Coby Gierke:

Hello and welcome, everyone. I’m Coby Gierke, the Executive Director of IBEC Inc. It’s a pleasure to have you all join us today for the first part of our “Lessons Learned” series, a collaborative effort between IBEC and our generous sponsor, the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA). Given the overwhelming interest, we even expanded our available spaces. I’d like to thank AIHA for supporting and actively promoting this event. Additionally, I appreciate the partner organizations and individuals who spread the word, making this gathering successful.

It’s a point of pride for IBEC to host complimentary events like today’s, made possible by the unwavering support from our members and partners. I encourage everyone to explore more about IBEC and our various initiatives. To get involved or become a member, please visit weareIBEC.org.

Without further delay, I’m sure you’re eager to engage with our distinguished speaker and panelists.

 

Claire Bird:

Thank you, Coby. Hello, everyone. I’m Claire Bird, the Executive Secretary of IBEC. As we wait for Ken’s reconnection, I’d like to provide an overview of today’s event.

Earlier this year, our organizations, including IBEC, had the privilege to be invited to Washington, DC, for a meeting with Dr. Jha, then the White House COVID-19 Response Coordinator. The core of our discussion with Dr. Jha revolved around the role of indoor air quality in curbing infectious diseases within built environments. Although the Federal Public Health Emergency has since been lifted, the resurgence in COVID-19 hospitalizations and fatalities is alarming. Today’s session aims to reconvene and extend our dialogue from that pivotal meeting at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building.

And it seems Ken is back. Over to you, Ken, for the panel introduction.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Today’s session is instrumental, Emphasizing the significance of our prior meeting at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. At that crucial gathering, spearheaded by Dr. Jha, the focus was unmistakably on the nexus between indoor air quality and infectious diseases in our built environments. The organizations represented today were those very same voices invited to that dialogue. Our collective aim is to revisit and delve deeper into those discussions, amplifying awareness amongst a wider audience about indoor air quality’s pivotal role in curbing infectious diseases.

Allow me to briefly introduce our esteemed panel, with in-depth introductions to follow:

• James Frederick – He serves as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Labor from OSHA. James will elucidate OSHA’s ongoing efforts and strategies related to indoor air quality standards.
• Dr. Gigi Gronvall – As an Associate Professor of Public Health at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, Dr. Gronvall will lend her academic expertise on the contemporary state of indoor air quality and its ramifications.
• Dr. Joseph Allen – An Assistant Professor renowned for his work on exposure assessments and the challenges posed by indoor air quality research.
• Donna Heidel – The former president of the American Industrial Hygiene Association, Donna will offer an industrial viewpoint coupled with a safety and health perspective on advancements in indoor air quality.
• Dr. William Bahnfleth – Chairing the recently published infection control standard 241 by the American Society for Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Dr. Bahnfleth will shed light on evolving standards in this domain.
• Dave Rowson – As the current director of the EPA’s Indoor Environments Division, Dave brings a wealth of experience to our discussions.

Lastly, let me introduce my co-moderator, Claire, who you’ve already met. As the Executive Secretary of IBEC, she will guide each speaker in sharing their background and organizational affiliations.

 

Claire Bird:

I’m truly filled with enthusiasm for today’s session. My heartfelt gratitude goes to all our speakers and panelists for investing their time and expertise in this event. We’ve been eager to foster dialogue between top-tier academics and industry professionals. I genuinely believe that this session, irrespective of where you are and what time it is for you, will play a pivotal role in unifying our efforts across the three core domains: buildings, pathogens, and paper – the pillars that IBEC is built upon.

For those joining us, I encourage active participation. Share your feedback and inquiries in the chat box; we’re keen to hear from you.

Now, let’s proceed. Over to you for the introduction of James Frederick.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

It brings me immense pleasure and honor to introduce James Frederick. Over the past two years, I’ve had the privilege of engaging with him four times. Our most recent interaction was at the NIHS – the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences – during a worker training program. Jim delivered a riveting presentation there, captivating our attention effortlessly.

