Guest guest Posted June 1, 2007 Report Share Posted June 1, 2007 Shell, If the job is done correctly there is no need to apply anything to the framing. Additionally, if the framing is encapsulated after the remediation process than the loss has not been restored back to the pre-loss condition. Normally that procedure is done when the remediation contractor feels they have not done adequate cleaning. Personally, if I saw a painted surface it would warn me to not buy the home/condo. Put two cars besides one another one had noticeable repairs done the other didn’t. Which would you buy? EnviroBob From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Shell Bleiweiss Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 7:47 PM To: iequality Subject: s 40-80 and 40-20 A friend had a bathroom overflow and is remediating mold and wet subfloors, studs, etc. as a result. The contractor proposes to clean and seal studs and concrete subfloors with the two s products in my subject line. Is this needed and a good idea? Any toxic fumes to be concerned about/special precautions to take? This is in a modern high rise building. We have requested the MSDSs but have not seen them yet. Insurance is paying. Shell Bleiweiss Law Offices of Shell J. Bleiweiss Environmental and OSHA Law Offices in Chicago and Barrington, Illinois sbleiweissshell-bleiweiss http://www.shell-bleiweiss.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 1, 2007 Report Share Posted June 1, 2007 Shell, If the job is done correctly there is no need to apply anything to the framing. Additionally, if the framing is encapsulated after the remediation process than the loss has not been restored back to the pre-loss condition. Normally that procedure is done when the remediation contractor feels they have not done adequate cleaning. Personally, if I saw a painted surface it would warn me to not buy the home/condo. Put two cars besides one another one had noticeable repairs done the other didn’t. Which would you buy? EnviroBob From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Shell Bleiweiss Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 7:47 PM To: iequality Subject: s 40-80 and 40-20 A friend had a bathroom overflow and is remediating mold and wet subfloors, studs, etc. as a result. The contractor proposes to clean and seal studs and concrete subfloors with the two s products in my subject line. Is this needed and a good idea? Any toxic fumes to be concerned about/special precautions to take? This is in a modern high rise building. We have requested the MSDSs but have not seen them yet. Insurance is paying. Shell Bleiweiss Law Offices of Shell J. Bleiweiss Environmental and OSHA Law Offices in Chicago and Barrington, Illinois sbleiweissshell-bleiweiss http://www.shell-bleiweiss.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 1, 2007 Report Share Posted June 1, 2007 Shell, If the job is done correctly there is no need to apply anything to the framing. Additionally, if the framing is encapsulated after the remediation process than the loss has not been restored back to the pre-loss condition. Normally that procedure is done when the remediation contractor feels they have not done adequate cleaning. Personally, if I saw a painted surface it would warn me to not buy the home/condo. Put two cars besides one another one had noticeable repairs done the other didn’t. Which would you buy? EnviroBob From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Shell Bleiweiss Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 7:47 PM To: iequality Subject: s 40-80 and 40-20 A friend had a bathroom overflow and is remediating mold and wet subfloors, studs, etc. as a result. The contractor proposes to clean and seal studs and concrete subfloors with the two s products in my subject line. Is this needed and a good idea? Any toxic fumes to be concerned about/special precautions to take? This is in a modern high rise building. We have requested the MSDSs but have not seen them yet. Insurance is paying. Shell Bleiweiss Law Offices of Shell J. Bleiweiss Environmental and OSHA Law Offices in Chicago and Barrington, Illinois sbleiweissshell-bleiweiss http://www.shell-bleiweiss.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2007 Report Share Posted June 2, 2007 On the other hand, show me a house that has painted framing and one that does not, and I would pick the one with the framing painted, especially when I know that the paint is mold and termite resistant. Assuming the area remediated is a vulnerable area that could experience water again, I would rather have framing that is more resistant to future damage. I tell my clients the remediated house is better than it was when it was first built, because you have found a problem, repaired it, and now have framing in place that is resistant to future problems. Don Schaezler, Ph.D., P.E., CIH ETC Information Services, LLC Cibolo, Texas EnviroBob wrote: > > Shell, > > If the job is done correctly there is no need to apply anything to the > framing. Additionally, if the framing is encapsulated after the > remediation process than the loss has not been restored back to the > pre-loss condition. Normally that procedure is done when the > remediation contractor feels they have not done adequate cleaning. > > Personally, if I saw a painted surface it would warn me to not buy the > home/condo. Put two cars besides one another one had noticeable > repairs done the other didn’t. Which would you buy? > > EnviroBob > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* iequality [mailto:iequality ] > *On Behalf Of *Shell Bleiweiss > *Sent:* Thursday, May 31, 2007 7:47 PM > *To:* iequality > *Subject:* s 40-80 and 40-20 > > A friend had a bathroom overflow and is remediating mold and wet > subfloors, studs, etc. as a result. The contractor proposes to clean > and seal studs and concrete subfloors with the two s products in > my subject line. Is this needed and a good idea? Any toxic fumes to be > concerned about/special precautions to take? This is in a modern high > rise building. We have requested the MSDSs but have not seen them yet. > Insurance is paying. > > Shell Bleiweiss > > Law Offices of Shell J. Bleiweiss > > Environmental and OSHA Law > > Offices in Chicago and Barrington, Illinois > > > > sbleiweiss@... > > http://www.shell-bleiweiss.com > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2007 Report Share Posted June 2, 2007 Bob, To add to your comment, coatings are often used as a cover up in my neck of the woods and like you I would want to able to see what's there. If anyone thinks mold won't grow thru a coating, I have some great deals on beach front property in Alaska. There is absolutely no good reason for coating in my opinion as well. ge See what's free at AOL.