Jail study finds mold and more

[Guest guest]

Jail study finds mold and more

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?

newsid=14485730 & BRD=2068 & PAG=461 & dept_id=387472 & rfi=6

By BARBARA L. PARSONS May 06, 2005

Email to a friend Voice your opinion

THE INTERIOR WALLS OF THE FOYER in the Decatur County Sheriff's

Office show signs of water damage from moisture seeping through

exterior walls.

A study performed two years ago noted deteriorating structural

conditions at the Decatur County Jail and Sheriff's Department

facility on Spring Creek Road, including mold and fungal growth on

walls and damp, and crumbling sheetrock.

The study by Air Purification Specialists Inc. of Pavo, Ga., dated

July 29, 2003, cost the county $11,843 and makes a direct connection

between an improperly functioning exterior wall covering and a large

number of problems associated with high moisture conditions that

affect not only the structural integrity of the 65,710-square-foot

building—built for an approximate cost of $7 million in 1991-92—but

also air quality inside of the building.

Advertisement

Sheriff Wiley gave a copy of the 96-page report to County

Administrator Jim Bramblett, who then wrote a memo to the

commissioners on April 28, saying $500,000 funding for repairs to

the Jail and Sheriff's Department was included in the 2004 Special

Purpose Local Option Sales Tax (SPLOST) but to date only about

$50,000 has been collected and apportioned to the project.

Bramblett said he spoke to architect Leon Lynn of Jinright, and

Lynn, who roughly estimated repairs to the jail's exterior could run

anywhere from $450,000 to $600,000.

" Our current priority is the new landfill, though we can shift some

funds around and possibly accomplish this (the jail) project this

year or early next year. I feel we need to employ an expert in this

field to analyze the current report, make recommendations for

remediation, draw plans and specifications for construction and

supervise the contractor during construction, " Bramblett said.

According to the cover sheet on the study, the study was prepared

for former County Administrator Alan , the Decatur County

Board of Commissioners and in 2003. The name of the study

is " Decatur County Jail & Sheriff's Department Building Envelope

Diagnostics Report. "

The study was authorized by the Board of Commissioners after it

received reports from of recurrent moisture intrusion and

concerns over building degradation. The evaluation was limited to

specific parameters and areas highlighted during a preliminary

assessment performed in January 2003.

Findings & recommendations of study

In the report, Tim Hebert, a certified microbial consultant with Air

Purification Specialists Inc., said structural damage and the

presence of mold, lichen and fungus in the jail facility is the

result of breaches in the exterior wall covering—along with the fact

that the material is allowing moisture to seep inside the structure.

The building envelope wall system is " concrete block and/or poured

masonry overlaid with an Exterior Insulation and Finish System

(EIFS) cladding with inoperable (fixed glass) windows. "

This exterior covering consists of " expanded polystyrene (EPS)

insulation board adhesively attached to masonry block or cast

concrete surfaces. The EPS insulation is covered with a base coat,

fiber mesh and a finish coat … collectively referred to as the

lamina … the actual waterproofing sealant, " the report says.

Hebert said he requested information from Dryvit Systems Inc.,

manufacturers of the exterior insulation and finish system, but no

literature was available for the time period of construction from

1991-92. However, his team did visual and moisture surveys and

performed water resistance testing.

" It was reported by [the jail] staff that no building-wide

maintenance inspection or repairs have been performed on the

[exterior] cladding since the date of occupancy [in 1993], " the

report stated.

It also says that the exterior coating relies on " water tight "

components such as windows, copings and flashings combined with

sealed joints. However, the cladding lacks a " secondary drainage

plane to capture incidental water intrusion and redirect it to the

building exterior. As a result, bulk water … becomes trapped within

the barrier wall assembly. If sufficient water is retained … it may

deteriorate the wall system and compromise the system's properties. "

In the " Limitations " portion of the report, it states that extensive

efforts were made to locate areas affected by moisture intrusion and

mold amplification but areas not known to have been affected by

water damage were not investigated.

" Therefore, the potential for mold growth in these areas cannot be

dismissed at this time. This report is intended to be used for

planning, remediation and construction activities. This report is

not intended to be used as a document to render medical judgments, "

the report states.