With a formidable career spanning over three decades in Occupational Safety and Health, Jim is a beacon of expertise and commitment. His legacy as a steadfast advocate for North American labor unions, employers, and regulatory agencies is undisputed. A testament to his profound grasp of workplace safety is his dedicated 25-year stint with the Health Safety Environment Department at the United Steelworkers, where he held pivotal roles as Assistant Director and Principal Investigator up until 2019. Within this capacity, Jim was the go-to expert for insights on occupational health, safety, and environmental matters. His collaborations have extended globally, partnering with diverse entities on myriad projects to enhance scientific and environmental health understandings.

Jim’s academic credentials are equally commendable. He’s an alumnus of Purdue University, holding a Bachelor’s in Industrial Hygiene, and secured a Master of Science in Environmental Health and Safety Management from the Rochester Institute of Technology. His dedication to Occupational Safety and Health isn’t confined to his professional roles; he has lent his expertise to various esteemed groups, including the NIOSH Board of Scientific Counselors, the NCSY 10 Standard Committee, and the US ISO 45001 standard committee.

Possessing a holistic understanding of health and safety, enriched by vast field experience and scholastic pursuits, Jim’s leadership in Occupational Safety and Health has been instrumental in sculpting global workplace safety standards.

James, it’s a privilege to welcome you. We’re truly honored to have you as our keynote speaker today.

 

James Frederick: 

Thank you, Ken. Good evening, good morning, and all times in between. I’m delighted to discuss indoor air quality from the standpoint of the US Department of Labor and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Warm regards from the Department of Labor’s Acting Secretary, Julie Sue, and Assistant Secretary of Labor, Doug Parker, who heads OSHA. Thank you, Ken, and to the integrated bioscience and built environment Consortium for your invaluable work promoting safety and health. Special thanks to AIHA and Larry Sloan for connecting us tonight. AIHA and OSHA’s formal collaboration dates back to 2002 and was reinforced in February 2020, right before COVID-19 reshaped our world. In March 2020, a national emergency was declared concerning this outbreak. One key lesson from these past years is the importance of clean indoor air.

Every day, I reflect on the number “14” – the average daily count of workers who succumb to acute work-related injuries. According to the most recent data from 2021, 5,190 workers died due to on-job hazards. This translates to 14 deaths daily, five every eight-hour shift. This doesn’t account for occupational disease deaths or the 2.6 million workers who suffered non-fatal injuries. Behind these figures are actual individuals, their families, and communities. OSHA envisions safety and health as a core value in all American workplaces, with clean air being fundamental.

COVID-19 highlighted the significance of clean indoor air. The Biden administration, in March 2022, introduced the “clean air in buildings challenge” to combat COVID-19 spread indoors. Collaborative government efforts have since been made to improve indoor air quality.

OSHA, as a regulatory agency, emphasizes the enforcement of standards. Our enforcement team addresses various air quality issues, from exposure to harmful gasses to mold and temperature concerns. We’re updating our technical manual to release the updated indoor air quality chapter by 2024. But, true advancements in indoor air quality necessitate partnerships and collaborations.

Several companies, like Phillips 66, Vantage Oleochemicals, NASA Kennedy Space Center, and Delta Airlines, have taken notable steps to ensure indoor air quality. OSHA offers various training and compliance assistance programs to help businesses establish effective safety and health management systems.

A critical aspect of indoor air quality is equity. Historically, marginalized workers often find themselves in jobs with poor air quality. Every worker deserves equal access to clean air. The collaboration between the American Industrial Hygiene Association and OSHA is pivotal to improving indoor air quality. We value this partnership and look forward to its growth. Thank you for this platform, and I now hand it back.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Thank you, Jim, for your insightful presentation. We appreciate your time today. Now, we’ll proceed to the panel discussion. Claire, please introduce our first two panelists.

