"Oh no, we have had a flood, roof leak, window leak, pipe burst, etc., and now I think that we might have mold. Who should we call? Ghost Busters? Superman? My clergyman? My insurance company? I hope that we're covered for this."
Handling a water-intrusion claim when the clients are convinced that their residence or office has toxic mold growth (heaven help us) can be an insurance adjuster's worst nightmare. Mishandling a water-intrusion claim can make the adjuster's job seem like the eighth circle of hell, increasing costs to the insurer for unnecessary remediation and consultants, leading to bad faith claims, and creating difficulties for all involved.
There are ways to handle these claims quickly, however, keeping them out of the court system and settling them with minimal stress. The first step is to assess the time frame. If the event happened less than 72 hours previously, wet drywall materials can be dried or removed with little concern for fungal growth.
Fungal spores, which are ubiquitous, are merely seeds. All the conditions (i.e., food, oxygen, and temperature) that they need to grow are plentiful in our environment, except for water. In other words, add water and they will grow.
Drying should include large air movers and dehumidifiers to reduce the humidity in the air, which will pull water out of building materials. Also, base coves or baseboards should be removed, and warm air introduced into the wall cavities. This will speed up the drying process and will keep mold colonies from forming. Moisture meters should be used to monitor the drying process until the wall material returns to normal background levels.
If the event is older than 72 hours, cutting out drywall, removing baseboards or coves, or injecting warm air into the walls is unadvisable, as it is possible that fungal growth already has begun and these actions could exacerbate the situation. Instead, air blowers and dehumidifiers should be used to dry the building materials, followed up with destructive testing to determine the extent, if any, of fungal growth. If fungal growth begins to form on the room-side of the walls, it should be covered with poly sheeting and sealed with tape until it can be removed following recommended guidelines. Any maintenance person with minimal hazard communication training related to mold exposure can cover the visible mold growth.
If the event is older than 72 hours, retaining the services of a Certified Industrial Hygienist and a reliable contractor experienced with water intrusion and fungal remediation projects is recommended. The CIH can assist in creating scopes of work for destructive testing and subsequent remediation, if necessary. It is important to inform the CIH of the cause of the event in order to limit his scope of work. Ensuring that there is a well defined cause and location within the property can prevent industrial hygienists from looking for mold in other areas of the building, which may expand the remediation into areas unrelated to the loss event, thereby increasing costs.
Additionally, the CIH should address insureds' concerns related to exposure to toxic mold. He should be able to describe succinctly the latest literature regarding toxic mold exposures and explain that no studies confirm toxicosis associated with normal, or even above normal, indoor exposure to mold spores.
Once the destructive testing has been completed, and samples collected and analyzed, the CIH should be able to provide an action plan for the removal of fungal growth in the building and a post-remediation process to ensure that the area has been cleaned.
Avoid Unnecessary Actions
Under normal water-intrusion circumstances, such as floods and leaks, indoor air quality sampling for fungal spores is not recommended to evaluate whether buildings have fungal growth. The majority of air sampling methods are limited to short-term, grab-type samples (3 to 10 minutes), which are poor indicators of fungal growth in buildings.
Wall cavity samples (i.e., sucking air out of wall cavities and looking for fungal spores) also should be avoided. They are poor indicators of fungal growth and are easily contaminated by materials in wall cavities that may have mold spores or growth prior to water-intrusion events, such as lumberyard mold on wood or spores on insulation.
In addition, multiple indoor and outdoor sampling sites and methods for total and culturable spores, such as Air-O-Cell Cassettes and MEA and DG-18 agar media, must be used. At least two rounds of sampling at each location must be performed for the sampling to be meaningful.
In general, duct cleaning is not necessary unless the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system has been affected by the water intrusion, resulting in fungal growth inside the ductwork. Flexible ductwork never should be cleaned. Flexible ductwork containing fungal growth must be replaced. Cleaning attempts can damage the interior of the linings, causing problems with fiberglass. Only large, metal ductwork, big enough for a person to climb into, should be cleaned.
Consultants or contractors may suggest that wood studs in containment areas need to be sanded to remove mold growth. This is unnecessary. The majority of structural wood materials, especially studs, have lumberyard mold growth on them. These materials can be cleaned easily using either a detergent solution or an antimicrobial solution (10 percent bleach and 90 percent water), and treated with an anti-fungal encapsulant. This method of cleaning should be included in the contractor's scope of work.
Personal items without actual fungal growth on them rarely become contaminated with fungal spores. If concerns related to these items arise, it normally is cheaper to launder them in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations than to sample them. Items such as furniture and carpeting can be vacuumed easily with a vacuum cleaner equipped with a high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter. However, if these items have fungal growth on them, it usually is more cost effective to replace rather than clean them.
Countertops in kitchens and bathrooms can pose problems, as they often are constructed of marble or granite that may be damaged if removed. In some instances, the cabinets can be removed from beneath, with temporary supports installed below the countertops. For less expensive materials, this process is likely to be more costly than replacement.
Once an accurate scope of work has been defined, the CIH can prepare a remediation plan in accordance with governmentally recommended guidelines that are available on the Internet from the New York Department of Health or the Environmental Protection Agency. The plan should include appropriate worker training requirements, containment procedures, scope of work, and post-remediation criteria.
It is critical that adjusters communicate regularly with insureds during the investigation process. Communications should be frequent, easy to understand, specific, and friendly. Most insureds are not prepared for the normal time lag that is associated with insurance claims and investigations. Let them know what to expect. If possible, follow up each verbal communication with a written summary, and each written correspondence with a phone call. Nothing is worse than insureds who feel ignored or that their concerns are not being addressed.
Many of the issues discussed above are commonsense, while others are more technical. Having a strong relationship with veteran water remediation contractors and experienced Certified Industrial Hygienists is an advantage. Being part of a team allows adjusters to know what to do, when to do it, who should be involved, and what not to do or believe. This, in turn, can assist in keeping control of claims, claimants, and consultants.
Joel I. Berman, CIH, is a vice president of Health Science Associates. He can be reached at jberman@healthscience.com.
© Arc, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to TMSalesOperations@arc-network.com. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.