Re: Re: , Appellate Ruling Shoemaker Proof of Causation,

[Guest guest]

Jim:

I agree with most everything you mention regarding building science and the behavior of wall assemblies – my responses to your specific comments are shown below.....in BLUE (since I’m seem to be doing a lot of that recently). However, you, like many others, totally missed my two points. ONE - The Brief stated that workers won benefits due to mold present in a wall cavity. Note the singular use of A and CAVITY. It is not “cavities!” It is not the wall system, It is A wall CAVITY. Are you (and you others) willing to opine that mold in A wall CAVITY can make six people soo ill that they are entitled to medical benefits? I, for one, can see the possibility and fathom how it could happen. I believe that the odds of this happening in any typical or normal building (i.e., mold present in a single wall cavity irreparably harming six adults in an office, work-related, environment) is remote. Moreover, the brief implied that mold was only found in the wall cavity and not the occupied space. Someone enlighten me if you believe this is a common occurrence? How is it that six adults can be harmed AT WORK by the presence of mold in a wall cavity, and not via an indoor air pathway? Is it solely the MVOCs? Can one wall cavity produce sufficient MVOCs within a typical work day to be harmful? Tell me! I want to say I was wrong and admit it, because I will be smarter from it. I look forward to the dialog.

And....TWO – I also stated that there must be more to this case than was written in the Brief. I’m sure there was, and there probably is. I look forward to someone sharing it with me and the group.

Regards,

--

Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP

President

KERNTEC Industries, Inc.

Bakersfield, California

www.kerntecindustries.com

As a building scientist I cannot let you get away with any inference that mold in an interstitial space is not in (will not move into) (I never stated or implied that mold cannot move between spaces.) the breathable air in the room. That smacks of other opinions, mostly by doctors, who do not understand how buildings " breathe. " It would be a very rare case indeed where what is in a wall cavity does not communicate rather well (Please define “rather well?” If communication is significant, then the wall assembly also exhibits piss-poor thermal performance. I eagerly wait for your definition.) with the indoor air that we breathe. Only those cavities that are virtually airtight, or see no pressure differences with the indoor air system, would be isolated well enough not to be of concern. (Such might be the case when the vapor barrier is on the conditioned (interior) side of the wall surface? In extremely cold environments, no less.) With changes of the power and direction of stack effect, changes in wind direction, changes in ventilation system or venting system operation, etc., the pressure differences within a building often vary dramatically. These changes often communicate well with wall cavities (It had better be with interior wall cavities and not exterior wall cavities, or condensation inside the exterior wall cavity may be a problem - resulting in liquid moisture; which is the root cause of all mold in buildings.) and what is released within those cavities will get into the indoor air. (Sometimes yes, and sometimes no. Fiberglass spicules are released within exterior wall cavities all the time, and we often don’t see glass spicules impacting IAQ. Why mold spores and not glass spicules?) That is simple building science. (Building science is anything but simple, and never generic!) There are, in fact, many sessions on just such processes in such conferences as Affordable Comfort. Many of the experts in that area built on early Canadian research and now are well beyond what we did here in Canada. Maybe you should learn more about this from them. (I respect the Canadian research and reference it often. I have learned a lot from them and hope to continue to do so.)

Jim H. White System Science Consulting

1b.

Re: , Appellate Ruling Shoemaker Proof of Causation, <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/iequality/message/8396;_ylc=X3oDMTJyMnR0bW8yBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEyMzg3NDc1BGdycHNwSWQDMTYwMDA2MTE0NgRtc2dJZAM4Mzk2BHNlYwNkbXNnBHNsawN2bXNnBHN0aW1lAzExNTk1NzIzODQ->

Posted by: " Geyer "

Fri Sep 29, 2006 10:19 am (PST)