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2007 Report Share Posted June 2, 2007 Bob, To add to your comment, coatings are often used as a cover up in my neck of the woods and like you I would want to able to see what's there. If anyone thinks mold won't grow thru a coating, I have some great deals on beach front property in Alaska. There is absolutely no good reason for coating in my opinion as well. ge See what's free at AOL.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2007 Report Share Posted June 2, 2007 Don, Interesting how you came to the conclusion you did. I briefly saw this past week on TV a chemical reportedly a mold inhibitor and a pesticide. I didn't get the name of the chemical. I was hoping someone else may know what it is. Moffett * s 40-80 and 40-20 > > A friend had a bathroom overflow and is remediating mold and wet > subfloors, studs, etc. as a result. The contractor proposes to clean > and seal studs and concrete subfloors with the two s products in > my subject line. Is this needed and a good idea? Any toxic fumes to be > concerned about/special precautions to take? This is in a modern high > rise building. We have requested the MSDSs but have not seen them yet. > Insurance is paying. > > Shell Bleiweiss > > Law Offices of Shell J. Bleiweiss > > Environmental and OSHA Law > > Offices in Chicago and Barrington, Illinois > > > > sbleiweiss@... > > http://www.shell-bleiweiss.com > > FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2007 Report Share Posted June 2, 2007 Don, Interesting how you came to the conclusion you did. I briefly saw this past week on TV a chemical reportedly a mold inhibitor and a pesticide. I didn't get the name of the chemical. I was hoping someone else may know what it is. Moffett * s 40-80 and 40-20 > > A friend had a bathroom overflow and is remediating mold and wet > subfloors, studs, etc. as a result. The contractor proposes to clean > and seal studs and concrete subfloors with the two s products in > my subject line. Is this needed and a good idea? Any toxic fumes to be > concerned about/special precautions to take? This is in a modern high > rise building. We have requested the MSDSs but have not seen them yet. > Insurance is paying. > > Shell Bleiweiss > > Law Offices of Shell J. Bleiweiss > > Environmental and OSHA Law > > Offices in Chicago and Barrington, Illinois > > > > sbleiweiss@... > > http://www.shell-bleiweiss.com > > FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2007 Report Share Posted June 2, 2007 ge, Encapsulation of the framing should not be done prior to PRV. If the area passes there is no need to encapsulate. If we were to encapsulate just in case water may be a problem in the future, than pant the home framing prior to insulation, etc. as its being built. For the painting everything position: Everyone knows that does not work so where is the data to substantiate that once painted, mold will not grow? To further back up your position ge painters have been saying clean and paint for years and none the less mold condition reoccur. If they paint it, it tells me they do not believe they did a thorough cleaning. EnviroBob From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of davidge@... Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 3:38 PM To: iequality Subject: Re: s 40-80 and 40-20 Bob, To add to your comment, coatings are often used as a cover up in my neck of the woods and like you I would want to able to see what's there. If anyone thinks mold won't grow thru a coating, I have some great deals on beach front property in Alaska. There is absolutely no good reason for coating in my opinion as well. ge See what's free at AOL.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 2, 2007 Report Share Posted June 2, 2007 ge, Encapsulation of the framing should not be done prior to PRV. If the area passes there is no need to encapsulate. If we were to encapsulate just in case water may be a problem in the future, than pant the home framing prior to insulation, etc. as its being built. For the painting everything position: Everyone knows that does not work so where is the data to substantiate that once painted, mold will not grow? To further back up your position ge painters have been saying clean and paint for years and none the less mold condition reoccur. If they paint it, it tells me they do not believe they did a thorough cleaning. EnviroBob From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of davidge@... Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 3:38 PM To: iequality Subject: Re: s 40-80 and 40-20 Bob, To add to your comment, coatings are often used as a cover up in my neck of the woods and like you I would want to able to see what's there. If anyone thinks mold won't grow thru a coating, I have some great deals on beach front property in Alaska. There is absolutely no good reason for coating in my opinion as well. ge See what's free at AOL.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 4, 2007 Report Share Posted June 4, 2007 The data on paint and decay are clear to anyone who inspects the exterior wood details of buildings. A well-painted surface fares much better than unpainted or poorly painted surfaces. Additionally, it is common to find mold and decay on the underside and at the edges of wood trim, where paint was applied after installation of the trim, and the hidden surfaces could not be (or were not) painted. It doesn't help that the cut edges are more prone to moisture absorption and to fungal attack. I have had water damage contractors tell me they have done demolition after an event and found less damage on previously remediated and coated wood framing than on original framing with equal secondary exposure. Don Schaezler EnviroBob wrote: > > ge, > > > > Encapsulation of the framing should not be done prior to PRV. If the > area passes there is no need to encapsulate. If we were to encapsulate > just in case water may be a problem in the future, than pant the home > framing prior to insulation, etc. as its being built. > > > > For the painting everything position: > > Everyone knows that does not work so where is the data to substantiate > that once painted, mold will not grow? > > > > To further back up your position ge painters have been saying > clean and paint for years and none the less mold condition reoccur. > > > > If they paint it, it tells me they do not believe they did a thorough > cleaning. > > > > EnviroBob > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* iequality [mailto:iequality ] > *On Behalf Of *davidge@... > *Sent:* Saturday, June 02, 2007 3:38 PM > *To:* iequality > *Subject:* Re: s 40-80 and 40-20 > > > > Bob, > > > > To add to your comment, coatings are often used as a cover up in my > neck of the woods and like you I would want to able to see what's > there. If anyone thinks mold won't grow thru a coating, I have some > great deals on beach front property in Alaska. > > > > There is absolutely no good reason for coating in my opinion as well. > > > > > > *ge * > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > See what's free at AOL.com > <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503>. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 4, 2007 Report Share Posted June 4, 2007 Bob, This is a pet thought of mine but there is no such thing as encapsulation as you can not seal by coating. I do agree completely with your other statement. ge ge, Encapsulation of the framing should not be done prior to PRV. If the area passes there is no need to encapsulate. If we were to encapsulate just in case water may be a problem in the future, than pant the home framing prior to insulation, etc. as its being built. For the painting everything position: Everyone knows that does not work so where is the data to substantiate that once painted, mold will not grow? To further back up your position ge painters have been saying clean and paint for years and none the less mold condition reoccur. If they paint it, it tells me they do not believe they did a thorough cleaning. EnviroBob From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of davidgeaolSent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 3:38 PMTo: iequality Subject: Re: s 40-80 and 40-20 Bob, To add to your comment, coatings are often used as a cover up in my neck of the woods and like you I would want to able to see what's there. If anyone thinks mold won't grow thru a coating, I have some great deals on beach front property in Alaska. There is absolutely no good reason for coating in my opinion as well. ge See what's free at AOL.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2007 Report Share Posted June 5, 2007 Hi, You may find the MSDS to s 40-80 at the following link http://www.questsafety.com/msds.asp. If you are looking to prevent mold/fungi & mildew from growing on a surface you may want to look into the Microbe Guard line of anti-microbials. The technology is applied by certified technicians, but also comes with a 10 year warranty on a remediated surface. The technology is safe, non- leaching and does not offgas, but has been in direct contact with humans for over 25 years. You can take a look at this website www.microbeguardoforegon.com for more information. The technology is more of a chemistry than a chemical. regards, alonzo > > > > Shell, > > > > If the job is done correctly there is no need to apply anything to the > > framing. Additionally, if the framing is encapsulated after the > > remediation process than the loss has not been restored back to the > > pre-loss condition. Normally that procedure is done when the > > remediation contractor feels they have not done adequate cleaning. > > > > Personally, if I saw a painted surface it would warn me to not buy the > > home/condo. Put two cars besides one another one had noticeable > > repairs done the other didn't. Which would you buy? > > > > EnviroBob > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ > > > > *From:* iequality [mailto:iequality ] > > *On Behalf Of *Shell Bleiweiss > > *Sent:* Thursday, May 31, 2007 7:47 PM > > *To:* iequality > > *Subject:* s 40-80 and 40-20 > > > > A friend had a bathroom overflow and is remediating mold and wet > > subfloors, studs, etc. as a result. The contractor proposes to clean > > and seal studs and concrete subfloors with the two s products in > > my subject line. Is this needed and a good idea? Any toxic fumes to be > > concerned about/special precautions to take? This is in a modern high > > rise building. We have requested the MSDSs but have not seen them yet. > > Insurance is paying. > > > > Shell Bleiweiss > > > > Law Offices of Shell J. Bleiweiss > > > > Environmental and OSHA Law > > > > Offices in Chicago and Barrington, Illinois > > > > > > > > sbleiweiss@... > > > > http://www.shell-bleiweiss.com > > > > > > > > FAIR USE NOTICE: > > This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been > specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material > available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, > political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice > issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such > copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. > In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is > distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in > receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. > For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. > If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your > own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright > owner. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 5, 2007 Report Share Posted June 5, 2007 Hi, You may find the MSDS to s 40-80 at the following link http://www.questsafety.com/msds.asp. If you are looking to prevent mold/fungi & mildew from growing on a surface you may want to look into the Microbe Guard line of anti-microbials. The technology is applied by certified technicians, but also comes with a 10 year warranty on a remediated surface. The technology is safe, non- leaching and does not offgas, but has been in direct contact with humans for over 25 years. You can take a look at this website www.microbeguardoforegon.com for more information. The technology is more of a chemistry than a chemical. regards, alonzo > > > > Shell, > > > > If the job is done correctly there is no need to apply anything to the > > framing. Additionally, if the framing is encapsulated after the > > remediation process than the loss has not been restored back to the > > pre-loss condition. Normally that procedure is done when the > > remediation contractor feels they have not done adequate cleaning. > > > > Personally, if I saw a painted surface it would warn me to not buy the > > home/condo. Put two cars besides one another one had noticeable > > repairs done the other didn't. Which would you buy? > > > > EnviroBob > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ > > > > *From:* iequality [mailto:iequality ] > > *On Behalf Of *Shell Bleiweiss > > *Sent:* Thursday, May 31, 2007 7:47 PM > > *To:* iequality > > *Subject:* s 40-80 and 40-20 > > > > A friend had a bathroom overflow and is remediating mold and wet > > subfloors, studs, etc. as a result. The contractor proposes to clean > > and seal studs and concrete subfloors with the two s products in > > my subject line. Is this needed and a good