Attachment 13 - Water Intrusion and Mold Report.pdf

wwwww

1.800.801.3224 www.aeiconsultants.com

Water Intrusion and Mold Assessment Report REPORT DATE: October 14, 2024

PROPERTY INFORMATION

Bermingham VA Health Care System, Mechanical Rooms 700 South 19th Street Birmingham, Jefferson County, Alabama 35233

PROJECT INFORMATION

AEI Project No. 500172 Site Assessment Date: October 8, 2024

PREPARED FOR

Davenergy Solutions 4801 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 200 Raleigh, North Carolina 27612

PREPARED BY

AEI Consultants 4255 Wade Green Road, Suite 510 Kennesaw, Georgia 30144

October 14, 2024

Mr. Alexander Boucher Vice President of Operations 4801 Glenwood Avenue, Suite 200 Raleigh, North Carolina 27612

Subject: Water Intrusion and Mold Assessment Report

Dear Mr. Boucher, AEI Consultants, Inc. (AEI) was retained by Davenergy Solutions (Client) to conduct a Water Intrusion and Mold Assessment of the Bermingham VA Health Care System, Mechanical Rooms, located at 700 South 19th Street, in Birmingham, Alabama. The assessment and survey were conducted on October 8, 2024, by AEI representative Mr. Charles Yoon, a Certified Mold Inspector (CMI).

We thank you for this opportunity and look forward to working with you on this project.

Sincerely, Matthew E. Wasson Vice President, Building Assessment Email: cyoon@aeiconsultants.com mailto:cyoon@aeiconsultants.com

Project No. 500172

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Scope of Work

1.2 Background Information

1.3 Site-Specific Limitations

1.4 Regulations and Guidelines

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Indoor Air Quality Procedure

3.2 Limitations and Service Constraints

4.0 OBSERVATION, SAMPLING, AND ANALYTICAL

4.1 Observation

4.2 Sampling

4.3 Analytical

4.3.1 Temperature and Relative Humidity

4.3.2 Air and Surface Samples

5.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Summary

5.2 Recommendations

6.0 REPORT RELIANCE

7.0 SIGNATURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS

TABLES

Table 1 Comfort Parameter Readings Table 2 Air Sampling Summary Table 3 Surface Sampling Summary

APPENDICES

Appendix A Inspector Certifications Appendix B Floor Plan Appendix C Photographic Log Appendix D Laboratory Certifications Appendix E Microbial Air and Surface Sampling Analytical Report

October 22, 2024

1.0 INTRODUCTION

AEI Consultants (AEI) was contracted by Davenergy Solutions (Client) to conduct a water intrusion and mold assessment. The assessment included a visual evaluation, moisture survey, indoor temperature and relative humidity measurement, and sampling for airborne fungal spore concentrations and suspect surface mold within Bermingham VA Health Care System, located at 700 South 19th Street, in Birmingham, Alabama (Site). The survey was limited to the mechanical rooms.

1.1 Scope of Work

The assessment and survey aimed to evaluate the site's interior for water intrusion and assess for visible suspect mold growth (VSMG) within the mechanical rooms.

The assessment and survey were performed on October 8, 2024, by AEI representative Mr.

Charles Yoon, a Certified Mold Inspector (CMI). Appendix A of this report provides Mr. Yoon’s certification.

1.2 Site Specific Limitations

The assessment and survey were performed with a limited budget and scope determined by the client. The data presented and the opinions expressed in this report are qualified as follows:

• The sole purpose of the assessment was to assess the Site for water intrusion and visible suspect mold and conduct an interior air assessment within the mechanical rooms.

• The Client's request defined the Scope of Services, the time and budgetary constraints imposed by the Client, and the availability of access to the Site.

• This report is intended to provide information concerning the property's condition during the assessment and survey. Property conditions change with time and use.

This report is provided for the specific benefit of the client(s); secondary readers of this information should hire a licensed inspector or technician to perform tests or inspections to meet their particular needs and obtain current information concerning the property. Neither this report nor any information contained herein shall be used or relied upon for any purpose by any person or entity other than the client(s).

• The exposure assessment for biologically derived contaminants, whether airborne (bioaerosols) or visible growth on surfaces, may include the identification of suspect microorganisms and fragments, fungal spores, toxins, and particulate waste. Humans are exposed daily to bioaerosols (e.g., fungal spores) because of their ubiquity in the environment.

• Currently, there are no Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) set by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) against which to compare environmental air concentrations of most biologically derived airborne contaminants.1 Similarly, there are no standards for acceptable levels or tolerable quantities of bioaerosols (i.e., fungal spores and hyphal fragments) given by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Therefore, it is clear that reduction and prevention of mold exposure is needed to decrease the risk of damage to human health.” 2 Furthermore, it is widely recognized that timely repair of water intrusion and the immediate remediation of visible growth using proper techniques is critical to avoid future health problems.

• It is essential to understand that this process is a snapshot in time and location.

Variability in airborne concentrations and surface locations can change rapidly if conditions exist to allow for fungal amplification and dispersal.

• The assessment and survey cannot wholly and accurately assess all risks, detect all flaws, predict all occurrences and life spans, or make assurances. The recommendations and conclusions presented as a result of this assessment and survey apply strictly to the environmental regulations and property conditions existing when the appraisal and survey were performed. Available information has been analyzed using currently accepted assessment techniques, and it is believed that the inferences made were reasonably representative of the property at the time of the survey. AEI Consultants makes no warranty, expressed or implied, except that the services have been performed by generally accepted environmental fungal assessment practices applicable at the time and location of the survey.

1.3 Regulations and Guidelines

Relevant industry guidelines incorporated into AEI’s evaluation of this Site include the following:

• Guidelines on Assessment and Remediation of Fungi in Indoor Environments (New York City Department of Health &Mental Hygiene, 2008).

• Recognition, Evaluation, and Control of Indoor Mold (American Industrial Hygiene Association, 2008).