 

Claire Bird:

Thank you, Ken. First, a heartfelt thanks to James for his impactful introduction. Also, we thank the American Industrial Hygiene Association and IBEC  for organizing today’s session. We’ll soon hear from Donna Heidel, their former past president. But first, let me introduce Professor William Bahnfleth. Dr. Bahnfleth, a professor at the Department of Architectural Engineering at Pennsylvania State University, holds a doctoral degree in mechanical engineering from the University of Illinois. His experience spans research, government labs, and professional practice. He aims to bridge the gap between practical application and scientific research. He is an esteemed fellow of ASHRAE, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, and the International Society of Indoor Air Quality and Climate. With over 170 journal articles and 14 book contributions, Dr. Bahnfleth chairs the ASHRAE Epidemic Task Force. His tenure at ASHRAE includes roles like director, vice president, treasurer, and society president during 2013-14. He has been recognized with various ASHRAE awards, including their highest individual accolade, the F. Paul Anderson Award. Bill, please share ASHRAE’s contributions.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Bill, we can’t hear you. I suggest we let Donna speak while you resolve the issue. I experienced similar technical difficulties earlier.

 

Claire Bird:

Alright. While Bill fixes his audio, let’s move on to Donna Heidel from the American Industrial Hygiene Association. Donna’s rich background includes leadership roles in industrial hygiene at a consultancy, coordination at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and directing industrial hygiene and occupational toxicology at a leading pharmaceutical company. She holds a Master of Science in industrial hygiene and is certified by the American Board of Industrial Hygiene. Additionally, she has the esteemed title of fellow within the American Industrial Hygiene Association. Her profound knowledge of industrial hygiene has significantly advanced workplace safety and risk reduction. Donna, please share insights from AIHA’s work.

 

Donna Heidel:

Thank you for inviting me to this panel. I’ll outline the role of the Industrial Hygienist in managing indoor air quality. The American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) caters to industrial hygiene professionals across various sectors. AIHA contributes to indoor air quality by creating publications and documents offering technical procedures for assessing and addressing indoor air quality (IAQ) concerns. This includes investigating contaminant concentrations from equipment, manufacturing processes, or outdoor sources like wildfire smoke and vehicle emissions. We also examine indoor temperature and humidity, ensure fresh air provision based on occupancy, and inspect for mold and Legionella.

Collaborating with HVAC engineers and building ventilation maintainers, Industrial Hygienists utilize the ASHRAE Standard 62.1 to maintain acceptable indoor air quality. We advise building managers on air quality, recommend interventions, and suggest high-efficiency filters for wildfire smoke or exhaust systems for welding fumes. Addressing water intrusion sources is crucial to managing mold, and increasing fresh air intake can reduce exhaled carbon dioxide levels.

Our indoor air quality resources are accessible on the AIHA website. Our proficiency in managing indoor air quality was particularly useful during the pandemic, allowing us to enhance ventilation system controls. Supported by CDC NIOSH grants, AIHA launched the ‘commit to care’ initiative in partnership with IBEC. This involved updating AIHA’s publication on the Industrial Hygienist’s role during pandemics, introducing multilingual resources, and offering guidance for various industries. With another grant in late 2022, we expanded our knowledge products on topics like ventilation and disinfection, which became accessible on Commit to C.A.R.E.  in 2023. Another phase, due later this year, will update our original guidance into a comprehensive ‘healthier workplaces’ guide.

Lastly, AIHA’s indoor environmental quality committee released a guide on mitigating COVID-19 risks using engineering controls. This included recommendations on improving air change rates, assessing airflow’s role in particle transportation, identifying poorly ventilated building areas, and deploying air-cleaning technologies like HEPA filters and ultraviolet germicidal irradiation.

Thank you for allowing me to share about AIHA’s contribution to indoor air quality.

 

Claire Bird:

Thanks, Donna. Your relationship with OSHA sounds intriguing. Can you share more about how that partnership functions?

 

Donna Heidel:

Absolutely. We collaborate closely with OSHA, inviting them to participate in various task forces and committees. This fosters knowledge sharing between employers and OSHA’s insights from workplaces. Additionally, we share academic research with OSHA to benefit both entities.