I understand that the hubbub of this thread is the admissibility of

Shoemaker’s testimony. However, what I find appalling is the statement in

this brief that....six employees sought benefits after mold was discovered

in a wall cavity at their office. If this is true, what BS! Wall cavities

are un-occupied interstitial spaces within a structure. Moreover, there are

few, if any, structures that don’t have mold spores in their interstitial

spaces, and there is plenty of data and research to show that biomass in

wall cavities does not significantly affect the occupied space; even if the

cavity is black with hyphae and spores. If the mold was present in the

occupied space, I would be more sympathetic to the claims of the plaintiffs,

because I for one believe inhaled biomass causes harm ­ some more and some

less. But mold in a wall cavity..... What a bunch of bull. There must be

more to this case than the brief as written by Courtroom News. The pathway

to exposure is just not well developed.

[Guest guest]

Mold spores aren't the only part of the picture. Mold can live in

buildings for a long time and the powdered mold material often becomes

airborne. Not just spores.

See http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/full/71/1/114

Wind can blow through a buildings walls - as there are often leaks.

Air can also be driven by the stack effect. Thermal energy drives a

pressure upward in any building of any height.(The stack effect can

drive some pretty strong winds)

Any part of the US that has earthquakes will also have even more

porous buildings..ever more porous the longer they have been

standing..

Also, people are realizing that mold illness is nonlinear. Once

somebody gets ill from some kind of mold, their system is in a state

of extreme inflammation that even small amounts of mold can make much

much worse. Thats why people get so sick.

Chronic or acute inflammation can cause brain injury..

http://www.som.tulane.edu/classware/pathology/medical_pathology/inflammation/

http://www.nature.com/bjp/journal/v147/n1s/full/0706400a.html

[Guest guest]

As said a few days ago there's more than meets the eye in this case. The facility at the heart of this legal controversy is an approx. 20 year old commercial pre-fab building heavily damaged some years ago during either a hurricane or severe summer wind and rain storm. There are maybe 15-25 employees at this administrative headquarters of the land Methodist Conference which houses their print shop and administrative offices for the activities of the Methodist Conference (churches) in land. The employees have for years been advocating better and cheaper medical insurance plans. When the wind and storm damage occurred I'm remembering the local newspapers wrote of the severe damage. As I live 12 miles from the facility and pass it monthly whenever I drive to Baltimore I know of some of its history. The insurance carrier on this case for the worker's compensation coverage and possibly also the property [storm] damage is our small county insurance company called The Montgomery Mutual Insurance Company. land I have found to be a peculiarly strict state in enforcing the insurance laws. In general a land insurance company MUST deny a claim if there is any question of coverage. It is strictly up to the claimant to prove he is covered or has a case. GEICO paid a heavy fine years ago for paying auto glass claims without ever inspecting the glass. This Methodist Conference case being a Workers comp case where workers are claiming they are sick five years after a rain storm and building damage has to evoke a court case. And it seems Dr. Shoemaker is being used to support the claim so the insurance company challenged his eligibility to be an expert witness under a routine Frye- challenge and the Appeals Court ruled he is eligible. It's all legal maneuvering. I believe the case is now clear to be settled. What I don't understand is what has anyone gained from this case beside recovering medical expenses. Dr. Shoemaker will probably be the only one benefiting as he is the treating physician. I doubt very much if the employees can be reimbursed their transportation costs under WC which is a trip of about 100 miles. Now the big question..... who loses and who pays??? It is not the insurance company or the employer!!! As an insurance settlement under workers compensation it is all the employers in the State of land who will see this and all other mold settlements reflected in next year's premium. The State sets the premium and guarantees to the insurance companies all claim costs can be passed on to all the policyholders in the state. I'm not concerned with the settlement to the injured workers as there is no question in my mind it is fair. I am however very concerned with the high cost of litigation which is a part of the settlement costs and now also a legitimate part of next year's insurance premiums. What I wish we could see is the doctors like Shoemaker have their medicine understood and accepted by the establishment so we wouldn't have so much litigation and so sick folk could be treated faster. This means to me establishing the link between interior mold and sickness. Gibala ========================== Re: Re: , Appellate Ruling Shoemaker Proof of Causation,Mold spores aren't the only part of the picture. Mold can live inbuildings for a long time and the powdered mold material often becomesairborne. Not just spores.See http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/full/71/1/114Wind can blow through a buildings walls - as there are often leaks.Air can also be driven by the stack effect. Thermal energy drives apressure upward in any building of any height.(The stack effect candrive some pretty strong winds)Any part of the US that has earthquakes will also have even moreporous buildings..ever more porous the longer they have beenstanding..Also, people are realizing that mold illness is nonlinear. Oncesomebody gets ill from some kind of mold, their system is in a stateof extreme inflammation that even small amounts of mold can make muchmuch worse. Thats why people get so sick.Chronic or acute inflammation can cause brain injury..http://www.som.tulane.edu/classware/pathology/medical_pathology/inflammation/http://www.nature.com/bjp/journal/v147/n1s/full/0706400a.html

