903 Report k: C1130226 PO.No.: 00340 JFK Middle School Date Received: 01/14/2011 Date Reported: 01/19/2011 Page l oft Analysts:Chlorine Analytical Method:Ion Chromatography;Mod.NIOSH 6011-Silver Membrane Filter Prep Date 01/19/11 Analysis Date:01/19/11 Sample Air Volume �s PM l er:s Component 1048SM 125 Chlorine <200 c0.016 c0.0055 1046SM 102 Chlorine <200 <0020 <00068 1049SM -- Chlorine <200 Reponmg Lana:100ug Analytical recalls have been corrected for the sample mple Samples analyzed by ion ahmms m are quanntated by ma ng'n8 the retention time of sample ample peaks Cnottoflmo powmre se. A marching retention time is not proof of chemical identity Uoleeotdsreported are basil co air ohmcepoei Results only b tested.Unless noted otherwise above,the condition diioo of samples upon receipt was accpale. Approved By James Kenny Imes Kenny CM,CSP-Laboratory Manager Date: 1/19/11 L4B0RATORYANALYSIS REPORT T0:Adam Lesko Green Environmental Consu0ing,LLC 296 Sylvester Rd. Florence,MA 01062 Analysis:TO-15 Scan Analytical Method:GC/MS Whole Air Canisters;Modified EPA TO-15 Sample Number Air Volume Liters Compounds 'Acetone IAcetonOMe L crylonitrile IAII)1 Chloride Benzene 'Benzyl Chloride _ <2.5� 50.50 Bromodichloromethane _ <3.3 <0.50 'L IBromcethane <2.2 _ 50.50 1Bromoemene -- rt <2.2 <0.50 . F 1Bromaform <5.2 50,50 Bromomethane 11,3-Butadiene <1.9 <0.50 j 00340-04 00340-04 0.400 0.400 ug/m3 ppp 12 4.9 2.1 1.2 <1.1 <0.50 + in <1.6 <0.50 I <1 6 <0.50 ES*vMR eTAL HEALTH LAB .msau,.c«,sees Do 349a10ee. m,ic I�Rwsm9emxyar3 Report#: C1137227 P.O.No.:00340 JFK hate School Date Anayzed:01/21/11 Date Reported 0124/11 Date Received:01/14411 Date Prepped:01/14/11 <1.1 <0.50 IButAenzene <2.7 5050 (sec-Butylbenzene 'Carbon DisulfMe _ 1 <1.6 <0.50 'Carbon Tetrachloride -1-- <31 <0.50 Porabenzene j <2.3 <0.50 iChloroethane <1.3 <0.50 Chloroform <21 <0.50 - 1.2 0.50 1Cumene 0.57 <2.5 <0.50 'Cyclohexane <1.7 50.50 IDibromochloromethane <4.2 <0.50 11_2-Dbmmo-3chloropropane 4.8 <050 Im-Dichlorobenzene <3.0 <0.50 jo-Dichlorobenzene <3.0 <0.50 IpDichlorobenzene <3.0 <0.50 Dichlorodi0uoromethane <2.0 <0.50 1,1-Dichloroetharle <2.0 50.50 11 ,2-Dichloroethane <2.0 <0.50 11,1-Dichloroethyne <2.0 I <0.50 icis=1,2,2-Dichlorceth lene Itrans-1,2-Dichlorceth lene <2.0 <0.50 Y <2.0 <0.50 i 12-0ichbro ro ne 11,3-Dichloropropane <2.3 in <0.50 <2.3 <0.50 icis1,3-Dichbropropene <2.3 4/50 :Vans-1.3-0IChbropropene <2.3 <0.50 Di chlorotetra0uorcethane <3.5 <0.50 1'1,4-0ioxane <1.8 <0.50 'Epichlarohytlrin <1.9 <0,50 !Ethanol MNp[ John A Lee 96 i 51 CAS# 67-64-11 L 75-0J 107-13-1' 107-05-11 71-03-11 100-44-71 75-27.41 74-96-41 593-60-21 75-25-2' 74839 106-99-01 104-51-81 =135-98-81 75-15-04 56-23-5.. 108-90-7' 75-00-3' 67-66-31 74-87-31 98-82-8'I 110-82-71 96-12-8 1 I 541-73-1 95-50-1 106-06-71 75-71-81 75 107-06-2 75-3541 156-59-2, 156-605' 78-87-51 142-28-91 10061-01-51 10061-02-61 76-1421 123-91-11 106-89-8 64-1751 Date: 1/27/11 Page 1 of 2 Attachment No.2 Total Volatile Organic Compounds(TVOC's)Laboratory Results ' &INC. DBA Environmental Health Laboratory I Sebethe Drive Suite A-5 Cromwell,60 635-6475 or 800 243-4903 FAX: 860 635-6750 REQUEST FOR ANALYTICAL SERVICES lame on blank m n better rene Send INVOICE To /REQUIRED/ Standard TAT ILA--II O 3 Day RUSH TAT O Next Day RUSH TAT O Same Day RUSH TAT Lab:gFrmwl?i'OLrrRPnc RFSR air:ILPk=cal ahead Additional charges en* FOR INr_RNAL USE ONLY Baal Send RESULTSTo /REQUIRED/ Name: A Pon% Accts.pa abilarelattraullE:2=11 Ref#Of Required): E-mail: 00 V• " A."