 

Claire Bird:

Thank you, Donna. That’s truly commendable. And I see we have Bill back. Bill, could you delve into ASHRAE’s work and touch on standard 241?

 

William Bahnfleth:

Of course. ASHRAE, founded in 1894 as the American Society of Heating and Air Conditioning Engineers, has always prioritized air quality. While I won’t delve deep into our century-long history, a few key achievements are worth noting. Many recognize ASHRAE for our air quality standards, like 62.1 and 62.2, targeting residential and non-residential buildings, and 170, specific to health care ventilation. We also set standards for filter MERV ratings and even Legionella control.

Recognizing the significance of health experts’ input, we’ve maintained an Environmental Health Committee since 1985. Our Indoor Air Quality (IAQ) conference, initiated around the same time, will see its 20th edition in 2025. Additionally, we have numerous technical committees focused on IAQ and health. In 2014, we established the Indoor Environmental Quality Global Alliance, with AIHA as a charter member.

Shifting to infection control, one of ASHRAE’s earliest recommendations in 1895 was building ventilation to control infection risk. This guidance made its way into numerous state codes by 1922. Fast forward to the pandemic, and ASHRAE formed an Epidemic Task Force, producing valuable guidance. Recently, after discussions with the White House and its COVID-19 Response Team, we were tasked to create a pathogen control standard. Completed in a record six months, this standard offers equivalent clean air requirements across various spaces introduces measures for air cleaner testing, and emphasizes system assessment, planning, and maintenance.

Though I served as the past chair of this standard’s committee, it’s now a standing committee. We’re not only spreading the word about it but are also preparing for its further development. We aim to bolster building resilience against airborne infections and, more broadly, elevate indoor air quality. ASHRAE’s current efforts in this domain are unmatched in our history, and we’re dedicated to making a lasting impact.

That’s a brief overview of ASHRAE’s endeavors in IAQ. There’s certainly more, but time constraints a deeper dive.

 

Claire Bird:

Thank you, Dr. Bahnfleth. Your efforts have garnered global attention, especially during such a brief period. The Australian Institute of Refrigeration, Air Conditioning, and Heating (AIRAH) have also closely monitored these developments. Furthermore, I’d like to express our gratitude for your contributions as one of IBEC’s scientific advisors. With that said, could you enlighten us on what you deem as the most urgent needs concerning building standards and regulations for infection risk mitigation?

 

William Bahnfleth:

First and foremost, standards are pivotal. Over the last few years, I’ve emphasized implementing minimum standards as they drive change. There’s a noticeable gap due to prolonged underfunding in indoor air quality research. With growing awareness and support, now is the time to address these questions through further research. Equally crucial is emphasizing the importance of building maintenance and operational standards. The U.S., for instance, lacks regulation in this area post-construction. Implementing periodic building assessments to ensure optimal performance is essential. Proper maintenance ensures better air quality and can result in energy savings. We can achieve improved air quality through well-structured standards, like 241, without escalating energy consumption.

Claire Bird:

Thank you for the insights. Ken, back to you.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Appreciate it, Claire. Please submit your questions via chat to our speakers, and we’ll address them later. Thanks to Bill and Donna for their informative sessions. Now, I’d like to introduce Dave Rowson from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), where he oversees the indoor environments division. Dave has spearheaded numerous initiatives throughout his tenure, ranging from radon and asthma care to international indoor air programs and EPA’s indoor air response to COVID-19. Dave, could you shed light on the EPA’s endeavors related to indoor environments?

 

Dave Rowson:

Thank you, Ken. Good morning, afternoon, or evening, depending on where you are globally. It’s an honor to be among these esteemed panelists discussing indoor air as a public health strategy. As Director of the Indoor Environments Division at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, I lead a non-regulatory branch that offers guidance, technical aid, outreach, and financial support for healthy indoor air.

Our mission addresses public health risks through guidance on radon, mold, viruses, VOCs, indoor particulate matter, asthma triggers, and secondhand smoke. Our primary authority derives from two legislative pieces—one providing a broad directive for research on indoor air risks and public information and the other focused on radon.