[Guest guest]

Dear LiveSimply (Whatever your name is):

You stated:

“Any part of the US that has earthquakes will also have even more porous buildings..ever more porous the longer they have been standing..”

I would like you to substantiate what you just claimed! I live in earthquake country and occasionally I have swarms of quakes right under my home – more than five a day. And my home is no more porous that the day it was built. Then again, it is because I built it. Earthquakes do interesting things to structures, and the effects of slip faults versus thrust faults can be dramatic; not to mention reflections of ground movement too. This said, I really don’t believe your opinion is valid. Just where did you get it? What is it based on? And what about parts of the U.S. with hurricanes? Can the same be said for buildings in Florida, i.e., the longer structures have been standing the more porous they become solely due to the wind pressures of hurricanes?

No one should quote me on the specifics of the numbers I am going to mention, because it has been some time since I calculated it. All things being equal and ignoring geometry and uplift loads, etc.....For low rise (i.e., 30-ft) wood-framed structures with a low mass roof system, a seismic 5.0 event is ruffly equivalent to a lateral wind pressure of 15psf or a wind velocity of 60mph. A seismic 6.0 event is ruffly equivalent to a wind pressure of 25psf or a wind velocity of 70mph. A seismic 7.0 event is ruffly equivalent to a wind pressure of 35psf or a wind velocity of 100mph. In a seismically active area, like mine, we engineers are required to design for a seismic 6.0 event (Seismic Zone 4), unless the importance of the building warrants a higher level of protection. I typically design and build for a lateral pressures of 35psf to 40psf, but it costs a lot more to do so. This said, Category 4 hurricanes often exceed 100mph and wind pressures exceed 35psf. (You guys that live in the southeast please help me here!) If so, and you believe that structures in earthquake zones become porous with time, wouldn’t it also stand to reason that structures in hurricane zones leak like swiss cheese in a shorter period of time. Because....There are many more Category 3 and Category 4 hurricanes hitting Florida than 6.0 earthquakes hitting California!

I may be bit off-base regarding the numbers, but I don’t buy your opinion that structures become more porous just because they are in a seismically active area. You opinion is baseless.

For what it is worth....

--

Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP

President

KERNTEC Industries, Inc.

Bakersfield, California

www.kerntecindustries.com

Mold spores aren't the only part of the picture. Mold can live in

buildings for a long time and the powdered mold material often becomes

airborne. Not just spores.

See http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/full/71/1/114

Wind can blow through a buildings walls - as there are often leaks.

Air can also be driven by the stack effect. Thermal energy drives a

pressure upward in any building of any height.(The stack effect can

drive some pretty strong winds)

Any part of the US that has earthquakes will also have even more

porous buildings..ever more porous the longer they have been

standing..

Also, people are realizing that mold illness is nonlinear. Once

somebody gets ill from some kind of mold, their system is in a state

of extreme inflammation that even small amounts of mold can make much

much worse. Thats why people get so sick.

