NYC Law Department release
Independent mirror · updated as the City releases more · v1.2.6
← Document results/DEP Box 33/No folder label
Document / 3 pages

DOH mold inspection memo, August 2002

Machine-extracted title · confidence 75%

Memo from NYC Department of Health regarding a mold inspection conducted in July 2002, with inspection report attached.

NYC-WTC_000096944–000096946
Page image
Scanned page image, NYC-WTC_000096946
OCR text

OCR status: ok · source: pdftotext

NYC 9/11 Public Portal Document AUG-19-2002 1` 44 I-._C'it_rl~ii-~i_ L' c-: 21 ES 429 F.05./03

Apartment 5 — Water damage was less extensive in this apartment. Some peeling paint was observed on the ceiling in a rw,_ T,^a~1i and above a clr_1' ceiling over the bathroom by the ,,vorlaoom. No visible mold was ohser,'e in thrS a:cas. A small area of water damage nos also noted [n the-kitchcn above the shw4do j "" the wail. it vas unclear if the discoloratlon - in this location was troll growth I, -

Apartment 6N -- . Ceiling \rater damage v.as noted and some c~1i;5ping paint was observed on the ceiling in se'vera i area . So:te of wood floors: 'ca ..is buckled. it was unclear whether a the radiator, smali area of r_1SCoirra.lrJn L'1 one location (in the .orn:'.T of the ceiling, above in the room with the desk) was 1.1101:1 growth.

Apartment 5S — Smali areas of chipping paint were observed is tl!ree room's elf this apari ne;.t. No vi_ mold growth was noted.

CorLClU51C_n and itecorlltiiai; ato;s

it 'T.ICFIt,1 he ro,mo rd in accordance with the enclosed "c ''^':rne d:Cj that any vmsibl Du H '\ [ t ;ilioelines on Assessnier1t and l"..erne'i'.t1"-n of .I u;-ito 1i. L111 n ' OrLr ti nts

It is also Iecor.uneiided ;flat the .sn all are,fs of dm clo o'.i n that could not: be ideratified a be pC:Ilt'c7iateii in 3Ct:orti.L'ZCC wit!. .' -!:ye. ,.iIC{C:il1'il.'.s i -ucLit'4. !'l: o iii`'. `:iuuiu mold gro` ^•- th

be removed and inspected for Y'.lC ld o'y i ll. i `lc fi n sextent of th e mold growth in the l by th e area revealed U.t;1'..t in 4p~, t .i.-F'•, shout i he determined. 4N a , ,.i -rir ,

Where wallboard t Vi a ,. a ~1. yli~J ll~in _S removed. exposed :e .l'~ ms~ should -- be Lnsoected for mold growth. If mold ?LYwh J.,; ciisi:o erad, the extent t'f th eIta?iowth should he determined and I't-',Lllti.ttlii.l~ri practices st2~.71t 1d 'cc ad~j 4i,.4C.'.G' 3..r~urtJile adjusted ^~ ..~.it b1' ~,_r lJ. t is _`i iss that r.?.oic _growth is occurring _hi behind 1 ! L other. j~'ee 7 L, 1 l..ed wails. Perimeter p _,. soc i ster walls arc not likely to promote sigiificant mold growth or the unpainted interstitial space. Exploratory cutouts of the sheetrock (preferably at the base of the wall) should be perforn:.ed in areas where water damage is observed but no visible mold growth is seen to identify possible hidden sources of mold.

NYC-WTC 000096946

OCR can misread numbers and units. Confirm readings against the page image before using them.

NYC-WTC_000096946Source: NYC Law Department, mirrored locally

Related records

Browse subjects →

Ranked by indexed similarity. Reasons describe shared subjects and filing context; check the source records.

Same-box records

Filed elsewhere

More like this page

Similar subjects in other documents. Similarity does not establish the same event, measurement or conclusion.

Page similarity is temporarily unavailable or this page has no indexed vector.

Buildings in this record

Machine-extracted building matches; verify each source. Buildings, never households.

Others also read

Readers open these alongside this record — through an Ask answer, the same folder, or indexed similarity. Not a claim they are about the same event.

Compare copies and versions →