Interest in indoor air quality has surged, especially during the pandemic. We’ve observed record interactions with our online content and an increased engagement in our webinars. New initiatives from the administration and Congress further solidify this interest. Among our new responsibilities are the $50 million appropriation for promoting healthy indoor air in schools and a $10 million program on wildfire smoke preparedness.

Furthermore, we’re emphasizing the significance of effective ventilation, dilution, filtration, and air cleaning to combat COVID-19 transmission and promote better indoor air quality. But it’s essential to remember that these solutions don’t address all indoor air problems. Source control remains vital.

I’m thrilled to be here and eagerly await our discussion.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Thank you, Dave. Given the growing concerns around air quality and disease transmission in educational spaces, could you elaborate on the EPA’s efforts to enhance indoor air quality practices in schools?

 

Dave Rowson:

The pandemic emphasized the crucial role schools play in our society. We’ve focused extensively on aiding schools in reopening safely for students and the wider community. While every environment is essential, schools—especially those in disadvantaged communities—face unique infrastructure and investment challenges.

To address this, the Congress and administration allocated $50 million via the Inflation Reduction Act for the EPA, aimed at school indoor air quality. While this amount might seem limited for infrastructural changes, our goal is to guide schools towards effective and sustainable investments, especially those in disadvantaged areas. Significant funding has also been made available through the Department of Education. We aim to steer these investments effectively, ensuring the health and safety of our future generations.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

 

Thank you, Dave. Let’s pivot and delve into academia to discuss some critical initiatives. I’d like to introduce Dr. Gigi Gronvall, Assistant Professor of Public Health at Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. Gigi holds an esteemed position as a Senior Scholar at the Center. She is an associate professor in the Department of Environmental Health and Engineering at the Berg School of Public Health. A trained immunologist, Gigi’s expertise has deeply influenced both health and engineering fields. She has led the center’s initiatives to monitor diagnostic test developments during the COVID-19 pandemic and championed enhancing indoor air quality to reduce pathogen transmission, particularly in schools. Gigi also played a pivotal role in crafting the Model State Indoor Air Quality Act and has authored pieces on the pandemic’s scientific response and its security implications globally.

 

Gigi Gronvall:

Thank you, Kenneth, for the introduction. I’m honored to discuss our efforts at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. Operating within the Bloomberg School of Public Health, our center functions like a think tank, aiming to translate scientific research and public health knowledge into actionable policies. We’ve been active for two decades, founded by D.A. Henderson, the mind behind the smallpox eradication campaign. I’m privileged to work alongside Dr. Paula Olsiewski and Dr. Richard Bruns regarding indoor air quality. We have convened experts, hosted conferences, and documented best practices observed during the pandemic. For example, our soon-to-be-published study examines how a well-funded school system in Manhattan and the Baltimore City Public Schools enhanced indoor air quality and COVID-19 mitigation measures. We’re thrilled to launch a Model State Indoor Air Quality Act today. Created in collaboration with experts and legal professionals from Arizona State University, it aims to provide states with the necessary structure to enforce indoor air quality standards. We aim to build an infrastructure that ensures everyone can breathe clean, healthy air.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Thank you, Gigi. I’m aware you’ve explored challenges the world faced during the pandemic and the implications of SARS-CoV-2 on global security. Can you summarize your findings in a sentence or two for our discussion?

 

Gigi Gronvall:

Certainly, while there were many complexities during the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, the robust response of the scientific community stood out. The rapid development of vaccines is a testament to that. Going forward, the scientific community needs strategies to counter misinformation and ensure that science remains a trusted source of truth.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Well said, Gigi. I’ll hand it over to Claire to introduce Dr. Joseph Allen.

 

Claire Bird:

Thank you. Dr. Joseph Allen is an esteemed Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health assistant professor. Beginning his career investigating sick buildings in various industries, he developed a commitment to promoting global healthier buildings. Dr. Allen spearheads the Healthy Buildings program at Harvard and advises the Harvard Healthier Building Materials Academy. Additionally, he’s an associate editor for the Indoor Air Journal and the Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology. Dr. Allen actively promotes healthy building strategies by collaborating with Fortune 100 companies and contributing to international discussions. His research and public roles underscore the importance of healthy buildings for well-being. I eagerly await his insights today. Joe, the floor is yours.