Chronic or acute inflammation can cause brain injury..

http://www.som.tulane.edu/classware/pathology/medical_pathology/inflammation/

http://www.nature.com/bjp/journal/v147/n1s/full/0706400a.html

[Guest guest]

Ken:

Thank you for the added detail. Your information provides a lot of clarity and like I suspected, there was much more to the exposure basis than a single wall cavity as alleged in the Brief posted earlier. Needless to say, we must be suspicious of what we read. I also find your assessment of insurance protocol as administered by land DOI to be alarming. If an insurance company MUST deny claims given any question of coverage, it makes the whole industry much more expensive to the insureds. I can’t fathom the overall benefit or value of litigating reasonable and/or minor value claims (e.g., auto glass) and I imagine that the backlog in land’s court system got worse because of the ruling against GEICO Insurance Co. Moreover, you are wholeheartedly correct in your assessment that the injured party is further injured by the delay and cost of litigating reasonable claims in order to have a judge validate the claim. This can’t be good.

For what it is worth....

--

Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP

President

KERNTEC Industries, Inc.

Bakersfield, California

www.kerntecindustries.com

As said a few days ago there's more than meets the eye in this case.

The facility at the heart of this legal controversy is an approx. 20 year old commercial pre-fab building heavily damaged some years ago during either a hurricane or severe summer wind and rain storm. There are maybe 15-25 employees at this administrative headquarters of the land Methodist Conference which houses their print shop and administrative offices for the activities of the Methodist Conference (churches) in land. The employees have for years been advocating better and cheaper medical insurance plans. When the wind and storm damage occurred I'm remembering the local newspapers wrote of the severe damage. As I live 12 miles from the facility and pass it monthly whenever I drive to Baltimore I know of some of its history. The insurance carrier on this case for the worker's compensation coverage and possibly also the property [storm] damage is our small county insurance company called The Montgomery Mutual Insurance Company.

land I have found to be a peculiarly strict state in enforcing the insurance laws. In general a land insurance company MUST deny a claim if there is any question of coverage. It is strictly up to the claimant to prove he is covered or has a case. GEICO paid a heavy fine years ago for paying auto glass claims without ever inspecting the glass. This Methodist Conference case being a Workers comp case where workers are claiming they are sick five years after a rain storm and building damage has to evoke a court case. And it seems Dr. Shoemaker is being used to support the claim so the insurance company challenged his eligibility to be an expert witness under a routine Frye- challenge and the Appeals Court ruled he is eligible. It's all legal maneuvering. I believe the case is now clear to be settled. What I don't understand is what has anyone gained from this case beside recovering medical expenses. Dr. Shoemaker will probably be the only one benefiting as he is the treating physician. I doubt very much if the employees can be reimbursed their transportation costs under WC which is a trip of about 100 miles.

Now the big question..... who loses and who pays???

It is not the insurance company or the employer!!!

As an insurance settlement under workers compensation it is all the employers in the State of land who will see this and all other mold settlements reflected in next year's premium. The State sets the premium and guarantees to the insurance companies all claim costs can be passed on to all the policyholders in the state. I'm not concerned with the settlement to the injured workers as there is no question in my mind it is fair. I am however very concerned with the high cost of litigation which is a part of the settlement costs and now also a legitimate part of next year's insurance premiums.

What I wish we could see is the doctors like Shoemaker have their medicine understood and accepted by the establishment so we wouldn't have so much litigation and so sick folk could be treated faster. This means to me establishing the link between interior mold and sickness.

Gibala

==========================

-----

Original Message -----

To: iequality

Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2006 9:49 PM

Subject: Re: Re: , Appellate Ruling Shoemaker Proof of Causation,

Mold spores aren't the only part of the picture. Mold can live in

buildings for a long time and the powdered mold material often becomes

airborne. Not just spores.

See http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/full/71/1/114

Wind can blow through a buildings walls - as there are often leaks.

