When an adjuster enters a loss following a fire or water damage, determining whether soft-surface items such as fabrics and carpets should be remediated or discarded can be difficult to determine.
Hard-surface items can typically be cleaned and returned to service, but the conditions of soft-surface items are frequently more difficult to assess.
The condition of an item may depend on whether it was directly or indirectly affected by a water loss; which determines the extent of remediation. For example, a fabric-covered sofa directly affected by a water loss may have deep-seated mold colonization that is difficult to remove and the item may be discarded by the restoration contractor (RC).
A similar item in an area adjacent to the water loss may simply be affected by settled surface contaminants, which can probably be remediated and the item returned to service. But how does the insurance adjuster or contractor determine if a soft-surface item has been affected by surface contamination or deep-seated colonization?
Determining conditions
The RC often classifies an indoor space that has been affected by a water loss into zones based on the expected amount of water damage in each zone. The ANSI/IICRC S520 Standard for Professional Mold Remediation provides one helpful classification scheme. Areas of the structure not affected by the water loss are Condition 1; those potentially affected by elevated humidity or settled airborne contaminants are Condition 2; and those directly affected by the water loss are Condition 3 areas.
The classification allows the condition of items in each area to be assessed independently and the RC can utilize appropriate, cost-effective remediation methods tailored to the expected condition of the items in each conditional area. Without the use of conditional areas, the contractor would be more likely to apply aggressive cleaning methods to the entire indoor space, possibly resulting in unnecessary costs.
However, there is often a difference in approach between those inspecting a property following a water loss and those responsible for remediating the water loss. The property inspector may not use the concept of conditional areas when inspecting a water-damaged property. If not, it may be difficult for the RC to use the resulting report to effectively apply conditional areas in the remediation process.
The inspection report issued by the property inspector would have greater utility in the remediation process if the conditional areas were identified as part of the inspection, and the inspection results were associated with those conditional areas.
Assessing condition
The conditions of soft-surface items and carpeting are frequently assessed based on professional judgment. This typically includes a visual inspection, incident history, humidity readings and moisture content measurements. Although professional judgment is a subjective assessment, it performs well for many projects. However, some projects may benefit from sample collection, which is a more objective method of assessing condition.
Sampling may be beneficial in the decision-making process if high-value items are involved, the sampling method can be interpreted, and the reported sample results can be associated with condition. Validated sampling methods that meet these criteria exist, however, sample collection is often discouraged because sampling methods that are difficult to interpret have often been used in field investigations.
For example, assume a substantial water loss occurred in the kitchen of a two-story house. It would be reasonable to classify the kitchen as a Condition 3 area, and since the adjacent dining room and living room may have been affected by elevated humidity, those rooms might be classified as Condition 2. Assuming the upstairs bedrooms were not affected by the water loss, the second floor might be classified as a Condition 1 area. These decisions may determine whether the soft-surface items in each of those areas are cleaned or discarded.
These classifications, which directly affect the extent of the remediation, would typically be subjective decisions based on professional judgment. However, let's assume the dining room contained a 10×12 Persian rug valued at $500 per square foot, there was a fabric-covered sofa in the living room valued at $20,000, and the homeowner was insisting that both items could not be adequately cleaned and should be discarded. Under these conditions an objective, defensible assessment of condition based on sample results may be both warranted and prudent if the referenced sampling criteria were met.
The clean-discard decision is frequently based on professional judgment. However, validated sampling methods may be used to provide objective criteria when warranted. (Photo: iStock)
Soft-surface items
One task of the adjuster is to provide an assessment of the condition of soft-surface items, as well as recommendations for either their restoration or replacement. This task requires the adjuster or RC to differentiate between soft-surface items that can and cannot be effectively cleaned. However, other than observing visible damage, classifying an item as Condition 2 or Condition 3 is often subjective.
A differential sampling method can objectively distinguish between Condition 2 and Condition 3 soft-surface items. The method is based on the assumption that Condition 2 primarily results in the deposition of contaminants on the surface of an item, while the interior surfaces of Condition 3 items are assumed to also be colonized by contaminants.
Two samples are collected from a soft-surface item, one from the surface of the item and the second from both the surface and the interior of the same item. The difference between the two sample results indicates the extent of internal colonization. If colonization of the interior surfaces is nominal, then the item can be cleaned and restored to service. If the interior surfaces are heavily colonized, then the item should be discarded.
The differential sampling method for soft-surface items has been used to provide objective criteria for making a clean-discard decision. It has been applied to both residential and commercial restoration projects, recently water-damaged items and to those stored for a year post-remediation.
Carpets
Sampling can also be used to determine whether or not carpets can be saved or should be replaced. Following a loss, dust samples can be collected from a carpet utilizing the Open-Face Fixed Area method. Using sample results, the carpet can be classified as uncontaminated, potentially contaminated, or contaminated.
The clean-discard decision is frequently based on professional judgment. However, validated sampling methods may be used to provide objective criteria when warranted.
Joe C. Spurgeon, Ph.D., (jospur46@gmail.com) has a multi-disciplinary doctorate degree in analytical chemistry and environmental health; and he was a Certified Industrial Hygienist until 2012. Dr. Spurgeon has been performing residential and commercial IAQ investigations since 1993, and has served as an expert witness in microbial IAQ and wildfire smoke contaminant cases.
Related: Adjuster tools for water losses
© 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.