• Fungal Contamination in Public Buildings: Health Effects and Investigation Methods (Health Canada, 2004).

• The IAQ Investigator’s Guide: A Guide to Principles, Techniques, and Resources Available for Professional Indoor Air Quality Investigations (American Industrial Hygiene Association, 2006).

• Building Air Quality: A Guide for Building Owners and Facility Managers (Environmental Protection Agency, 1991).

1 TLVs and BEIs: Based on the Documentation of the Threshold Limit Values for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents & Biological Exposure Indices. 2006. Cincinnati, Ohio: American Conference of Government Industrial Hygienists.

2 Davis, Pamela J. 2001. Molds, Toxic Molds, and Indoor Air Quality. California Research Bureau

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

The site consisted of two mechanical rooms within twelve-story medical building, reportedly constructed in 1949. The interior finishing comprised suspected gypsum board walls with joint compound, vinyl floor tiles and associated mastic, ceramic floor tiles and associated grout, pipe insulations, gypsum board wall insulations, covebase and associated mastic, CMU and brick walls and bare concrete floors. Thermal system insulation (TSI) which appeared to be fiberglass material was present on pipe runs. The roof finishing comprised of asphalt rolled roofing and associated mastic. See Appendix B for the site floor plan.

October 22, 2024

3.0 METHODOLOGY

3.1 Indoor Air Quality Procedure

AEI’s inspectors visited the Site to conduct an initial walkthrough of the complaint area(s) to evaluate factors for water intrusion and VSMG issues that might contribute to the Site.

AEI performed the following tasks:

• Interviewed onsite facility manager to gather information regarding water intrusion issues at the Site.

• Visual observation of the facility layout, noting any water intrusion impact areas, type of material, and quantity impacted.

• If VSMG was observed, detailed information regarding the location, the evaluation of potential source of water/moisture, and photographic evidence of VSMG or water-impacted areas.

• Field Testing: Interior collection of temperature and relative humidity (RH) and exterior for comparison purposes.

• Moisture meter testing of water-impacted building materials to determine if elevated moisture content is present.

Temperature and Relative Humidity (RH)

Thermal comfort is determined by the room’s temperature, humidity, and air speed. Additional factors such as activity level, clothing, age, gender, and health status affect comfort. The temperature in a building is based on the outside temperature and sun loading plus whatever heating or cooling is added by the heating, ventilation, air conditioning (HVAC), or other heating and cooling sources. Room occupants also add heat to the room since the average body temperature is much higher than the room temperature.

The American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning (ASHRAE) Standard 55 “Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy” recommends an interior temperature between 68°F to 75°F during the heating (winter) season and between 73°F to 80°F during the cooling (summer) season. Standard 62-2001, “Ventilation for Acceptable Indoor Air Quality,” the lower boundary of the relative humidity range is limited to 25 percent, and the upper boundary of the relative humidity range is limited to 60 percent. In cold climates, interior relative humidity should be kept as low as possible in winter. Still, within the comfort and health range (above 25%) and in the summer months, interior relative humidity should never exceed 60 % for comfort and health reasons.

Moisture Testing

Moisture testing of building materials was conducted using handheld instruments designed to detect moisture in building materials. The type of instrument used were:

• A pin penetrating Protimeter, Model Mini C meter that displays instant moisture content results on its 6 to 30% LED scale. The three-color coded LED scale set by the manufacture are:

o Green indicating “Dry” 6% to 17% o Yellow indicating “At Risk” – 18% to 20% o Red indicating “Wet” – 21% to 90%

3.2 Limitations and Service Constraints

• Property management granted AEI full access to the Site/mechanical rooms.

• AEI derived the data in this report primarily from visual inspections, interviews with individuals with information about the Site, and a limited number of environmental samples. The passage of time, manifestation of latent conditions, or occurrence of future events may require further exploration at the Site, analysis of the data, and re-evaluation of the findings, observations, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in the report.

• In preparing this report, AEI has relied upon and presumed accurate certain information (or absence thereof) about the Site provided by the Client and others identified herein. Except as otherwise stated in the report, AEI did not attempt to verify the accuracy or completeness of such information.

• The data reported and the findings, observations, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in the report are limited by the Scope of Services, including the extent of environmental sampling and other tests.

• Inspection of the exterior and below-grade structures or foundation walls was not included in this scope of work and limited to the mechanical rooms.

• AEI derived the data in this report primarily from visual inspections, interviews with individuals with information about the Site, and a limited number of environmental samples. The passage of time, manifestation of latent conditions, or occurrence of future events may require further exploration at the Site, analysis of the data, and re-evaluation of the findings, observations, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in the report.

4.0 OBSERVATION, SAMPLING, AND ANALYSIS

4.1 Observation

The following observations were noted during this project. Refer to Appendix C for photographic details.

Northern Mechanical Room:

• AEI observed VSMG and inactive water stains (dry), approximately 150 SF, were noted on the gypsum board on lower portions of the western wall where water may be collecting.

• Water stains running down the walls indicated that water is intruding from above and migrating downward. The presence of water damage across various points, likely due to a compromised roof and inadequate drainage.

• The large, rusted area in the middle of the western wall appeared that the metal components inside the wall have been in contact with moisture for an extended period.

• Based on the interview with the onsite facilities manager, they had previous roof leaks in this area.

• Based on AEI’s observation during the asbestos sampling on the roof, the roof insulation under the asphalt rolled roofing appeared wet.

Southern Mechanical Room:

• AEI observed VSMG and inactive water stains (dry), approximately 200 SF, were noted on the gypsum board on upper portions of the northern wall.

• Several areas showed water stains running down from the ceiling and pipes, particularly along the wall lines and near pipe penetrations. This indicated that water has been seeping through the ceiling along the piping.

• Drywall in many areas is water stained with visible degradation. Rust steaks are visible near metal components.

• Based on the interview with the onsite facilities manager, they had previous roof leak in this area.