Air can also be driven by the stack effect. Thermal energy drives a

pressure upward in any building of any height.(The stack effect can

drive some pretty strong winds)

Any part of the US that has earthquakes will also have even more

porous buildings..ever more porous the longer they have been

standing..

Also, people are realizing that mold illness is nonlinear. Once

somebody gets ill from some kind of mold, their system is in a state

of extreme inflammation that even small amounts of mold can make much

much worse. Thats why people get so sick.

Chronic or acute inflammation can cause brain injury..

http://www.som.tulane.edu/classware/pathology/medical_pathology/inflammation/

http://www.nature.com/bjp/journal/v147/n1s/full/0706400a.html

[Guest guest]

Jim:

Thank you for the kind words. Much appreciated.

And thanks for letting me know that the color does not come through. I’ll change my ways next time.

Regards,

--

*****************************************************

Geyer PE, CIH, CSP

PRESIDENT

KERNTEC Industries, Inc.

3703 Columbus Street

Bakersfield, California 93306

P

F

mgeyer@...

www.kerntecindustries.com

www.michaelgeyer.com

*****************************************************

Hey

If we learn because people talk to us, you must be doing really well lately. It seems you do not get too hurt by disagreeing comments, so there is obviously great hope for you (by the way, those who get the summary [i do even though I hate it and have not gotten back on individual posts although I asked] do not see color in our posts).

The reality of buildings is that each is different and they are occupied by people with widely different occupants, susceptibility- and sensitivity-wise. At one time, in the late 80's, I had a list of Canadian air tightness test results in several thousand houses. The tightest was more than three orders of magnitude tighter than the loosest on record.That made me recognize that it is not wise to say definitive things about houses. Even when I presented those results and that conclusion/opinion to several audiences, the attendees went right on making definitive statements based on work on one or two houses. Amazing, at the least! I have met people who, in a double-blind situation, react to very small amounts of contamination while others (sometimes a spouse) do not react at levels that affect most people. This variability is real and a problem not recognized by the traditional medical personnel, at least not in an obvious way. Putting these two variabilities makes definitive statements virtually impossible, doesn't it?

1 It does seem to me that mold growth can cause exactly such responses in a particular building. It would require that the mold was unusually stressed and produced abundant mycotoxins that were transferred on very fine particulate into the indoor air that the occupants were breathing. The occupants would have had to be susceptible to those levels of mycotoxin but, and here is the rub, it might have been the history of that group, in that building or another, that made them uniquely sensitive. Clusters of susceptible people can occur if they were all exposed in a manner that produced a sensitivity. After investigating thousands of troubled houses, without wearing breathing protection because it scares the living s**t our of the occupants (and they then do nothing to remediate the problem, a weird but often-repeated result). Several other Canadian IAQ investigators and remediation contractors have the same problem. I will not say that it is because of our past history of unprotected exposure, but one does wonder doesn't one. In short (what a giggle), yes I believe that this is possible, even when it is not always to be expected.

2 Would it not be great if we got access to more of the story! It is often true, however, that only parts are made available, on purpose. Those who release parts may have reasons, or may only have part, or think that only the part that they release is the important part, or have been persuaded by their lawyers that only that part can be released. This is the norm, not the exception, I believe.

Jim H. White System Science Consulting

..

Re: , Appellate Ruling Shoemaker Proof of Causation, <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/iequality/message/8429;_ylc=X3oDMTJydDYyODFwBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE1BGdycElkAzEyMzg3NDc1BGdycHNwSWQDMTYwMDA2MTE0NgRtc2dJZAM4NDI5BHNlYwNkbXNnBHNsawN2bXNnBHN0aW1lAzExNTk3MDU2NDY->

Posted by: " Geyer " mgeyer@... <mailto:mgeyer@...?Subject= Re%3A%20%20%2C%20Appellate%20Ruling%20Shoemaker%20Proof%20of%20Causation%2C> bs101master <http://profiles.yahoo.com/bs101master>

Sat Sep 30, 2006 6:07 pm (PST)

Jim:

I agree with most everything you mention regarding building science and the

behavior of wall assemblies ¡© my responses to your specific comments are

shown below.....in BLUE (since I¡&hibar;m seem to be doing a lot of that recently).

