Union decries recurring mould, moisture concerns at DND’s Carling Campus

The Union of National Defence Employees says mould remediation has either taken place, or is currently underway, in three buildings at National Defence’s Carling Campus in Ottawa, and that humidity and indoor air quality concerns there date back to at least 2018.

Union of National Defence Employees (UNDE) representatives have recorded relative humidity readings above 70 per cent at times, well above the range recommended in Health Canada’s office-air-quality guidance, and told The Hill Times recurring incidents are being addressed individually rather than examined as evidence of a potentially broader problem. The union is calling on the Department of National Defence (DND) and Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC) to conduct a comprehensive assessment of recurring humidity, moisture, and indoor air quality issues across the campus.

"Ultimately, our members deserve to know that the buildings they are being required to work in are healthy and safe. They also deserve clear answers about who is responsible when they aren't," said UNDE executive vice-president James Potts.

Potts had not clarified by deadline when the readings above 70 per cent were recorded, or in which buildings they came from.

A February 2020 PSPC briefing note described Carling Campus as comprising 11 buildings and said it was expected to house 9,300 to 9,400 Defence personnel.

Problems reported in three of 11 buildings

Potts said UNDE representatives have reported visible mould and water damage in Building 8, as well as concerns following flooding in Buildings 3 and 5. Potts said representatives have also repeatedly raised concerns about the campus’ heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning system, and whether it can adequately control humidity.

Health Canada’s Guidance on Improving Indoor air Quality in Office Buildings recommends keeping relative humidity between 30 and 50 per cent, and checking that heating, ventilation and air-conditioning equipment is functioning properly, including its humidity controls. The guidance notes that high humidity can contribute to condensation, excess moisture, and mould growth.

Potts said UNDE representatives have raised humidity, HVAC, and indoor-air-quality issues through workplace health-and-safety channels for years. He said representatives are often not proactively informed when problems arise, and frequently first hear about them from employees before seeking information from DND, PSPC, or building management.

Members have been encouraged to submit service requests when conditions deteriorate, Potts said, but that dealing with complaints one by one has failed to resolve what the union sees as a recurring underlying problem.

“There have been water leaks, flooding, high humidity, mould remediation, and repeated indoor-air-quality complaints across multiple buildings,” said Potts.

“When the same kinds of problems continue to arise year after year, the appropriate response cannot simply be another service ticket.”

Potts also described accountability at Carling as fragmented. DND employs the workers represented by UNDE, PSPC is responsible for the property, and private contractors are involved in facilities management. He said that division can make it difficult for staff to determine who is ultimately responsible for fixing a recurring workplace problem.

Members reporting uncomfortable working conditions

Potts said members have reported coughing and sneezing, headaches, fatigue, dry eyes and allergies being triggered while working at Carling Campus. He had not clarified by deadline when those complaints were reported, or which buildings they concerned. Members have also reported high humidity and uncomfortable working conditions, and some told the union they felt significantly more fatigued after working in the building than when working remotely.

“We cannot independently establish that the building conditions caused individual medical symptoms, but the frequency and consistency of the concerns being reported to us warrants serious attention,” Potts said.

The union’s concerns come weeks after a major water event at Carling. PSPC identified the campus as one of four federal properties most significantly affected by the severe July 1 storm, and said multiple buildings and tunnel systems there were affected.

In reporting published by The Hill Times in August, DND said fewer than 30 employees had been temporarily moved to another area while affected spaces dried out. By Aug. 13, the department said those workers had returned, and described the impacts to areas occupied by DND staff as minimal. PSPC had not identified which buildings or areas of the campus were affected, and remediation was still underway as of Aug. 4.

The Hill Times asked DND to respond to UNDE’s concerns and its call for a broader assessment of conditions at Carling. DND said it's reviewing the questions, but did not provide a response by deadline.

PSPC was also asked about reported water intrusion and mould in Building 3, and whether it had conducted or planned a broader assessment of recurring conditions at Carling. PSPC also did not respond by deadline.

Experts weigh the pattern

The pattern described by UNDE would be enough to justify looking for a broader cause, according to experts interviewed by The Hill Times, but not enough on its own to establish that the problems across Carling share one.

Asked what repeated moisture and indoor-air problems across several buildings could indicate, University of Toronto assistant professor Sarah Haines, who specializes in building science and indoor environmental quality, said she would want to know whether the buildings were experiencing similar problems and what was causing them.

Haines said that if water infiltration and high humidity were recurring across multiple buildings, she would want to investigate whether there was a larger infrastructure or water-management problem, including how the buildings were sealed and where water was entering.

Karen Bartlett, professor emeritus in occupational and environmental health at the University of British Columbia, said mould needs moisture to grow, which is why investigators looking at recurring problems across several buildings would want to identify what is allowing water or dampness to persist. If buildings were constructed around the same time using similar designs or materials, she said, they could share the same type of vulnerabilities such as leaking pipes, inadequate exterior cladding, or insufficient insulation.

“Until the source of moisture is removed, the mould will just come back,” Bartlett said.

That does not mean similar incidents across different buildings necessarily have the same cause. Jeffrey Siegel, a University of Toronto civil-engineering professor, said investigators trying to determine whether a pattern exists would need to compare where problems are appearing, whether affected buildings share construction practices or materials, and whether issues are concentrated in particular types of spaces.

“Is it in these buildings or in those buildings? Is it in entire buildings or in specific spaces in the buildings? That's how the tracing should happen,” Siegel said.

The humidity readings cited by UNDE also need context. Bartlett said relative humidity above 70 per cent can allow mould to grow on building materials, but Siegel cautioned that a brief reading at that level is very different from humidity remaining there most of the time. Haines likewise said repeated readings around 70 per cent would be a reason to investigate further, but would not by themselves establish that a building has a leak or mould problem.

Occupational hygienist Chun-Yip Hon said that if mould testing is conducted in a workplace, workers should be told what was tested, when the testing occurred, what was used for comparison, and what actions followed. He said the findings should be explained in plain language.

Public procurement records show mould-remediation work at Carling predates this summer’s flooding.
A 2021 BGIS procurement tender for Carling Campus titled “B5 Mould Remediation/Insulation Reinstatement” called for mould-affected insulation on mechanical piping in Building 5 to be removed and the affected material replaced.

A second Building 5 procurement followed in 2022 under the title “B5 AHU Mould Remediation.”

The records establish that Building 5 was the subject of mould-remediation work in both 2021 and 2022. They do not establish whether the two projects were connected, whether mould persisted between them, or whether those projects share a cause with the problems Potts now describes.

mponcana@hilltimes.com

The Hill Times