Laserfiche WebLink
OCT 19 1993 to 9® uuE 81 <br />Others suggested the need for operable windows, that is, Increased fresh air. These <br />complaints must be weighed against the number of employees who report allergies and <br />hay fever. To increase direct fresh air intake through open windows by necessity means <br />the introduction of untreated outside air. The system currently introduces fresh air <br />through the central air conditioning system. Those employees with known allergies to <br />pollens would possibly be at greater risk for allergy -like symptoms. Complaints about <br />humidity would also probably increase with the introduction of the humid outside air into <br />the building, potentially necessitating the need for mechanical control of increased <br />moisture. Immediately following the Third Floor petition, Buildings & Grounds made a <br />number of adjustments to the ventilation system. To my knowledge, there have been no <br />further complaints about air circulation since that time. <br />Of particular interest to us was the pattern which a number of these surveys followed. <br />Many of the respondents noted numerous physical symptoms many of which cluster <br />around workplace stress with symptoms abating immediately after leaving the building. <br />Such immediate abatement does not follow the usual medical model which indicates an <br />IAQ problem. An almost equal number of employees were either too hot or too cold. <br />As in the past, ongoing housekeeping and preventive maintenance are the best methods <br />for assuring acceptable indoor air quality. These have been discussed with Building & <br />Grounds and efforts will continue to address these concerns. In summary, our findings <br />are consistent with those of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health <br />(NIOSH) and independent environmental consultants who report that 95% of all IAQ <br />• complaints cannot be identified through surveys, testing, etc. We found a portion of the <br />workforce displeased with crowded office space, lack of windows, and housekeeping. <br />Many have suggested a new building. Of equal interest is the fact that since the surveys <br />were made there have been no further complaints or inquiries to us from anywhere In the <br />building except the Utilities/SWDD area. While here for the Utilities/SWDD testing, Clayton <br />Environmental's certified industrial hygienist reviewed the results received to date. His <br />cursory review of the findings indicated the lack of necessity for testing based upon the <br />data reported. <br />A consolidated summary of the raw data is attached. We are prepared to discuss the <br />results and our conclusions with you at your convenience. Please do not hesitate to <br />contact us. <br />Ms. Jordan reported that between 2/3 and 3/4 of the people <br />responded to the questionnaire, and there have been no complaints <br />from respondents since the questionnaires were completed. <br />Commissioner Adams contended that people are waiting to see <br />what action the County takes. She noticed an odor problem in the <br />legal department on several occasions. <br />Administrator Chandler announced that he will discuss this <br />matter further with Mr. Griffin and then present the results of <br />their discussion to the Board. <br />Jim Granse, 36 Pine Arbor Lane, expressed concern about the <br />air quality in other large buildings in the county, such as Indian <br />River Memorial Hospital. <br />40 <br />