However, you, like many others, totally missed my two points. ONE - The

Brief stated that workers won benefits due to mold present in a wall cavity.

Note the singular use of A and CAVITY. It is not ¡°cavities!¡± It is not the

wall system, It is A wall CAVITY. Are you (and you others) willing to

opine that mold in A wall CAVITY can make six people soo ill that they are

entitled to medical benefits? I, for one, can see the possibility and

fathom how it could happen. I believe that the odds of this happening in

any typical or normal building (i.e., mold present in a single wall cavity

irreparably harming six adults in an office, work-related, environment) is

remote. Moreover, the brief implied that mold was only found in the wall

cavity and not the occupied space. Someone enlighten me if you believe this

is a common occurrence? How is it that six adults can be harmed AT WORK by

the presence of mold in a wall cavity, and not via an indoor air pathway?

Is it solely the MVOCs? Can one wall cavity produce sufficient MVOCs within

a typical work day to be harmful? Tell me! I want to say I was wrong and

admit it, because I will be smarter from it. I look forward to the dialog.

And....TWO ¡© I also stated that there must be more to this case than was

written in the Brief. I¡&hibar;m sure there was, and there probably is. I look

forward to someone sharing it with me and the group.

Regards,

[Guest guest]

Dear ,I know all of this because I went through it. I lived in a very badly maintained 100 year old building for a very long time, and it was riddled with mold. And holes. I got sicker and sicker. When I finally did begin to realize that the building was the cause, I tried to get my landlord to fix the problem, but it was like talking to a brick wall. I finally figured out that it was futile. How dumb of me for believing their LIES. Shame on me.

Everything I said I know from personal experience. And - in my opinion, people who tell me that my personal experience was wrong are not just wrong, they are willfully enablling a dangerous national denial about an AVOIDABLE public health menace that stole my health and the health of many, many other people.. Mostly poor people, (the ones who can't afford expensive IAQ consultants) but yes, even some well to do people.. Like I used to be.. when I had a normal job.. before I got sick..

I am not some kind of nut, I documented this entire thing as it was happening and its very clear what was happening. Lab after lab tested the situation. I don't know why people like you play this little denial game under the guise of 'scientific skepticism' but science will prove you wrong.

You are just playing a delaying game and you should be aware that this national denial is killing people and ruining families and lives. I am not mincing words because we all need to face the reality. The current denial is killing people.

[Guest guest]

I think its reasonable to expect that a building with mold in one wall cavity (the one that was opened up) probably had it in others that remained hidden. You are trying to apply the lawyers principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' to a situation in which it really does not and should not apply. We do not go around in buildings opening up every wall cavity to ascertain which ones have mold.. But employees and tenants have to live and work with moldy walls that have cracks in them everyday.

And people do get sick from being exposed to some kinds of mold. In my case, mold from one of the wall cavities- next to the bathtub/shower in the 100 year old bulding I lived in was tested and the mycotoxin levels were higher than those that I have seen in most papers published on the subject. I had that mold tested because I was getting very sick, in very many ways.. Yes, the cost of actually fixing a building like that might run into the tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars, but it is often still just a fraction of its value. This seems like a good investment compared to the cost of letting a situation exist which is almost guaranteed to make many people sick over the length of its life. Dr. Shoemaker says that 24% of the people in any situation will get sick, eventually, because of their HLA-DR type. That makes sense. So, even though in an office with, say 20 or 30 people, only one or two might complain (Others being often too AFRAID to..) that does not mean that ONLY them are getting sick.. Do you get my point?If society permits this, (which is debatable, I'd say its closer to society not understanding the gravity of the situation yet) society needs to change. We are letting irresponsible people poison people..