idea? Any toxic fumes to be > > concerned about/special precautions to take? This is in a modern high > > rise building. We have requested the MSDSs but have not seen them yet. > > Insurance is paying. > > > > Shell Bleiweiss > > > > Law Offices of Shell J. Bleiweiss > > > > Environmental and OSHA Law > > > > Offices in Chicago and Barrington, Illinois > > > > > > > > sbleiweiss@... > > > > http://www.shell-bleiweiss.com > > > > > > > > FAIR USE NOTICE: > > This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been > specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material > available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, > political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice > issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such > copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. > In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is > distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in > receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. > For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. > If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your > own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright > owner. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2007 Report Share Posted June 6, 2007 ge: You stated: “.....you can not seal by coating.” You are so wrong!, I just don’t know where to start to point out your mistakes. Ever heard of a thing called paint?!? Bob, This is a pet thought of mine but there is no such thing as encapsulation as you can not seal by coating. I do agree completely with your other statement. ge ge, Encapsulation of the framing should not be done prior to PRV. If the area passes there is no need to encapsulate. If we were to encapsulate just in case water may be a problem in the future, than pant the home framing prior to insulation, etc. as its being built. For the painting everything position: Everyone knows that does not work so where is the data to substantiate that once painted, mold will not grow? To further back up your position ge painters have been saying clean and paint for years and none the less mold condition reoccur. If they paint it, it tells me they do not believe they did a thorough cleaning. EnviroBob From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of davidge@... Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 3:38 PM To: iequality Subject: Re: s 40-80 and 40-20 Bob, To add to your comment, coatings are often used as a cover up in my neck of the woods and like you I would want to able to see what's there. If anyone thinks mold won't grow thru a coating, I have some great deals on beach front property in Alaska. There is absolutely no good reason for coating in my opinion as well. ge See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2007 Report Share Posted June 6, 2007 ge: You stated: “.....you can not seal by coating.” You are so wrong!, I just don’t know where to start to point out your mistakes. Ever heard of a thing called paint?!? Bob, This is a pet thought of mine but there is no such thing as encapsulation as you can not seal by coating. I do agree completely with your other statement. ge ge, Encapsulation of the framing should not be done prior to PRV. If the area passes there is no need to encapsulate. If we were to encapsulate just in case water may be a problem in the future, than pant the home framing prior to insulation, etc. as its being built. For the painting everything position: Everyone knows that does not work so where is the data to substantiate that once painted, mold will not grow? To further back up your position ge painters have been saying clean and paint for years and none the less mold condition reoccur. If they paint it, it tells me they do not believe they did a thorough cleaning. EnviroBob From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of davidge@... Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 3:38 PM To: iequality Subject: Re: s 40-80 and 40-20 Bob, To add to your comment, coatings are often used as a cover up in my neck of the woods and like you I would want to able to see what's there. If anyone thinks mold won't grow thru a coating, I have some great deals on beach front property in Alaska. There is absolutely no good reason for coating in my opinion as well. ge See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2007 Report Share Posted June 6, 2007 Hi ge, I must respectfully disagree. I always recommend painting after bare wood is cleaned. This is particularly important when moldy fiberglass is removed from a crawl-space or basement ceiling. Due to the coarseness of the wood, every spore and hypha can never be removed. In addition, other dust particles (incuuding cellulose itself) possibly coated with mold allergens (and potentially acting as surrogate allergens) can become aerosolized when the surfaces are disturbed. Paint permanently seals these allergens in. It also eliminates a huge source of nutrients (the framing cellulose and starch) from being a future food source. More than half of the basement and crawl-space fiberglass samples I take have very significant Aspergillus and/or Cladosporium growth. More than a third of these also have significant mold-eating mite populations. The ecosystem is always due to mold growth in dust embedded in insulation from spaces that are not dehumidified. In one case, the homeowner continued to experience rashes after the framing and fiberglass were remediated. She became symptom-free only after the joists and subflooring was painted. C. May, M.A., CIAQP May Indoor Air Investigations LLC 1522 Cambridge Street Cambridge, MA 02139 www.mayindoorair.com www.myhouseiskillingme.com From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of davidge@... Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 3:38 PM To: iequality Subject: Re: s 40-80 and 40-20 Bob, To add to your comment, coatings are often used as a cover up in my neck of the woods and like you I would want to able to see what's there. If anyone thinks mold won't grow thru a coating, I have some great deals on beach front property in Alaska. There is absolutely no good reason for coating in my opinion as well. ge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2007 Report Share Posted June 6, 2007 EnviroBob: I respectfully disagree, and I believe you are providing Shell with some poor advice! Post-remediation encapsulation is a standard of care within the remediation industry, and there is a lot of value to encapsulation. The foundation of your opinion seems to be focused on the premise that encapsulation is used on poor quality remediation efforts in order to hide a source contaminant. Not true. The purpose of encapsulation is to lock down any remaining contaminant that has avoided being removed, and seal surfaces so new products can be applied and/or the (remediated) space being re-occupied without fear of exposure to workers rehabilitating the work area. If you can claim that all bio-mass has been removed, then you could claim that the space was essentially sterile – not possible! Encapsulants are a standard of care for many types of remediation and construction efforts, e.g., asbestos, LBP, mercury, silica, fiberglass, partial demo, and mold. Moreover, encapsulated surfaces resist new biological infestations, moisture imbibition is slowed, and they are easier to re-clean if soiled. To not use encapsulants post-remediation may be a negligent act; depending upon the circumstance. While I agree that pigmented encapsulants can be used to hide poor quality remediation work, this is not their purpose. Similarly, drywall mud and paint can hide problems with wall assemblies on the inside, and stucco can effectively hide them on the outside; but this is not the purpose of the coating material. In your previous posts, you have positioned yourself as a “total source removal” advocate; however, you have failed to acknowledge the practical aspects that do not always support this position, e.g., budgetary limitations, loss of use restrictions, and/or accessing inaccessible interstitial spaces. (I recall that you were the person that advocated disassembling a wood-framed wall system in order to scrub each piece of wood until it was free of mold, then re-building.) On most mold-related projects, it is practical to remove and/or clean what is readily accessible – acknowledging that some bio-mass will remain behind, mitigate the source of moisture, encapsulate exposed building materials after a PRV visual and sampling regime, encapsulate, then build-back. This is consistent with many other standards of care where contaminant reduction/mitigation is warranted. How is it that you can state: “Additionally, if the framing is encapsulated after the remediation process then the loss has not been restored back to the pre-loss condition.”? Huh? This is an unfounded opinion and does not have merit. Moreover, I and A LOT of contractors I know of take exception to your comment: “Normally that procedure is done when the remediation contractor feels they have not done adequate cleaning.” What BS! Based on your comments, I really don’t believe you know what “normal” is. Maybe you should align yourself with some good-quality remediation contractors who are not trying to hide anything, strive to do good work, and provide a clean post-remediation work space. We encapsulate these workspaces after everyone is satisfied with the cleanliness. Encapsulation is often a very minor cost of the total project effort, it is quick, and its value is well-understood by all involved....except you, it appears. If you can have cleaned to a press-loss condition, all sources of bio-mass and do so with the confidence that you can leave that space fit for re-occupancy without using a method (i.e., encapsulation) whose value has been well-demonstrated for nearly 20-years....more power to you. IMHO, you are also denying the building owners the value that encapsulants provide, and you are not conducting your work within an accepted industry practice. For what it is worth..... Shell, If the job is done correctly there is no need to apply anything to the framing. Additionally, if the framing is encapsulated after the remediation process than the loss has not been restored back to the pre-loss condition. Normally that procedure is done when the remediation contractor feels they have not done adequate cleaning. Personally, if I saw a painted surface it would warn me to not buy the home/condo. Put two cars besides one another one had noticeable repairs done the other didn’t. Which would you buy? EnviroBob From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Shell Bleiweiss Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 7:47 PM To: iequality Subject: s 40-80 and 40-20 A friend had a bathroom overflow and is remediating mold and wet subfloors, studs, etc. as a result. The contractor proposes to clean and seal studs and concrete subfloors with the two s products in my subject line. Is this needed and a good idea? Any toxic fumes to be concerned about/special precautions to take? This is in a modern high rise building. We have requested the MSDSs but have not seen them yet. Insurance is paying. Shell Bleiweiss Law Offices of Shell J. Bleiweiss Environmental and OSHA Law Offices in Chicago and Barrington, Illinois sbleiweiss@... http://www.shell-bleiweiss.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2007 Report Share Posted June 6, 2007 Geyer, Your reply caught my eye - What consensus document on mold remediation describes encapsulation as a standard of care? As you well understand, there are significant difference between "locking down" fibers vs. down "locking down" organisms, so there can be no comparison there. Furthermore, there has been ample discussion on this List and elsewhere that addresses the fallacy of "mold resistant" surfaces. AIHA Guideline 3-2004 (Assessment, Remediation, and Post-Remediation Verification of Mold in Buildings) does describe possible scenarios where real-world situations may indicate the need for an "alternative approach" that involves coating surfaces that can not otherwise be adequately remediated (pg. 6-7), but that hardly constitutes a blanket endorsement of encapsulation, much less establishing a "standard of care." I just now picked up on this thread, so perhaps I'm misunderstanding you. If so, please accept my apology for jumping in like this. If not, could you please clarify? Curtis Redington, RS Environmental Quality Specialist City of Wichita Dept. of Environmental Health -----Original Message-----From: iequality [mailto:iequality ]On Behalf Of GeyerSent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 3:19 PMTo: iequality Subject: Re: s 40-80 and 40-20 EnviroBob:I respectfully disagree, and I believe you are providing Shell with some poor advice!Post-remediation encapsulation is a standard of care within the remediation industry, and there is a lot of value to encapsulation. The foundation of your opinion seems to be focused on the premise that encapsulation is used on poor quality remediation efforts in order to hide a source contaminant. Not true. The purpose of encapsulation is to lock down any remaining contaminant that has avoided being removed, and seal surfaces so new products can be applied and/or the (remediated) space being re-occupied without fear of exposure to workers rehabilitating the work area. If you can claim that all bio-mass