• Based on AEI’s observation during the asbestos sampling on the roof, the roof insulation under the asphalt roofing rolled appeared wet.

4.2 Sampling

• Air-O-Cell Sampling

Utilizing Zelon Air Sampling cassettes, AEI collected three (3) non-viable air-o-cell samples: one each from northern and southern mechanical rooms, and one exterior sample as a baseline/comparison sample.

Each cassette was exposed for ten (10) minutes at a rate of fifteen liters of air per minute (15 L/pm), utilizing a Zefon Bio-Air Pump. The pump was calibrated before the sampling commenced to determine the airflow rate.

• Surface Sampling

Two surface samples were collected using a Health Link Sterile Transport Swab: one each from northern and southern mechanical rooms.

4.3 Analytical

4.3.1 Temperature and Relative Humidity

Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) parameter readings were collected from the exterior and interior using a Extech humidity/temperature meter calibrated before use. The following table indicates the IAQ parameters noted during the evaluation.

Table 1 – Comfort Parameter Readings

Location Temperature Relative Humidity

Outside 74 33 Northern Mechanical Room 81 35 Southern Mechanical Room 82 33

Guidance Value(s)

Winter:

68°-75° F Summer:

73°-80° F

25%-60%

The above RED numbers indicate either below or above recommended levels

4.3.2 Air and Surface Samples

All air and surface samples collected were transported under Chain of Custody documentation to Eurofins – EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC (EPK) in Norcross, Georgia, for analysis. EPK is accredited by the Environmental Microbiology Laboratory Accreditation Program (EMLAP) under Accreditation No. 221504. Laboratory certifications are provided in Appendix D of this report.

• Air Samples:

Direct examination samples for mold are commonly referred to as “nonviable,” “spore trap,” or “total spore count” samples for mold or fungi. The term “nonviable” means that cultures are not grown in the laboratory to identify the species of fungi detected in these samples. When analyzing direct examination samples, fungi are identified using microscopical techniques to examine spores, hyphae, and other fungal structures captured by the air sampling cassette.

Fungi may be determined to the genus level by direct exam. Results are typically reported in spores per cubic meter of air (spores/m3); each spore type's number and relative percentage in a sample are also usually reported.

The table below summarizes the airborne mold spores identified during the assessment and laboratory analytical results, which are included in Appendix E.

Table 2 – Air Sampling Summary

Mold Spores

Sample

ST-1

Outside

Sample

ST-2

Mech.

Room N

Sample

ST-3

Mech.

Rom S

Alternaria 87 Ascospores 990 830 160

Basidiospores 15,000 5,500 8,600 Cercospora 93 40

Chaetomium 7 13 Cladosporium 2,700 1,400 1,100

Curvularia 20 7 7 Epicoccum 20 Nigrospora 7 13

Other brown 13 20 7 Penicillium/A spergillus types

160 580 290

Pestalotiopsis 20 7 Pithomyces 27 13

Smuts, Periconia, Myxomycetes 510 110 27

Stachybotrys 7 7 Stemphylium 7

Torula 7 Zygomycetes

Hyphal Fragments

Total Spores/m3 20,000 8,500 10,000

The above RED/Bold numbers indicate elevated levels

• Surface Samples:

The laboratory report for surface/swab sampling also reports Hyphal fragments or mycelia, which are components of fungal growth (similar to the roots and branches of a tree); small hyphal fragments are expected to be found in outdoor air and possibly in indoor dust.

The presence of hyphal fragments in indoor air samples, whether in quantity or large segments, suggests an active fungal colony in the building. Their presence in a surface sample in quantity or large segments indicates that active fungal growth is present or nearby or that fungal material has been disturbed in the building. Results are reported in four categories based on the estimated number of spores determined by the analyst:

o Rare – 1 to 10 spores o Low – 11 to 100 spores o Medium – 101 to 1000 spores o High – greater than 1000 spores

The following table indicates the surface sampling and laboratory analytical results, which Appendix E includes.

Table 3 – Surface Sampling Summary

Sample ID Sample Location Mold

Spores Spore Count

SW-1

Mechanical

Room North, West Wall

Aspergillus Chaetomium Memnoniella Stachybotrys

920,000 86,000

2,000,000 3,900,000

SW-2

Mechanical

Room South, North Wall

Colorless Hyphae with No Associated Sproes, ID Unknown Penicillium/Aspergillus types

2,600 2,600

The above RED/Bold numbers indicate elevated (High-greater than 1000 spores) levels and confirm the presence of fungal contamination of the sampled surface.

5.0 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Summary of Findings

Northern Mechanical Room:

• AEI observed VSMG and inactive water stains (dry), approximately 150 SF, were noted on the gypsum board on lower portions of the western wall where water may be collecting.

• Water stains running down the walls indicated that water is intruding from above and migrating downward. The presence of water damage across various points suggests, likely due to a compromised roof and inadequate drainage.

• The large, rusted area in the middle of the western wall appeared that the metal components inside the wall have been in contact with moisture for an extended period.

Southern Mechanical Room:

• AEI observed VSMG and inactive water stains (dry), approximately 200 SF, were noted on the gypsum board on upper portions of the northern wall.

• Several areas showed water stains running down from the ceiling and pipes, particularly along the wall lines and near pipe penetrations. This indicated that water has been seeping through the ceiling along the piping.

• Drywall in many areas is water stained with visible degradation. Rust steaks are visible near metal components.

• Based on the interview with the onsite facilities manager, they had previous roof leak in this area.

• Based on AEI’s observation during the asbestos sampling on the roof, the roof insulation under the asphalt rolled roofing appeared wet.

• Both mechanical rooms field-testing parameters measured were above the ASHRAE-recommended published guidelines for temperature during the summer months of 73° —80° F and within rage for the recommended guidelines for RH of 25%- 60%.