[Guest guest]

Unless you are talking about Kilz paints and others with high levels of mildicides and funcgicides. Injurious indoor air quality from VOCs is very prevalent. Barbara Rubin ============================gval102@... wrote: Buildings in Florida do become more porous after a rain / wind driven event . But nothing a good coat of paint can't take care of. 25 mph on primed stucco . Needless to say the interior finished walls were wet.

Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small Business.

[Guest guest]

Group,

Buildings, in general, do not become more porous after a rain/wind event unless there was damage to the exterior cladding and/or to the structural components. A stucco clad building should not allow moisture to penetrate into the interior finish area unless the detailing and stucco thickness are insufficient. We have seen too many newer building in Florida where there is no drainage plane behind the stucco and the stucco thickness was from 1/4 to 3/8 inch. Paint is not the answer. Making sure buildings are designed and then built properly is the answer.

Wayne Shellabarger

Principal/Engineer

Acuity Engineers, Inc.

Chanhassen, MN 55317

www.acuityengineers.com

Re: , Appellate Ruling Shoemaker Proof of Causation,

Buildings in Florida do become more porous after a rain / wind driven event . But nothing a good coat of paint can't take care of.

25 mph on primed stucco . Needless to say the interior finished walls were wet.

[Guest guest]

Kilz does not have a biocide that I know of (anyone else is welcome to show me wrong). It just has a lot of opacity/covering power due to the Titanium Dioxide pigments (very high refractive indices compared to the medium) - thus it covers (kilz) the color below it.

But as for painting over the the problem - don't like it .

What did they prime the stucco with? and is it really stucco?

Tony

........................................................................... "Tony" Havics, CHMM, CIH, PEpH2, LLCPO Box 34140Indianapolis, IN 46234 cell90% of Risk Management is knowing where to place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%â„ This message is from pH2. This message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or distributed without this statement.

-----Original Message-----From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of B.R.Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 7:45 PMTo: iequality Subject: Re: Re: , Appellate Ruling Shoemaker Proof of Causation,

Unless you are talking about Kilz paints and others with high levels of mildicides and funcgicides. Injurious indoor air quality from VOCs is very prevalent.

Barbara Rubin

============================gval102@... wrote:

Buildings in Florida do become more porous after a rain / wind driven event . But nothing a good coat of paint can't take care of.

25 mph on primed stucco . Needless to say the interior finished walls were wet.

Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small Business.

[Guest guest]

:

I need to ask a dumb question, only because I want to learn something.

I understand your 3/4-ton make-up air unit with MERV-8 filters. I assume this unit is in addition to the primary cooling units. (Right?) But why the pressure switch and a time delay? Can you explain the value of the delay, how long of a delay, and the benefits of it? Also, the pressure switch....What is the purpose there? Seems rather redundant and a bit complicated. Is one subordinate to the other, or are they co-located in series? Enlighten me! Much appreciated.

BTW...Here in the arid southwest, many schools are finding the MERV-8 to be insufficient at keeping out the small airborne crap that is sooo ubiquitous here. Tis why so many areas here are not in compliance with Title V; though much of the PM10s are non-anthropogenic. I have an opportunity to measure system efficiency, where it has been modified with a MERV-11 filter system. (Talk about pressure drop!) PM2.5’s are a real (and new) concern here. Difficult part is getting reasonably priced, data-logging particulate meters to do the work with a LOD below 2.5 microns. I may pass on the opportunity due to technical difficulties that I cannot rely on.

Regards,

--

Geyer, PE, CIH, CSP

President

KERNTEC Industries, Inc.

Bakersfield, California

www.kerntecindustries.com

Tony. You got the gold star for the Kilz..Its a stain sealer not an outside paint.

Drain plane for direct applied stucco? Or be thinking synthetic stucco, or an EIFS system. If you don't maintain the drain plane, your in for a major moisture issue.

But have been wrong before.