has been removed, then you could claim that the space was essentially sterile – not possible! Encapsulants are a standard of care for many types of remediation and construction efforts, e.g., asbestos, LBP, mercury, silica, fiberglass, partial demo, and mold. Moreover, encapsulated surfaces resist new biological infestations, moisture imbibition is slowed, and they are easier to re-clean if soiled. To not use encapsulants post-remediation may be a negligent act; depending upon the circumstance.While I agree that pigmented encapsulants can be used to hide poor quality remediation work, this is not their purpose. Similarly, drywall mud and paint can hide problems with wall assemblies on the inside, and stucco can effectively hide them on the outside; but this is not the purpose of the coating material.In your previous posts, you have positioned yourself as a “total source removal” advocate; however, you have failed to acknowledge the practical aspects that do not always support this position, e.g., budgetary limitations, loss of use restrictions, and/or accessing inaccessible interstitial spaces. (I recall that you were the person that advocated disassembling a wood-framed wall system in order to scrub each piece of wood until it was free of mold, then re-building.) On most mold-related projects, it is practical to remove and/or clean what is readily accessible – acknowledging that some bio-mass will remain behind, mitigate the source of moisture, encapsulate exposed building materials after a PRV visual and sampling regime, encapsulate, then build-back. This is consistent with many other standards of care where contaminant reduction/mitigation is warranted.How is it that you can state: “Additionally, if the framing is encapsulated after the remediation process then the loss has not been restored back to the pre-loss condition.”? Huh? This is an unfounded opinion and does not have merit. Moreover, I and A LOT of contractors I know of take exception to your comment: “Normally that procedure is done when the remediation contractor feels they have not done adequate cleaning.” What BS! Based on your comments, I really don’t believe you know what “normal” is. Maybe you should align yourself with some good-quality remediation contractors who are not trying to hide anything, strive to do good work, and provide a clean post-remediation work space. We encapsulate these workspaces after everyone is satisfied with the cleanliness. Encapsulation is often a very minor cost o f the total project effort, it is quick, and its value is well-understood by all involved....except you, it appears.If you can have cleaned to a press-loss condition, all sources of bio-mass and do so with the confidence that you can leave that space fit for re-occupancy without using a method (i.e., encapsulation) whose value has been well-demonstrated for nearly 20-years....more power to you. IMHO, you are also denying the building owners the value that encapsulants provide, and you are not conducting your work within an accepted industry practice.For what it is worth.....On 6/1/07 4:19 AM, "EnviroBob" <BobEnvironmentalAirTechs> wrote: Shell, If the job is done correctly there is no need to apply anything to the framing. Additionally, if the framing is encapsulated after the remediation process than the loss has not been restored back to the pre-loss condition. Normally that procedure is done when the remediation contractor feels they have not done adequate cleaning. Personally, if I saw a painted surface it would warn me to not buy the home/condo. Put two cars besides one another one had noticeable repairs done the other didn’t. Which would you buy? EnviroBob From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Shell BleiweissSent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 7:47 PMTo: iequality Subject: s 40-80 and 40-20A friend had a bathroom overflow and is remediating mold and wet subfloors, studs, etc. as a result. The contractor proposes to clean and seal studs and concrete subfloors with the two s products in my subject line. Is this needed and a good idea? Any toxic fumes to be concerned about/special precautions to take? This is in a modern high rise building. We have requested the MSDSs but have not seen them yet. Insurance is paying. Shell BleiweissLaw Offices of Shell J. BleiweissEnvironmental and OSHA LawOffices in Chicago and Barrington, Illinoissbleiweissshell-bleiweisshttp://www.shell-bleiweiss.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2007 Report Share Posted June 6, 2007 Hello Micheal, Maybe we should find the correct definitions for paint, blocking, coating, sealer, and encapsulant? Have you found a good coating to block methamphetamine on sheetrock? Bradley HarrSr. Environmental Scientist -----Original Message-----From: iequality [mailto:iequality ]On Behalf Of GeyerSent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 8:11 AMTo: iequality Subject: Re: s 40-80 and 40-20 ge:You stated: “.....you can not seal by coating.” You are so wrong!, I just don’t know where to start to point out your mistakes. Ever heard of a thing called paint?!?On 6/4/07 6:35 PM, "ge" <davidgeaol> wrote: Bob, This is a pet thought of mine but there is no such thing as encapsulation as you can not seal by coating. I do agree completely with your other statement. ge In a message dated 06/04/07 10:36:44 Eastern Daylight Time, BobEnvironmentalAirTechs writes: ge,Encapsulation of the framing should not be done prior to PRV. If the area passes there is no need to encapsulate. If we were to encapsulate just in case water may be a problem in the future, than pant the home framing prior to insulation, etc. as its being built. For the painting everything position: Everyone knows that does not work so where is the data to substantiate that once painted, mold will not grow?To further back up your position ge painters have been saying clean and paint for years and none the less mold condition reoccur. If they paint it, it tells me they do not believe they did a thorough cleaning. EnviroBob From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of davidgeaolSent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 3:38 PMTo: iequality Subject: Re: s 40-80 and 40-20Bob,To add to your comment, coatings are often used as a cover up in my neck of the woods and like you I would want to able to see what's there. If anyone thinks mold won't grow thru a coating, I have some great deals on beach front property in Alaska.There is absolutely no good reason for coating in my opinion as well.ge See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2007 Report Share Posted June 6, 2007 Hello , How good does the mold removal need to be (ie spores / sq cm) before the RC is allowed