 

Joseph Allen:

Thank you, Claire, for the warm welcome. I’ll touch upon three roles and the changes I’ve witnessed post-COVID. Firstly, as a professor at Harvard, I’ve been leading the Healthy Buildings Program for two decades. Secondly, as a commissioner for the Lancet COVID-19 Commission, I chaired the Task Force on Safe Work, School, and Travel. I’ve consulted for 20 years on healthy building strategies and resolving building-related health issues.

There are five significant shifts in our perspective on buildings and air quality. The foremost is the acknowledgment of airborne transmission of diseases like COVID-19. We emphasized the importance of improved ventilation and air purification early in the pandemic, and now major medical journals also recognize airborne transmission as a dominant mode. Secondly, there’s a renewed focus on health-based ventilation standards. During the pandemic, a few of us set ventilation targets, eventually leading to new standards by ASHRAE and the CDC.

The third shift is the technological advancements that empower the public to monitor building air quality. Recently, we collaborated with Amazon to develop real-time indoor air quality monitoring. Fourthly, the focus has expanded to consider other factors like lighting, acoustics, and materials, as highlighted in our ‘Nine Foundations of a Healthy Building’ report. Lastly, as the urgency of COVID-19 decreases, the climate crisis demands attention. We must ensure that our emphasis on energy-efficient buildings doesn’t compromise indoor air quality and health.

 

Claire Bird:

Thank you, Joe. The changes are indeed noteworthy. Regarding the Nine Foundations, do you foresee existing building performance certifications adapting to encompass health, or is there a need for new tools?

 

Joseph Allen:

While there are prevalent certifications like Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED), there’s also a surge in health-based building certifications. However, some organizations might feel overwhelmed with these certifications. Grounding our practices in the latest science is crucial, not just standards. Making claims about a building’s health requires utmost diligence and avoiding shortcuts. Mistakes in energy efficiency might not have immediate repercussions, but compromising health can have dire consequences.

 

Claire Bird:

Thank you. I’ll now hand it back over to Ken for our incoming questions.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Thank you, Claire. My camera seems to be malfunctioning, but that won’t hinder our Q&A. I noticed an alert suggesting technical issues with Safari, but I don’t need a camera for this. To direct a question at Bill: Beyond research and establishing standards, what can organizations like ASHRAE and AIHA do to minimize the airborne transmission of diseases indoors?

 

William Bahnfleth:

That’s a significant question. Today, in another webinar, I mentioned that real-world application involves three essential aspects: Science, public perception, and regulatory acceptance. While research is fundamental, public awareness and governmental acknowledgment are equally crucial. To sustain interest in indoor air quality, we must consistently educate the public about its significance and the authorities about its relevance. Professional training is also paramount. Most professionals who design and operate buildings have been educated in physical sciences and are more attuned to energy considerations than to human-centric factors like indoor air quality. We need ongoing education for the current workforce and advanced training for the upcoming one to ensure a holistic understanding. Building design isn’t just about energy conservation; it’s primarily about fostering a conducive environment for its inhabitants. The essence of my answer: Education cannot be stressed enough.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Thanks, William. Donna, what steps is AIHA taking to curb the transmission of infectious diseases?

 

Donna Heidel:

Certainly. AIHA is setting up a task force to delineate the Industrial Hygienist’s role concerning ASHRAE Standard 241. We aim to discern how our profession can facilitate the framing and execution of building readiness plans with guidelines on air changes and filtration during infection risk periods. Our task force will welcome AIHA members and non-members to encapsulate a broad perspective, including those of HVAC design engineers. We’ve made a public call for participation to bridge AIHA’s volunteer groups like the IAQ committee, sensor technologies committee, and big data committees with ASHRAE to bolster our joint endeavors to enhance indoor air quality.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Thank you, Donna. One more thing: How will the AIHA IAQ collaborate with other bodies framing guidelines and standards to make indoor spaces safer concerning infection risks?