Cole. SW Florida is a swamp. Very few builders pay attention to perm ratios or

Know what the work perm means . ( it is not a hair do) If water gets in, how does it get out.

I maintain a perm ratio of 1.5 too 2 . Do not use the typical eves and attic ventilation.

The building membrane is roof to slab with the slab vapor proofed.( no water is running down the inside glass in winter from slab transmission) Fresh air is provided thru a 3/4 ton make up air unit with oversized MERV 8 filters, ducted to air handler return coupled with a pressure switch and a time delay it cycles the unit providing 100 cfm of fresh air. No, it does not bring it to positive pressure as the extra air generally leaves thru fart fans and drier vents. HVAC has been modified with an extra coil for downstream heat during summer. Yes, during summer. If I want 70 at 40% with a reduced sensible load. I can get it.

Now of course that's now where I live and how I prefer to (custom) build. What others do or a buyer can afford is something else.

Valin

[Guest guest]

:

How well do the electrostatic coating on the MERV 8 and above filters work (in your experience) on the non-anthropogenic PM10s?? and PM2.5s??

Tony

........................................................................... "Tony" Havics, CHMM, CIH, PEpH2, LLCPO Box 34140Indianapolis, IN 46234 cell90% of Risk Management is knowing where to place the decimal point...any consultant can give you the other 10%â„ This message is from pH2. This message and any attachments may contain legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message and any attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and attachments (including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at . Delivery of this message and any attachments to any person other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of the sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or distributed without this statement.

-----Original Message-----From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of GeyerSent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 7:46 PMTo: iequality Subject: Re: Re: , Appellate Ruling Shoemaker Proof of Causation,:I need to ask a dumb question, only because I want to learn something.I understand your 3/4-ton make-up air unit with MERV-8 filters. I assume this unit is in addition to the primary cooling units. (Right?) But why the pressure switch and a time delay? Can you explain the value of the delay, how long of a delay, and the benefits of it? Also, the pressure switch....What is the purpose there? Seems rather redundant and a bit complicated. Is one subordinate to the other, or are they co-located in series? Enlighten me! Much appreciated.BTW...Here in the arid southwest, many schools are finding the MERV-8 to be insufficient at keeping out the small airborne crap that is sooo ubiquitous here. Tis why so many areas here are not in compliance with Title V; though much of the PM10s are non-anthropogenic. I have an opportunity to measure system efficiency, where it has been modified with a MERV-11 filter system. (Talk about pressure drop!) PM2.5’s are a real (and new) concern here. Difficult part is getting reasonably priced, data-logging particulate meters to do the work with a LOD below 2.5 microns. I may pass on the opportunity due to technical difficulties that I cannot rely on.Regards,-- Geyer, PE, CIH, CSPPresidentKERNTEC Industries, Inc.Bakersfield, Californiawww.kerntecindustries.com

Tony. You got the gold star for the Kilz..Its a stain sealer not an outside paint. Drain plane for direct applied stucco? Or be thinking synthetic stucco, or an EIFS system. If you don't maintain the drain plane, your in for a major moisture issue.But have been wrong before. Cole. SW Florida is a swamp. Very few builders pay attention to perm ratios or Know what the work perm means . ( it is not a hair do) If water gets in, how does it get out.I maintain a perm ratio of 1.5 too 2 . Do not use the typical eves and attic ventilation.The building membrane is roof to slab with the slab vapor proofed.( no water is running down the inside glass in winter from slab transmission) Fresh air is provided thru a 3/4 ton make up air unit with oversized MERV 8 filters, ducted to air handler return coupled with a pressure switch and a time delay it cycles the unit providing 100 cfm of fresh air. No, it does not bring it to positive pressure as the extra air generally leaves thru fart fans and drier vents. HVAC has been modified with an extra coil for downstream heat during summer. Yes, during summer. If I want 70 at 40% with a reduced sensible load. I can get it.Now of course that's now where I live and how I prefer to (custom) build. What others do or a buyer can afford is something else. Valin