to coat the wood? Goes to the question of where do you spend the money, on good removal or coating material. Are you testing the surfaces before allowing coating? I like coating on certain projects, but not all. Are we talking about antifugal coating or basic primer? Bradley HarrSr. Environmental Scientist -----Original Message-----From: iequality [mailto:iequality ]On Behalf Of GeyerSent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 2:19 PMTo: iequality Subject: Re: s 40-80 and 40-20 EnviroBob:I respectfully disagree, and I believe you are providing Shell with some poor advice!Post-remediation encapsulation is a standard of care within the remediation industry, and there is a lot of value to encapsulation. The foundation of your opinion seems to be focused on the premise that encapsulation is used on poor quality remediation efforts in order to hide a source contaminant. Not true. The purpose of encapsulation is to lock down any remaining contaminant that has avoided being removed, and seal surfaces so new products can be applied and/or the (remediated) space being re-occupied without fear of exposure to workers rehabilitating the work area. If you can claim that all bio-mass has been removed, then you could claim that the space was essentially sterile – not possible! Encapsulants are a standard of care for many types of remediation and construction efforts, e.g., asbestos, LBP, mercury, silica, fiberglass, partial demo, and mold. Moreover, encapsulated surfaces resist new biological infestations, moisture imbibition is slowed, and they are easier to re-clean if soiled. To not use encapsulants post-remediation may be a negligent act; depending upon the circumstance.While I agree that pigmented encapsulants can be used to hide poor quality remediation work, this is not their purpose. Similarly, drywall mud and paint can hide problems with wall assemblies on the inside, and stucco can effectively hide them on the outside; but this is not the purpose of the coating material.In your previous posts, you have positioned yourself as a “total source removal” advocate; however, you have failed to acknowledge the practical aspects that do not always support this position, e.g., budgetary limitations, loss of use restrictions, and/or accessing inaccessible interstitial spaces. (I recall that you were the person that advocated disassembling a wood-framed wall system in order to scrub each piece of wood until it was free of mold, then re-building.) On most mold-related projects, it is practical to remove and/or clean what is readily accessible – acknowledging that some bio-mass will remain behind, mitigate the source of moisture, encapsulate exposed building materials after a PRV visual and sampling regime, encapsulate, then build-back. This is consistent with many other standards of care where contaminant reduction/mitigation is warranted.How is it that you can state: “Additionally, if the framing is encapsulated after the remediation process then the loss has not been restored back to the pre-loss condition.”? Huh? This is an unfounded opinion and does not have merit. Moreover, I and A LOT of contractors I know of take exception to your comment: “Normally that procedure is done when the remediation contractor feels they have not done adequate cleaning.” What BS! Based on your comments, I really don’t believe you know what “normal” is. Maybe you should align yourself with some good-quality remediation contractors who are not trying to hide anything, strive to do good work, and provide a clean post-remediation work space. We encapsulate these workspaces after everyone is satisfied with the cleanliness. Encapsulation is often a very minor cost o f the total project effort, it is quick, and its value is well-understood by all involved....except you, it appears.If you can have cleaned to a press-loss condition, all sources of bio-mass and do so with the confidence that you can leave that space fit for re-occupancy without using a method (i.e., encapsulation) whose value has been well-demonstrated for nearly 20-years....more power to you. IMHO, you are also denying the building owners the value that encapsulants provide, and you are not conducting your work within an accepted industry practice.For what it is worth.....On 6/1/07 4:19 AM, "EnviroBob" <BobEnvironmentalAirTechs> wrote: Shell, If the job is done correctly there is no need to apply anything to the framing. Additionally, if the framing is encapsulated after the remediation process than the loss has not been restored back to the pre-loss condition. Normally that procedure is done when the remediation contractor feels they have not done adequate cleaning. Personally, if I saw a painted surface it would warn me to not buy the home/condo. Put two cars besides one another one had noticeable repairs done the other didn’t. Which would you buy? EnviroBob From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Shell BleiweissSent: Thursday, May 31, 2007 7:47 PMTo: iequality Subject: s 40-80 and 40-20A friend had a bathroom overflow and is remediating mold and wet subfloors, studs, etc. as a result. The contractor proposes to clean and seal studs and concrete subfloors with the two s products in my subject line. Is this needed and a good idea? Any toxic fumes to be concerned about/special precautions to take? This is in a modern high rise building. We have requested the MSDSs but have not seen them yet. Insurance is paying. Shell BleiweissLaw Offices of Shell J. BleiweissEnvironmental and OSHA LawOffices in Chicago and Barrington, Illinoissbleiweissshell-bleiweisshttp://www.shell-bleiweiss.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2007 Report Share Posted June 6, 2007  Hello Jeff, Are you talking about a basic primer or an antimicrobial coating / paint? Do you have a project size / extent of damage, cut off point for the painting recommendation? For example, 100 sq ft in a crawl space with mixed A/P Type mold. How clean does it need to be before you allow coating? I am very interested in this discussion on coatings. Bradley HarrSr. Environmental Scientist -----Original Message-----From: iequality [mailto:iequality ]On Behalf Of Jeff MaySent: Wednesday, June 06, 2007 1:44 PMTo: iequality Subject: Re: s 40-80 and 40-20 Hi ge, I must respectfully disagree. I always recommend painting after bare wood is cleaned. This is particularly important when moldy fiberglass is removed from a crawl-space or basement ceiling. Due to the coarseness of the wood, every spore and hypha can never be removed. In addition, other dust particles (incuuding cellulose itself) possibly coated with mold allergens (and potentially acting as surrogate allergens) can become aerosolized when the surfaces are