! So piing location: 5 k‘4+,OOL-E Divuioa: Sampling Description• CHAIN OF CUSTODY LAS NOTES ONLY: WIBrE-LAB COPY YELLOW_CUS'1OM COPY LABORATORYANALISIS REPORT ris:TO-15 Scan ical Method'.GC/MS Whole Air Canisters',Modified EPA TO-15 e Number 00340-04 lame Liters 0,400 m3 ands con cetate kcrylate Benzene me Dibromide yltoluene me ddorobutadiene Kane Zane propyltoluene and iyl tent-Butyl Ether lyl Buty4 Ketone ryl Ethyl Ketone ryl Iodide awl lsobutyl Ketone 1 IMeth-e late hylene Chloride _ nylcydohexene ro•and pene rene ,1,2-Tetrachloroethane ,2,2-Tetrachloroethane rachloroethylene 1,2=Tetrafuoroetane Tahydrofuran uene r,4-Trichlorobenzene I,1-Tnchlomethane I,2-Trichioroetane hloroethylene ichlom9uoromethane 1,2-Trichlro-1,22-trifueroethane 24-T'methy!benzene 3 5-Timethy!benzene in yl Acetate in Chodde o-X ene -Xylene 00340-04 0.400 II b 8 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 1 <0.50 1 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 1 <0.50 9.9 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 1 <0.50 <050 <0.20 4.3 <0.50 1 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 <0.50 1 2.1 <0.50 <1.5 <0.50 II <19 1 1 <0.50 <3.7 1 <0.50 -( <2.7 <0.50 <2.7 1 <0.50 1 <2.7 I<0.50 1 ESIS EIMFOp1ENrK HEALTH LAB IW Le Wee,Se A5 µo s%Can 03115 13W4001165)F35u75 Report Number C1137227 <20 <2.2 1 <3.8 <2.5 <2.0 i <5.3 <1,8 I <23 1 <2.7 13 T <1.8 <2.0 <1.5 1 <2.9 <2.0 1 rt <2.0 .7 <1.3 j 10 <0,86 <2.1 <3.4 1. <3.4 <3.4 CAS# 141-78-6 140-885 100-414 106-934 622-96-8 142-82-5 87-68-3 110-548] 54084-1I 99876 67-56-1) - 16344-Q046L11 78-93-31 74-8841 10810-11 8062-61 -0 499416-759-2 5 67-63-0, 115-07 100425) 630-204 79-3451 127-18-01 811-97-2' 109-99-9' 1080&3I 120-82-11 71-55-61 79-0051 79-0181 756941 76-13-1 95838 1 10805411 75-01-41 95478' 1 <2.8 f <0.50 <3 8 <0.50 <2.5 <0.50 <25 1 <0.50 <1.8 <1.3 1 <0.50 <4.3 <1.0 <2.2 <050 050 •Im3 j 11 4 'total Volatile Organic Compounds(TVOC) I 130 I 1 Unless noted otherwise above,the condition of samples the saemple wasnaept as acceptable.Results et.relate only to kems tested. 'This value is a summation of all peak areas present in Analyst Jahn A.Lee Date: 1/27111 Page 2af2 INC. BA Environmental Haab Laboratory 10 Sebottio oA•5 tomwal4 CT 06416 160 635-6475 or 800 7434903 FAX 860 6356750 REQUEST FOR ANALYTICAL SERVICES Rase .,Si Mambo .,Ili eeat7 SOW :. Send INVOICE To (REQUIRED! t►me: j\apvr. u ∎ -O :omlmay: 613-w1 - J.Vvwm4s‘.m._cT,rsx�S� L \-ep- aoao HaBlog Address: 716 My,State,Zip: QwO- c Accts.Payable Phone No: heels.Payable Fax 0: Accts.Payable E-mail: FOE,Ref p OJReSnires0: SempRegLocatioe:j4& v.+ ooi&SCNOC 4\- vv.c. 03-+ O wPO CHAIN OF CUSTODY Aanwriva By: mtma • Saodard TAT ,Oy-\\ O 3 Day RUSH TAT O Nat Day RUSH TA T O Su RUSH Sane Day Lab R4! please I ca®8rt4aMY C.C■v✓, FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY `0k1 !,1O' U Ale a Claw U URA O SRF UERIS UZ Cerny!Na Said RESULTS T. (REQUIRED/ Names Mailing Address: 9-aa,0 asrasis 1 . E-md: akc. b iCIrpogranalamma rr r MAW NL — A)maNmakatha ,aa•am2 ea Ranter NRA Ymt adITdsPYLti ItharenrirsofferterrImminstrao WINPAIMIllallarErnAllnlittlIttill IralafftVinilICMINMOM NUM TOTAL Inn 0//w/m), 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 W7BlE-LAB COPY YELLOW-CUSTOMER COPY Per 201.14 Wood li Oct: Daniel Wasiuk Wednesday, March 09, 2011 8136 AM Ben Wood Heather McBride JFK Middle School en, ding you a summary of the air quality complaint filed by Ivy Garcia against the JFK Middle School (100 Bridge Road) vlarch 4, 2011. The nature of the complaint indicates a strong fume/odor emanating from the 6`h grade/special cation classroom located at the school. The complainant explained that her daughter has been subject to these it's for numerous weeks and has subsequently had to seek medical assistance for her condition. The complainant said ter telephone call to me that the odor smells of strong chlorine. ade an inspection visit at the school on March 4, 2011 at approximately 11:50am. I met with the school principal and Ke