• Both Mechanical Rooms North and South have generally lower spore counts compared to the outdoor sample; however, elevated concentration of Penicillium/Aspergillus type spores (soil, food, carpet, HVAC, air) were detected: Mechanical Room North exhibited elevated level (580 spores/m3) compared to outdoor (160 spores/m3) and Mechanical Room South (290 sores/m3).

• The results of the surface samples collected from Mechanical Room North, West Wall indicated an elevated concentration of Stachybotrys, Memnoniella and Aspergillus, all of which are indicator of mold contamination. Stachybotrys is associated with water damage and ongoing water damage or high moisture levels in this area. The results of the surface samples collected from Mechanical Room South, North Wall indicated elevated concentration of Penicillium/Aspergillus types (soil, food, carpet, HVAC, air).

5.2 Recommendations

1. Do not disturb building components until their contents have been evaluated for asbestos.

2. Consult with an Alabama licensed mold remediation contractor to:

a. Remove identified visible water-damaged and suspected mold-impacted materials following consensus industry guidelines for remediating mold-impacted materials. Remove mold-impacted building materials from mechanical rooms,

b. Remove any unseen water-damaged or suspected mold-impacted building material exposed during removing the gypsum board walls.

c. Remove and discard any wet or colonized interior wall or insulation.

d. Remove any unseen suspect mold from interior wall or ceiling framing.

e. Use clear disinfection and clean the interior exposed wall or ceiling cavity with an antimicrobial solution, according to the manufacturer’s recommendation.

f. DO NOT APPLY AN ENCAPSULATE TO EXPOSED WALL OR CEILING FRAMING OR

BUILDING MATERIALS, UNITL PASSING A FINAL VISUAL AND AIR CLEARANCE (POST

REMEDIATION VERIFICATION (PRV)).

g. After passing the PRV, an anti-microbial encapsulation is applied to the exposed remediated area.

3. Upon completion of the remediation of water-damaged and suspected mold-impacted building material, conduct a PRV with a third-party consultant not associated with or having a financial interest in the remediation contractor.

Installing dehumidifiers after remediation can control moisture levels in the room.

4. If the building’s perimeter exterior support framing is damaged or possibly compromised, consult a qualified structural engineer about the building’s integrity.

5. Consult a qualified roofing contractor to assess the roof condition for possible water intrusion.

6. Perform the work in-house or consult with a qualified contractor to perform the following actions:

a. The source of water intrusion from roof and/or plumbing must be identified and repaired to prevent further damage.

b. Any compromised materials, including drywall, insulation, or rusted components, should be removed and replaced.

c. Assess and ensure that all sources of moisture intrusion into the building are addressed.

7. Consult a qualified mechanical contractor to maintain interior temperature and RH within ASHRAE-published guidelines.

6.0 REPORT RELIANCE

Because of the abovementioned limitations, the findings, observations, conclusions, and recommendations expressed by AEI in this report are limited to the information obtained and the surface and subsurface investigation undertaken. They should not be considered an opinion concerning the compliance of any past or current owner(s) or operator(s) of the Site with any Federal, State, or local laws or regulations. No warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied, is made concerning the data reported or findings, observations, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this report. Furthermore, such data, findings, observations, conclusions, and recommendations are based solely upon Site conditions at the time of investigation.

This assessment was performed at the request of the Client, its successors, and assigns ("Client") utilizing methods and procedures consistent with good commercial or customary practices designed to conform with acceptable industry standards. This report may be distributed to and relied upon by Client and its current and future wholly and partially owned subsidiaries, affiliates, successors, and assigns. The independent conclusions represent AEI Consultants’ best professional judgment based on the existing conditions and the information and data available to us during this assignment. Factual information regarding operations, conditions, and test data provided to the Client, Reliant Party, or their representative has been assumed to be correct and complete.

This report has been prepared on behalf of and for the exclusive use of the Client and is subject to and issued in connection with the Agreement and its provisions.

Project No.500172

7.0 SIGNATURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS

AEI Consultants has collected airborne fungal spore levels and surface sampling of suspected mold located at Bermingham VA Health Care System, Mechanical Rooms, 700 South 19th Street, in Birmingham, Alabama, in conformance with applicable indoor air quality guidelines and regulations. Any exceptions to, or deletions from, this practice are described in Sections 1.3 and 3.3 of this report.

Prepared By:

Charles Yoon Senior Project Manager AEI Consultants 4255 Wade Green Road, Suite 510 Kennesaw, Georgia 30144

Reviewed by:

Brett Huber Senior Project Manager AEI Consultants 20 Gibson Place, Suite 310 Freehold, NJ 07728

APPENDIX A

INSPECTOR

CERTIFICATIONS

W h e r e a s i t i s t h e p u r p o s e o f t h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n t o g i v e p r o f e s s i o n a l r e c o g n i t i o n t o p r o p e r l y q u a l i f i e d p e r s o n s . T h e r e f o r e w e , t h e B o a r d o f T r u s t e e s o f M I C R O h a v e c o n f e r r e d u p o n

Robert W. Ederer

Charles Yoon the designation of

Certified Mold Inspector

President/CEO

Having fulfi l led the condit ions of el igibil ity , this person is hereby awarded this certificate of complet ion, with al l r ights and privileges pertaining thereto. In witness whereof we have set our hands and cause the seal of MICRO to be affixed at Kirkland, WA on this 26th day of July, 2024.

CMI- #85787

APPENDIX B

FLOOR PLANS

K

J L L.2 M N O P R

(E) REMOVABLE LOUVER,

NEW EQUIPMENT

ACCESS, CONFIRM

(E) CRAWL SPACE

SCUTTLE

/2

/2

/2

/2

/2

/2

8' - 6" 15' - 4 1/2" 8' - 0" 18' - 4 1/2" 20' - 0" 20' - 0" 20' - 0" 17' - 7 1/2"

AREA SHOWN (GROUND LEVEL)

PROJECT

NORTH

TRUE NORTH

(DASHED)

T

H A

V E

S

OUT OF SCOPE

EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN

EXISTING DOOR TO DEMOLISH

TO DEMOLISH

EXISTING TO REMAIN

1 DEMOLISH EXISTING WALLS AS INDICATED, TYP.

DEMOLISH EXISTING DOORS AS INDICATED, TYP.