 

Donna Heidel:

Our task force is being established to pinpoint such collaboration opportunities. We’ll then rope in our committees, endowed with subject matter experts, to delve deep into each specific area.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Thank you. I have another question for Bill. ASHRAE Standard 241 was a significant accomplishment, especially in its timely delivery. How do you envision its successful implementation? Moreover, there was a question from the audience regarding the enforcement mechanisms for ASHRAE Standard 241. Is it the responsibility of states and municipalities to integrate it into building codes? And how can employees advocate for their workplaces to adopt the standards of 241?

 

William Bahnfleth:

There are multiple questions there. The challenge with standards is that they are only mandatory when an authority adopts them. We hope to advocate adopting 241 as part of an indoor air quality law. The model state Indoor Air Quality Act developed by Johns Hopkins could facilitate the adoption of 241. But it’s a lengthy process. I would suggest turning to government agencies, especially since they motivated the development of 241. They can adopt and showcase its effectiveness. We’re discussing with some agencies about piloting it and providing feedback. Another important aspect is that the standard was drafted in mandatory language, making it easier for authorities to adopt, unlike some other guidance created during the pandemic.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Thank you, Bill. Dave, can you discuss the range of strategies to enhance indoor air quality interventions, as mentioned in your guidance?

 

Dave Rowson:

Certainly, Ken. We primarily recommend best practices in ventilation to dilute pollutants, filtration to remove them, and source control to limit their introduction. Ventilation and filtration offer multiple benefits by reducing concentrations of various indoor contaminants. Our program has emphasized key indoor air contaminants based on significant public health risks and policy considerations. These include radon, particulate matter, biological contaminants like mold and viruses, and specific chemical contaminants. A rising topic of discussion is monitoring to identify key building issues and the effectiveness of interventions. We’ve recently issued guidance about indoor sensor technology. It’s still an emerging field, but with new technology, we can address specific contaminants more effectively than before.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Thank you, Dave. Claire, your question?

 

Claire Bird:

Yes. I’d like to direct this to Dr. Gronvall or Dr. Allen. Given your research on buildings, exposure, that and public health, are there other factors we should consider when relying on mechanical systems for public health strategies? Are there other aspects, be it social or related to public health strategy, we need to be mindful of?

 

Gigi Gronvall:

Most people naturally support improvements in public health. The challenge is demonstrating that it’s achievable and the benefits outweigh the costs. Historical changes in public health, like understanding cholera transmission through water, took significant time and effort. Building on decades of work is crucial.

 

Joseph Allen:

To add, we need to focus on elevating the standard of poorly performing buildings. We should prioritize areas with the lowest ventilation rates, especially schools serving underprivileged populations. Waiting for a crisis to upgrade our standards isn’t effective. There are simple steps every building can follow, like commissioning, increasing outdoor air, enhancing filtration, and using air quality monitors. It’s not a costly endeavor to have healthy buildings.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Thank you, Joe. On the topic of California’s grant incentive for schools to monitor indoor air quality, are there similar federal programs upcoming?

 

Dave Rowson:

Though not identical to California’s approach, there’s significant funding from the Department of Education under the bipartisan infrastructure law for monitoring in schools. Our forthcoming funds will potentially include monitoring as an eligible use based on stakeholder feedback.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

Thank you, Dave. Claire, any closing remarks?

 

Claire Bird:

Thank you to everyone for this enlightening session. We’ll review all questions and forward them to relevant speakers for potential responses. This is the first in a four-part series on indoor air quality. Upcoming sessions will delve deeper into pathogens, ventilation, and emerging technologies. We appreciate the collaboration with IBEC and the American Industrial Hygiene Association.

 

Kenneth Martinez:

To conclude, we must stay vigilant and proactive about indoor air quality, especially given the evolving nature of the pandemic and potential future health challenges. Thank you to our speakers and partners. We hope to see you in the next session. Goodbye.