disturbed. Paint permanently seals these allergens in. It also eliminates a huge source of nutrients (the framing cellulose and starch) from being a future food source. More than half of the basement and crawl-space fiberglass samples I take have very significant Aspergillus and/or Cladosporium growth. More than a third of these also have significant mold-eating mite populations. The ecosystem is always due to mold growth in dust embedded in insulation from spaces that are not dehumidified. In one case, the homeowner continued to experience rashes after the framing and fiberglass were remediated. She became symptom-free only after the joists and subflooring was painted. C. May, M.A., CIAQPMay Indoor Air Investigations LLC1522 Cambridge StreetCambridge, MA 02139www.mayindoorair.comwww.myhouseiskillingme.com From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf OfdavidgeaolSent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 3:38 PMTo: iequality Subject: Re: s 40-80 and 40-20 Bob, To add to your comment, coatings are often used as a cover up in my neck of thewoods and like you I would want to able to see what's there. If anyone thinksmold won't grow thru a coating, I have some great deals on beach front propertyin Alaska. There is absolutely no good reason for coating in my opinion as well. ge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2007 Report Share Posted June 6, 2007 Bradley, In my opinion, the coating used is not very relevant, nor is the size of the job. It is impossible to eliminate all the mold fragments from the coarse wood surface unless the top layer of wood cells is " blasted " off. (Actually, the " old fashioned " method developed for lead paint removal, using razor sharp, curved-blade, one inch scrapers is ideal as these can be used as wood planes on wood surfaces.) I work with many clients who have chemical sensitivity and they cannot tolerate most paints so I recommend that the wood be sealed with slightly diluted Elmer's Glue.(As I recall, the resin in the Elmer's emulsion is polyvinyl acetate, the same resin used in cheap paints.) The glue can be rolled or spray painted on and does a fine job of sealing the surface. The bottom line is if the RH is not controlled, whatever sealant is used, eventually mold will start to grow again. How clean is clean? I can't answer that but I think that in many cases, we are asking for too much. C. May, M.A., CIAQP May Indoor Air Investigations LLC www.mayindoorair.com www.myhouseiskillingme.com > > Hello Jeff, > Are you talking about a basic primer or an antimicrobial coating / paint? Do you have a project size / extent of damage, cut off point for the painting recommendation? For example, 100 sq ft in a crawl space with mixed A/P Type mold. How clean does it need to be before you allow coating? I am very interested in this discussion on coatings. > Bradley Harr > Sr. Environmental Scientist > > > > Re: s 40-80 and 40-20 > > Bob, > > To add to your comment, coatings are often used as a cover up in my neck of > the > woods and like you I would want to able to see what's there. If anyone > thinks > mold won't grow thru a coating, I have some great deals on beach front > property > in Alaska. > > There is absolutely no good reason for coating in my opinion as well. > > ge > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2007 Report Share Posted June 6, 2007 Bradley: Damn good point! ASTM has some criteria, but it is not all that clear. Moreover, there is overlap and duplicity. I have yet to see a single document compare and contrast a paint, from a coating, from a blocking agent, from a sealer, from an encapsulant. You point has merit. Regarding meth......I have cleaned-up quite a few meth labs. Not too many lately as compared to five years earlier. Tis because the Mexicans have gotten smart. Instead of smuggling meth ingredients into the U.S., they are manufacturing meth then smuggling the finished product. Confiscations at the border for meth ingredients is at an all-time low, while confiscations of meth are skyrocketing. Moreover, the three meth labs I cleaned-up this past 12 months have been small potatoes compared to what I cleaned up before. Big change. This said, in California we have a new meth clean-up standard which requires sampling. What surprised me is how meth fumes can migrate through a painted drywall system and get absorbed into the wood that makes-up the wall system. Compound this with the fact that California adopted the Feds meth clean-up threshold, which is unrealistically low, and we now have a recipe for total building demolition. And I keep asking....Is the demo waste hazardous? Not based on CERCLA! The new clean-up standard is a good one, except that the ridiculously low clean-up threshold gives it a fatal flaw. I wish some practicality would prevail. Hello Micheal, Maybe we should find the correct definitions for paint, blocking, coating, sealer, and encapsulant? Have you found a good coating to block methamphetamine on sheetrock? Bradley Harr Sr. Environmental Scientist Re: s 40-80 and 40-20 Bob, To add to your comment, coatings are often used as a cover up in my neck of the woods and like you I would want to able to see what's there. If anyone thinks mold won't grow thru a coating, I have some great deals on beach front property in Alaska. There is absolutely no good reason for coating in my opinion as well. ge See what's free at AOL.com <http://www.aol.com?ncid=AOLAOF00020000000503> . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 6, 2007 Report Share Posted June 6, 2007 Bradley: I am going to answer your question with a question.......What is a safe concentration (i.e., spores / sq cm)? Hello , How good does the mold removal need to be (ie spores / sq cm) before the RC is allowed to coat the wood? Goes to the question of where do you spend the money, on good removal or coating material. Are you testing the surfaces before allowing coating? I like coating on certain projects, but not all. Are we talking about antifugal coating or basic primer? Bradley Harr Sr. Environmental Scientist s 40-80 and 40-20 A friend had a bathroom overflow and is remediating mold and wet subfloors, studs, etc. as a result. The contractor proposes to clean and seal studs and concrete subfloors with the two s products in my subject line. Is this needed and a good idea? Any toxic fumes to be concerned about/special precautions to take? This is in a modern high rise building. We have requested the MSDSs but have not seen them yet. Insurance is paying. Shell Bleiweiss Law Offices of Shell J. Bleiweiss Environmental and OSHA Law Offices in Chicago and Barrington, Illinois sbleiweiss@... http://www.shell-bleiweiss.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.