CUT SLAB FOR NEW FLOOR ACCESS HATCH, SEE

STRUCT. SHEETS

DEMOLISH EXISTING LAVATORY, SEE P SHEETS

DEMOLISH EXISTING FLOOR ACCESS HATCH, SEE

STRUCT. SHEETS

1. ENSURE CONSTRUCTION ZONE IS FULLY ENCLOSED,

PRIOR TO BEGINNING ANY WORK. NO WORK SHALL BE

DONE WITHOUT PROPERLY MEETING ALL ICRA

REQUIREMENTS, SEE ICRA PLAN(S) FOR SPECIFIC ICRA

CLASS LOCATIONS & REQUIREMENTS.

2. DEMO EXISTING WALLS & DOORS AS SHOWN ON PLAN.

3. REMOVE WALL MOUNTED ACCESSORIES REQUIRED TO

COMPLETE A CONSTRUCTION TASK. VERIFY WITH COR

BEFORE DISPOSAL.

4. DEMO EXISTING FLOOR FINISH THROUGHOUT WORK AREA.

5. CEILINGS IN AREA OF WORK ARE ASSUMED TO BE

REMOVED PREVIOUSLY, IF ANY CEILING MOUNTED

ACCESSORIES REMAIN, REMOVE THEM PRIOR TO

STARTING CONSTRUCTION AND VERIFY WITH COR

BEFORE DISPOSAL.

6. COORDINATE WITH VA COR PRIOR TO THE DEMOLITION OF

ANY EXISTING EQUIPMENT.

7. DEMO EXISTING FINISHES AS REQ'D TO INSTALL NEW. SEE

FINISH SCHEDULE.

8. IF CONTRACTOR ENCOUNTERS WHAT APPEARS TO BE A

HAZARDOUS OR QUESTIONABLE MATERIAL, HE SHALL

DISCONTINUE WORK IMMEDIATELY AND CONTACT THE

COR AND/OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. THE

CONTRACTOR IS LIABLE FOR ABATEMENT/ CLEANUP/

CONTROL OF ANY POTIENTIALLY HAZARDOUS MATERIAL

DISTURBED WITHOUT PRIOR NOTIFICATION AND

APPROVAL OF THE COR.

Project Number

Building Number

Drawing Number

Project Title

Location

Issue Date Checked Drawn

Drawing Title

Approved:

VA FORM 08 - 6231

A

FULLY SPRINKLERED

Office of Construction and Facilities Management

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

B

C

D

E

F

A

B

C

D

E

F

21 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Phase

ARCHITECT/ENGINEER OF RECORD

A/E:

STAMPCONSULTANT

321 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

A / E:

NOT F

OR

CONSTRUCTIO

N

AD101

GROUND FLOOR - DEMO SPS

SUITESPEES DESIGN BUILD

625 1ST AVE, STE 301

SEATTLE, WA 98104

(206) 590-2118

ONE

Checker Author

65% DESIGN

DEVELOPMENT

09/13/2024

521-23-121

BIRMINGHAM, AL

BIRMINGHAM SPS PHASE II

DAVENERGY

2207 GARNET AVE, SUITE 1

SAN DIEGO, CA 92109

619-770-8552

LEGEND

GENERAL NOTES

KEY NOTES (THIS SHEET ONLY)

KEY PLAN

PROJECT

NORTH

TRUE NORTH

(DASHED)

1/8" = 1'-0"

GROUND LEVEL - DEMO SPS SUITE

Revisions: Date:

65% DESIGN DEVELOPMENT 9/13/2024

andrew.laverty Polygon andrew.laverty Callout Sampling Area

OUT OF SCOPE

EXISTING DOOR TO REMAIN

NEW DOOR

1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING

CONDITIONS BEFORE BEGINNING WORK. ANY CONFLICTS

BETWEEN EXISTING CONDITIONS AND THE CONTRACT

DOCUMENTS SHALL BE BROUGHT IMMEDIATELY TO THE

ATTENTION OF THE COR.

2. DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE FROM GRID LINES TO FACE OF

STUD, CENTERLINE OF STRUCTURAL COLUMNS,

CENTERLINE OF OPENINGS, UON

3. ANY DOORS NOT DIMENSIONED SHALL BE INSTALLED 6"

FROM THE INTERSECTING WALL OR CENTERED ON THE

WALL, UNO.

4. ENSURE THAT ALL REQUIRED BACKING IS INSTALLED IN

WALLS PRIOR TO INTALLING DRYWALL.

AREA SHOWN (GROUND LEVEL)

PROJECT

NORTH

TRUE NORTH

(DASHED)

T

H A

V E

S

L M N O P R

ROOF AREA, LEAK

DETECTION AND

REPAIR REQUIRED

ALT. 1 - REMOVE AND REPLACE (BASE)

ALT. 2 - DETECT LEAKS / SPOT REPAIR (DEDUCTIVE)

Project Number

Building Number

Drawing Number

Project Title

Location

Issue Date Checked Drawn

Drawing Title

Approved:

VA FORM 08 - 6231

A

FULLY SPRINKLERED

Office of Construction and Facilities Management

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs

B

C

D

E

F

A

B

C

D

E

F

21 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Phase

ARCHITECT/ENGINEER OF RECORD

A/E:

STAMPCONSULTANT

321 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

A / E:

NOT F

OR

CONSTRUCTIO

N

AE102

1ST FLOOR - ROOF OVER SPS

SUITESPEES DESIGN BUILD

625 1ST AVE, STE 301

SEATTLE, WA 98104

(206) 590-2118

ONE

Checker Author

65% DESIGN

DEVELOPMENT

09/13/2024

521-23-121

BIRMINGHAM, AL

BIRMINGHAM SPS PHASE II

DAVENERGY

2207 GARNET AVE, SUITE 1

SAN DIEGO, CA 92109

619-770-8552

LEGEND

GENERAL NOTES

KEY NOTES (THIS SHEET ONLY)