Findings of the study

Hebert's team found widespread evidence of high moisture levels

beneath the exterior cladding of the building, principally in the

vertical plane from ground level to 36 inches above grade. The real

problem lies in the fact that the exterior covering was installed

below ground level so its foam rubber backing absorbs moisture from

the ground.

" Recent work by the inmates has resulted in removal of all original

dirt surrounding most areas of the building and replacement with

river gravel to facilitate proper drainage of moisture away from the

building. This, however, has not eliminated the direct contact of

the [exterior] siding below ground with moist soil, " the report

states.

The team found that the majority of the expansion joint caulking had

failed on Building A where the magistrate's court and lobby is

located, and there was standing water around 90 percent of the

exterior walls. High water marks are evident and algae and lichen

growth indicate lack of cleaning over time, the report says.

" Visual inspection of the south elevation of the lobby revealed

recently replaced drywall that has already degraded and started

crumbling. This drywall was replaced approximately one year ago (in

2002) and has already experienced recurrent moisture intrusion and

fungal growth in certain areas, " the report says.

Although inmates were directed to dig French drains along the south

elevation, or the front of the building, the report states that the

drains only appear to aid in removal of standing water and cannot

overcome the direct contact of the cladding installed below grade,

or ground, with the moist soil.

Infrared thermographic imaging revealed numerous areas of thermal

bridging or reduced insulation ability of saturated wall areas. The

report states that the compromised insulation values may contribute

to the thermal and humidity control issues within the building.

The report also states that vinyl wallpaper, which is impermeable,

prevents any moisture that may enter the wall system from drying to

the inside of the building. As a result, high concentrations of

fungi were found. The Sheriff's office was found to contain heavy

contamination of Oidiodendron fungi, whose natural habitat includes

soil, litter, wood and bark.

According to information found on the Mold Help Organization Web

site, three of the mold strains found in the Magistrate's office,

lobby drywall, some of the cell blocks and other areas—Aspergillus,

Penicillium and Stachbotrys—are fungi, certain species of which

produce natural mycotoxins, or toxic substances. Attempts to reach

Hebert for more details on the possible effects of these fungi on

human beings were unsuccessful.

In addition, Bacillus species bacteria, gram positive cocci, gram

negative bacilli and actinomycetes bacteria were found in various

places like the lobby wall, Room 175 of the Magistrate's office,

cell block E and the trustee's dorm.

It was also discovered that the windows in the south elevation of

the main lobby were installed inside-out, resulting in moisture

intrusion. This was remedied by jail personnel by applying

siliconized caulking to the moisture pathways, the report states.

Two Grand Juries note damage

Both the 2003 and the 2004 Grand Jury jail committees noticed the

moisture damage and made recommendations based on tours of the jail

facility.

To his knowledge, however, former District Attorney Brown Moseley

said neither Grand Jury was made aware of the July 2003 study and he

never saw it himself.

The 2003 Grand Jury committee noted that " the building is in need of

painting and baseboards need to be replaced throughout the whole

jail. "

In the same inspection report, the committee noted " mold on the

walls, rust on the seats [in the kitchen], insulation on drain pipes

in need of replacing and rust on drain pipes. "

Most important, it noted that the ventilation system needed cleaning.

Some of the work recommended by the 2003 committee was done, Major

Linn Harrell said last year during an interview regarding the Grand

Jury findings. But the cracked floors noted in the report could not

be fixed nor would the building be painted until the exterior wall

covering problem was addressed.

The 2004 Grand Jury jail committee members also made recommendations

to the county to repair damage to interior walls and baseboards.

" We understand that there is an exterior water problem with the

building and until this problem is corrected, interior problems

cannot be addressed in relation to base boards and wallpaper

especially in the front lobby and hall areas. The exterior water

problems need to have immediate attention, " the jail committee said

in its inspection report.

The committee said exterior walls in the recreation areas needed to

be pressure washed. To date, as evidenced by recent photographs

taken earlier this month, the exterior walls still have black and

green-colored mold and lichen growing on them.