Diemand (Director of School Maintenance). I was allowed to make a sensory examination of the classroom for any el of offensive odors. In addition, I checked the school's swimming pool for excessive and/or offensive odors possibly mming from chlorination chemicals used for disinfection purposes and did not find any objectionable smell/odor that ry constitute a possible public health nuisance. id learn from the principal and Mike Diemand that this odor problem has been brought to the attention of the hoofs team members—not only from the complainant, but from an actual teacher within 1FK Middle School who perienced similar type of symptoms(nausea, headache, etc.). Also, I found that the school has initiated indoor air la ty ottherhpert corective on regarding th s tissu will o l indoor air quality oter e to my attention the wk of March y Nill certainly keep you posted with any future developments regarding this complaint. egards, )aniel Wasiuk iealth Inspector :ity of Northampton INDOOR AIR QUALITY ASSESSMENT John F. Kennedy Middle School 100 Bridge Road Village of Florence Northampton, MA 01062 Prepared by: Massachusetts Department of Public Health Center for Environmental Health Emergency Response/Indoor Air Quality Program March 2006 Background/Introduction At the request of the Northampton Health Department,the Massachusetts Department of Public Health's (MDPH) Center for Environmental Health (CEH) provided assistance and consultation regarding indoor air quality at the John F. Kennedy Middle School (JFKMS) located at 100 Bridge Road in Florence, a village within the city of Northampton, Massachusetts. The request was prompted by symptoms (e.g., headaches; exacerbation of allergies; dryness; eye and respiratory irritation; lethargy)that occupants believed to be associated with poor indoor air quality. On January 6, 2006, Sharon Lee, an Environmental Analyst in CEH's Emergency Response/Indoor Air Quality (ER/IAQ) Program, conducted an assessment at the JFKMS. During the assessment. Ms. Lee was accompanied by Greg Rochan, Maintenance Foreman,Northampton Public Schools(NPS), and Amy LeBeau, Maintenance/Custodian, JFKMS. The JFKMS is a red brick and metal building completed circa 1993. The school contains general classrooms, science labs, special education rooms, computer room, library, nurse's office, cafeteria, kitchen,teachers' rooms, art room, music room, gymnasium, pool and office space. Windows throughout the building are openable. Methods Air tests for carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide,temperature and relative humidity were taken with the TSI, Q-Trak, IAQ Monitor, Model 8551. Air tests for airborne particulate matter with a diameter less than 2.5 micrometers were taken with the TSI, 2 DUSTTRAKrM Aerosol Monitor Model 8520. Screening for total volatile organic compounds (TVOCs)was conducted using a Thermo Environmental Instruments Inc., Model 580 Series Photo Ionization Detector (ND). CEH staff also performed a visual inspection of building materials for water damage and/or microbial growth. Results This school houses approximately 700 students in grades 6 through 8. with approximately 90 staff members. Tests were taken during normal operations at the school. Results appear in Table 1. Discussion Ventilation It can be seen from Table 1 that carbon dioxide levels were elevated above 800 parts per million (ppm) in 61 of 66 areas, indicating poor ventilation in the majority of areas surveyed. Fresh air in classrooms is supplied by either unit ventilator (univent) systems or supply vents ducted to rooftop air-handling units (AHUs). Approximately half of the classrooms surveyed had univents (Picture IT A univent draws air from outdoors through a fresh air intake located on