KEY PLAN

PROJECT

NORTH

TRUE NORTH

(DASHED)

1/8" = 1'-0"

1ST FLOOR @ ROOF OVER SPS STE

Revisions: Date:

andrew.laverty Polygon andrew.laverty Callout Sampling Area

APPENDIX C

PHOTOGRAPHIC

LOG

Bermingham VA Health Care System, Mechanical Rooms Date of Inspection: October 8, 2024 700 South 19th Street, Birmingham, AL Photographic Log

1) Exterior view of the mechanical rooms 2) Interior view of the southern mechanical room

3) Interior view of the north mechanical room 4) Visible suspect mold growth (VSMG), water stains and rusted area in the middle.

5) Suspect signs of water intrusion and leak from the roof

6) VSMG, water satins and rusted area

7) VSMG in the southwest corner of the western wall 8) Moisture meter reading of the western wall (dry)

9) Temperature and relative humidity reading of the north mechanical room

10) Visible suspect mold growth (VSMG), water stains and rusted area on the northern wall of the south mechanical room

11) Suspect signs of water intrusion and leak from the roof

12) Moisture meter reading of the upper northern wall of southern mechanical room (dry)

13) Temperature and relative humidity reading of the south mechanical room

14) Moisture meter reading of the northern wall

(dry)

15) View of the mechanical room roof looking south 16) View of the mechanical room roof looking south

APPENDIX D

LABORATORY

CERTIFICATIONS

Effective: 10/24/2023 Revision: 8

AIHA Laboratory Accreditation Programs, LLC

SCOPE OF ACCREDITATION

Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing

- Atlanta

Laboratory ID: LAP-221504

Issue Date: 07/03/2024 6215 Regency Parkway, Suite 900 Norcross, GA 30071 Expire Date: 12/01/2024

The laboratory is approved for those specific field(s) of testing/methods listed in the table below. Clients are urged to verify the laboratory's current accreditation status for the particular field(s) of testing/Methods, since these can change due to proficiency status, suspension and/or withdrawal of accreditation.

Environmental Microbiology Laboratory Accreditation Program (EMLAP)

Initial Accreditation Date: 09/01/2016

EMLAP Scope Category Field of Testing (FOT) Component, parameter, characteristic, material, or product tested Method Method Description

(for internal methods only)

Fungal Air - Direct Examination Spore Trap Air Samples EM-MY-S-1038

Preparation and Analysis of Spore Trap (Air)

Samples for Fungal Spores, Other Biological and

Non-Biological Particles

Fungal Bulk - Direct Examination Tape, Swab, Wipe, Bulk, Dust, Soil EM-MY-S-1039

Preparation and Analysis of Tape, Swab, Wipe, Bulk and Dust - Soil Samples for Qualitative Direct Microscopic Examination

Fungal Bulk - Direct Examination Tape, Swab, Wipe, Bulk, Dust, Soil EM-MY-S-1041

Preparation and Analysis of Tape, Swab, Wipe, Bulk and Dust - Soil Samples for Quantitative Direct

Microscopic Examination

Fungal Surface - Direct Examination

Tape, Swab, Wipe, Bulk, Dust, Soil EM-MY-S-1039

Preparation and Analysis of Tape, Swab, Wipe, Bulk and Dust - Soil Samples for Qualitative Direct Microscopic Examination

Fungal Surface - Direct Examination

Tape, Swab, Wipe, Bulk, Dust, Soil EM-MY-S-1041

Preparation and Analysis of Tape, Swab, Wipe, Bulk and Dust - Soil Samples for Quantitative Direct

Microscopic Examination

A complete listing of currently accredited EMLAP laboratories is available on the AIHA LAP, LLC website at:

http://www.aihaaccreditedlabs.org

APPENDIX E

MICROBIAL AIR

AND SURFACE

SAMPLING

ANALY TICAL

REPORTS

Approved by:

Regional Laboratory Director Francina Thadigiri

Report for:

Charles Yoon AEI Consultants 2207 W 190th St Torrance, CA 90504

Regarding:

Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC Project: 500172; Davenergy Solutions/ Birmingham

EML ID: 3809923

All samples were received in acceptable condition unless noted in the Report Comments portion in the body of the report. Due to the nature of the analyses performed, field blank correction of results is not applied. The results relate only to the samples as received and tested. Information supplied by the client which can affect the validity of results: sample air volume.

Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC ("the Company"), a member of the Eurofins Built Environment Testing group of companies, shall have no liability to the client or the client's customer with respect to decisions or recommendations made, actions taken or courses of conduct implemented by either the client or the client's customer as a result of or based upon the Test Results.

In no event shall the Company be liable to the client with respect to the Test Results except for the Company's own willful misconduct or gross negligence nor shall the Company be liable for incidental or consequential damages or lost profits or revenues to the fullest extent such liability may be disclaimed by law, even if the Company has been advised of the possibility of such damages, lost profits or lost revenues. In no event shall the Company's liability with respect to the Test Results exceed the amount paid to the Company by the client therefor.

Dates of Analysis:

Spore trap analysis: 10-10-2024

Service SOPs: Spore trap analysis (EB-MY-S-1038) AIHA LAP, LLC accredited service, Lab ID #221504

Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC's LabServe® reporting system includes automated fail-safes to ensure that all AIHA LAP, LLC quality requirements are met and notifications are added to reports when any quality steps remain pending.

EMLab ID: 3809923, Page 1 of 4Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC

Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC 6215 Regency Parkway, Suite 900, Norcross, GA 30071

(866) 871-1984 www.eurofinsus.com/Built Client: AEI Consultants C/O: Charles Yoon Re: 500172; Davenergy Solutions/ Birmingham

Date of Submittal: 10-09-2024 Date of Receipt: 10-09-2024 Date of Report: 10-10-2024

SPORE TRAP REPORT: NON-VIABLE METHODOLOGY

Location: ST-01:

Outside

ST-02:

Mechanical Room N Comments (see below) A B

Lab ID-Version‡: 18809558-1 18809559-1

Analysis Date: 10/10/2024 10/10/2024 raw ct. % read spores/m3 raw ct. % read spores/m3 Alternaria 13 100 87 Ascospores 37 25 990 31 25 830 Basidiospores 581 25 15,000 205 25 5,500 Cercospora 14 100 93 6 100 40 Chaetomium 1 100 7 Cladosporium 83/67 25/100 2,700 52 25 1,400 Curvularia 3 100 20 1 100 7 Epicoccum 3 100 20 Nigrospora 1 100 7 Other brown 2 100 13 3 100 20 Penicillium/Aspergillus types† 6 25 160 5/67 25/100 580 Pestalotiopsis 3 100 20 1 100 7 Pithomyces 4 100 27 2 100 13 Smuts, Periconia, Myxomycetes 77 100 510 17 100 110 Stachybotrys 1 100 7 Stemphylium 1 100 7 Torula 1 100 7 Zygomycetes Background debris (1-4+) 3+ 4+ Hyphal fragments/m3 910 850 Pollen/m3 20 7 Skin cells (1-4+) < 1+ 1+ Sample volume (liters) 150 150 § TOTAL SPORES/m3 20,000 8,500 Comments:A) 67 of the raw count Cladosporium spores were present as a single clump. B) 67 of the raw count Penicillium/

Aspergillus type spores were present as a clump of 33 spores and a clump of 34 spores. Trace overloaded with debris. The counts provided should be considered as minimal.

EMLab ID: 3809923, Page 2 of 4Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC

Spore types listed without a count or data entry were not detected during the course of the analysis for the respective sample, indicating a raw count of <1 spore.

† The spores of Aspergillus and Penicillium (and others such as Acremonium, Paecilomyces) are small and round with very few distinguishing characteristics. They cannot be differentiated by non-viable sampling methods. Also, some species with very small spores are easily missed, and may be undercounted.

††Background debris indicates the amount of non-biological particulate matter present on the trace (dust in the air) and the resulting visibility for the analyst. It is rated from 1+ (low) to 4+ (high). Counts from areas with 4+ background debris should be regarded as minimal counts and may be higher than reported. It is important to account for samples volumes when evaluating dust levels.

The analytical sensitivity is the spores/m^3 divided by the raw count, expressed in spores/m^3, per spore and per sample.

For more information regarding analytical sensitivity, please contact QA by calling the laboratory.

‡ A "Version" indicated by -"x" after the Lab ID# with a value greater than 1 indicates a sample with amended data. The revision number is reflected by the value of "x".

§ Total Spores/m3 has been rounded to two significant figures to reflect analytical precision.

(866) 871-1984 www.eurofinsus.com/Built Client: AEI Consultants C/O: Charles Yoon Re: 500172; Davenergy Solutions/ Birmingham

Date of Submittal: 10-09-2024 Date of Receipt: 10-09-2024 Date of Report: 10-10-2024

SPORE TRAP REPORT: NON-VIABLE METHODOLOGY

Location: ST-03:

Mechanical Room S Comments (see below) C

Lab ID-Version‡: 18809560-1

Analysis Date: 10/10/2024 raw ct. % read spores/m3 Alternaria Ascospores 6 25 160 Basidiospores 324 25 8,600 Cercospora Chaetomium 2 100 13 Cladosporium 36/16 25/100 1,100 Curvularia 1 100 7 Epicoccum Nigrospora 2 100 13 Other brown 1 100 7 Penicillium/Aspergillus types† 11 25 290 Pestalotiopsis Pithomyces Smuts, Periconia, Myxomycetes 4 100 27 Stachybotrys 1 100 7 Stemphylium Torula Ulocladium Zygomycetes Background debris (1-4+) 4+ Hyphal fragments/m3 < 7 Pollen/m3 < 7 Skin cells (1-4+) 1+ Sample volume (liters) 150 § TOTAL SPORES/m3 10,000 Comments:C) 16 of the raw count Cladosporium spores were present as a single clump. Trace overloaded with debris. The counts provided should be considered as minimal.

EMLab ID: 3809923, Page 3 of 4Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC

Spore types listed without a count or data entry were not detected during the course of the analysis for the respective sample, indicating a raw count of <1 spore.

† The spores of Aspergillus and Penicillium (and others such as Acremonium, Paecilomyces) are small and round with very few distinguishing characteristics. They cannot be differentiated by non-viable sampling methods. Also, some species with very small spores are easily missed, and may be undercounted.

††Background debris indicates the amount of non-biological particulate matter present on the trace (dust in the air) and the resulting visibility for the analyst. It is rated from 1+ (low) to 4+ (high). Counts from areas with 4+ background debris should be regarded as minimal counts and may be higher than reported. It is important to account for samples volumes when evaluating dust levels.

The analytical sensitivity is the spores/m^3 divided by the raw count, expressed in spores/m^3, per spore and per sample.

For more information regarding analytical sensitivity, please contact QA by calling the laboratory.

‡ A "Version" indicated by -"x" after the Lab ID# with a value greater than 1 indicates a sample with amended data. The revision number is reflected by the value of "x".

§ Total Spores/m3 has been rounded to two significant figures to reflect analytical precision.