the exterior wall of the building(Picture 2) and returns air through an air intake located at the base of the unit Fi ure l). Fresh and return air are mixed, filtered,heated and provided to classrooms through a diffuser located on the top of the unit. Adjustable louvers control the ratio of 3 fresh and recirculated air. These univents are equipped with mesh filters that were last changed during winter break (Picture 3). Obstructions to airflow, such as furniture located in front of and/or materials stored on univents, were observed in some areas. Some univents were also deactivated at the time of assessment. In order for univents to provide fresh air as designed,these units must be activated and remain free of obstructions. Mechanical exhaust ventilation for these areas is provided by ceiling- or wall- mounted vents connected to rooftop fans(Pictures 4 and 5). This system was operating, although weakly in some areas, during the assessment. It is important to note that the location of some exhaust vents can limit exhaust efficiency. In some classrooms, ceiling- mounted exhaust vents are located above hallway doors (Picture 4). When classroom doors are open, exhaust vents will tend to draw air from both the hallway and the classroom. The open hallway door reduces the effectiveness of the exhaust vent to remove common environmental pollutants from classrooms. In some instances,wall-mounted exhaust vents were obstructed by furniture (e.g., book cases,file cabinets). Such obstructions also reduce the capability of the exhaust system to remove common classroom pollutants. For the remainder of school areas, ventilation is provided by rooftop air handling units (AHUs). Fresh tempered air is supplied through ceiling mounted air diffusers (Picture 6) and ducted back to the AHUs via return vents (Picture 7). These AHUs have localized thermostats that allow a computer system to monitor and control the AHUs. At the time of the assessment,supply of air via the ceiling vents could not be detected. This may indicate that either the AHUs were off or that the units were set to `automatic'. When an AHD's setting is programmed to automatic, the HVAC system's thermostat is set at a 4 preset temperature. Once the thermostat registers the preset temperature,the computer system deactivates the HVAC system. No mechanical ventilation is provided until the thermostat calls for the computer to re-activate the system. In addition, some return vents for these areas are located near hallway doors; as discussed, such location can prevent effective removal of classroom pollutants. To maximize air exchange, the MDPH recommends that both supply and exhaust ventilation operate continuously during periods of school occupancy. In order to have proper ventilation with a mechanical supply and exhaust system,the systems must be balanced to provide an adequate amount of fresh air to the interior of a room, while removing stale air from the room. It is recommended that HVAC systems be re-balanced every five years to ensure adequate air systems function(SMACNA, 1994). The HVAC system was likely balanced prior to occupation in 1993. The Massachusetts Building Code requires that each room have a minimum ventilation rate of 15 cubic feet per minute (cfm) per occupant of fresh outside air or have openable windows (SBBRS, 1997; BOCA, 1993). The ventilation must be on at all times that the room is occupied. Providing adequate fresh air ventilation with open windows and maintaining the temperature in the comfort range during the cold weather season is impractical. Mechanical ventilation is usually required to provide adequate fresh air ventilation. Carbon dioxide is not a problem in and of itself. It is used as an indicator of the adequacy of the fresh air ventilation. As carbon dioxide levels rise, it indicates that the ventilating system is malfunctioning or the design occupancy of the room is being exceeded. When this happens, a buildup of common indoor air pollutants can occur, 5 leading to discomfort or health complaints. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standard for carbon dioxide is 5,000 parts per million parts of air (ppm). Workers may be exposed to this level for 40 hours/week,based on a time- weighted average(OSHA, 1997). The MDPH uses a guideline of 800 ppm for publicly occupied buildings. A guideline of 600 ppm or less is preferred in schools due to the fact that the majority of occupants are young and considered to be a more sensitive population in the evaluation of environmental health status. Inadequate ventilation and/or elevated temperatures are major causes of complaints such as respiratory. eye, nose and throat irritation, lethargy and headaches. For more information concerning carbon dioxide, see Aonendix A. Temperature measurements ranged from 67°F to 79° F in areas throughout the school and 81 ° F in the pool room. Temperature measurements for most areas were within the MDPH recommended comfort range on the day of the assessment. The MDPH recommends that indoor air temperatures he maintained in a range of 70° F to 78° F in order to provide for the comfort of building occupants. Many occupants had concerns of uneven heating,particularly with classrooms being too warm. In many cases concerning indoor air quality,fluctuations of temperature in occupied spaces are typically experienced, even in a building with an adequate fresh air supply. The relative humidity measured in the building ranged from 22 to 37 percent in areas throughout the school and 50 percent in the pool room. Relative humidity measurements for classrooms,offices and other typical indoor school settings were below the range of the MDPH recommended comfort on the day of the assessment. The MDPH recommends a comfort range of 40 to 60 percent for indoor air relative humidity. Relative 6 humidity levels in the building would be expected to drop during the winter months due to heating. The sensation of dryness and irritation is common in a low relative humidity environment. Low relative humidity is a very common problem during the heating season in the northeast part of the United States. Of note are relative humidity measurements in the hallway outside the pool, which ranged from 32 percent to 40 percent; these measurements exceeded outdoor measurements by 11 to 19 percent on the day of the assessment. These measurements, as well as the odor of chlorine detected in hallways and classrooms, indicate that both air and moisture are penetrating into adjacent areas of the school from the pool area. The increase in relative humidity can indicate that the pool exhaust system is not operating sufficiently to remove water vapor and chlorine odor. Rooftop AHUs and exhausts should be examined to ensure proper function. Ventilation equipment for the pool area should also be examined to ensure pool exhaust is not being entrained into the general HVAC system (i.e..Al-lUs and univents). Microbial/Moisture Concerns A few hallway areas had water-stained ceiling tiles (Picture 8), most likely from a roof or pipe leak. Water-damaged ceiling tiles can provide a source for mold and should be replaced after a water leak is discovered and repaired. Ceiling tiles in some areas had been removed after water damage occurred; replacement tiles were reportedly on order at the time of the assessment. Open seams between the sink countertop and backsplash were observed in several rooms (Picture 9). If not watertight. water can penetrate through the seam, causing water 7