(866) 871-1984 www.eurofinsus.com/Built Client: AEI Consultants C/O: Charles Yoon Re: 500172; Davenergy Solutions/ Birmingham

Date of Submittal: 10-09-2024 Date of Receipt: 10-09-2024 Date of Report: 10-10-2024

SPORE TRAP REPORT: NON-VIABLE METHODOLOGY

PROJECT ANALYST AND SIGNATORY REPORT

Project Analyst

The test report shall not be reproduced except in full, without written approval of the laboratory. The report must not be used by the client to claim product certification, approval, or endorsement by AIHA LAP, LLC, or any agency of the federal government. The Company reserves the right to dispose of all samples after a period of thirty (30) days, according to all state and federal guidelines, unless otherwise specified.

‡ A "Version" indicated by -"x" after the Lab ID# with a value greater than 1 indicates a sample with amended data. The revision number is reflected by the value of "x".

Analyst: Francina Thadigiri

EMLab ID: 3809923, Page 4 of 4Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC

Approved by:

Regional Laboratory Director Francina Thadigiri

Report for:

Charles Yoon AEI Consultants 2207 W 190th St Torrance, CA 90504

Regarding:

Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC Project: 500172; Davenergy Solutions/ Birmingham

EML ID: 3809923

All samples were received in acceptable condition unless noted in the Report Comments portion in the body of the report. Due to the nature of the analyses performed, field blank correction of results is not applied. The results relate only to the samples as received and tested.

Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC ("the Company"), a member of the Eurofins Built Environment Testing group of companies, shall have no liability to the client or the client's customer with respect to decisions or recommendations made, actions taken or courses of conduct implemented by either the client or the client's customer as a result of or based upon the Test Results.

In no event shall the Company be liable to the client with respect to the Test Results except for the Company's own willful misconduct or gross negligence nor shall the Company be liable for incidental or consequential damages or lost profits or revenues to the fullest extent such liability may be disclaimed by law, even if the Company has been advised of the possibility of such damages, lost profits or lost revenues. In no event shall the Company's liability with respect to the Test Results exceed the amount paid to the Company by the client therefor.

Dates of Analysis:

Quantitative spore count direct exam: 10-10-2024

Service SOPs: Quantitative spore count direct exam (EM-MY-S-1041) AIHA LAP, LLC accredited service, Lab ID #221504

Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC's LabServe® reporting system includes automated fail-safes to ensure that all AIHA LAP, LLC quality requirements are met and notifications are added to reports when any quality steps remain pending.

EMLab ID: 3809923, Page 1 of 3Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC

(866) 871-1984 www.eurofinsus.com/Built Client: AEI Consultants C/O: Charles Yoon Re: 500172; Davenergy Solutions/ Birmingham

Date of Submittal: 10-09-2024 Date of Receipt: 10-09-2024 Date of Report: 10-10-2024

QUANTITATIVE SPORE COUNT REPORT

Location: SW-04:

Mechanical Room N, West

SW-05:

Mechanical Room S, North Comments (see below) None None Sample type Swab sample Swab sample Lab ID-Version‡: 18809556-1 18809557-1 Analysis Date: 10/10/2024 10/10/2024 Dilution 1:40 1:40 raw ct. spores/unit raw ct. spores/unit Aspergillus 700 920,000 Bipolaris/Drechslera group Botrytis Chaetomium 66 86,000 Cladosporium Colorless hyphae with no associated spores, ID unknown 4 2,600 Curvularia Epicoccum Fusarium Memnoniella 1,500 2,000,000 Myrothecium Nigrospora 1 650 Other brown 1 650 Other colorless Penicillium/Aspergillus types† 4 2,600 Pithomyces Rusts Smuts, Periconia, Myxomycetes 1 650 Stachybotrys 3,000 3,900,000 Stemphylium Torula Ulocladium Zygomycetes Background debris (1-4+)†† 2+ 3+ Sample size 1 1 Unit 1 swab 1 swab

§ TOTAL SPORES/UNIT 6,900,000 7,200

Comments:

EMLab ID: 3809923, Page 2 of 3Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC

† The spores of Aspergillus and Penicillium (and others such as Acremonium, Paecilomyces) are small and round with very few distinguishing characteristics. They cannot be differentiated by non viable sampling methods. Also, some species with very small spores are easily missed, and may be undercounted.

†† Background debris is an indication of the amount of non-biological particulate matter present on the slide (dust in the air) and is graded from 1+ to 4+ with 4+ indicating the largest amounts. This background material is also an indication of visibility for the analyst and resultant difficulty reading the slide. For example, high background debris may obscure the small spores such as the Penicillium/Aspergillus group. Counts from areas with 4+ background debris should be regarded as minimal counts and may actually be higher than reported.

Where tape lifts are performed for bulk sample analysis, the unit reported is specific to the area of tape analyzed.

‡ A "Version" indicated by -"x" after the Lab ID# with a value greater than 1 indicates a sample with amended data. The revision number is reflected by the value of "x".

§ Total Spores/unit has been rounded to two significant figures to reflect analytical precision.

The limit of detection is 1 spore per area analyzed; Analytical Sensitivity is 1 spore per unit times the dilution factor.

Spore types listed without a count or data entry were not detected during the course of the analysis for the respective sample, indicating a raw count of <1 spore.

(866) 871-1984 www.eurofinsus.com/Built Client: AEI Consultants C/O: Charles Yoon Re: 500172; Davenergy Solutions/ Birmingham

Date of Submittal: 10-09-2024 Date of Receipt: 10-09-2024 Date of Report: 10-10-2024

QUANTITATIVE SPORE COUNT REPORT

PROJECT ANALYST AND SIGNATORY REPORT

Project Analyst

The test report shall not be reproduced except in full, without written approval of the laboratory. The report must not be used by the client to claim product certification, approval, or endorsement by AIHA LAP, LLC, or any agency of the federal government. The Company reserves the right to dispose of all samples after a period of thirty (30) days, according to all state and federal guidelines, unless otherwise specified.

‡ A "Version" indicated by -"x" after the Lab ID# with a value greater than 1 indicates a sample with amended data. The revision number is reflected by the value of "x".

Analyst: Francina Thadigiri

EMLab ID: 3809923, Page 3 of 3Eurofins EPK Built Environment Testing, LLC