A former SFU graduate student is still searching for answers after finding the presence of potentially toxic mould spores in his suite in Hamilton Hall in 2007.

George Kaufmann, who was recovering from lung cancer surgery when attending SFU, told The Peak that his health sharply declined over the course of his residency, during which he developed a “weeping body rash” and “difficulties in breathing,” according to a document he later filed under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act in 2009. 

Kaufmann’s concern turned into alarm when he discovered a large colony of what he believed to be black mould behind his bed.

Administrative concerns at SFU regarding the deterioration of campus buildings and indoor air quality can be dated back to the late 1990s. Hamilton Hall, a student residential building constructed in 1992, was the subject of a series of building envelope assessments conducted by the environmental analysis group James Neill and Associates in 1998, 2003, and 2005. 

The reports recommended a review of maintenance records in addition to a list of remediative actions in 1998; the 2003 report recommended both temporary and full-scale repairs, with the latter estimated to cost up to $978,000.

The 2005 report observed that “with the exception of repairs conducted at the northwest corner [. . .] in 2003, it appears that minimal overall short term preventative maintenance was completed.” The report further explained that, “in some cases, the water penetration appears to have continued unabated to the point where advanced structural deterioration has occurred.” 

SFU continued renting rooms to students as late as 2007, prior to extensive building renovations that were conducted over a two year period. 

Kaufmann moved into suite 1013 in Hamilton Hall on May 8, 2007. The suite was designed for disabled persons, as Kaufmann was recovering from his surgery which had taken place in December of 2006 and was on a second round of chemotherapy. He was listed with the Centre for Students with Disabilities as an immunosensitive person, and claims that he was not informed of the building’s history prior to being assigned the room.

Kaufmann complained once via email about the quality of the carpets, but otherwise saw no cause for concern with the room. However, during his residence, he alleges that his health suffered. When he, along with the other tenants of the building, were relocated to Louis Riel House due to renovations taking place on Hamilton Hall, Kaufmann claims to have discovered the alleged black mould behind his bed. 

Upon further emailed complaints to Residence and Housing, Kaufmann was informed by Jan Flagel, a management representative of the Residence safety committee and SFU’s director of Residence and Housing, that the stain was “food-based,” despite the issuance of a report in September 2007 from Pacific Environmental Consulting that confirmed the presence of “significant fungal staining.” Flagel declined to comment for this article. 

The report stated that the spores were present in levels three times higher than outside air samples: approximately 57,000 spores per cubic metre inside versus approximately 17,100 per cubic metre outside. 

However, a second assessment of the room, which was conducted by Pacific Environmental Consulting after the room was left untouched for four days, found that fungal spore counts sharply declined for both indoor and outdoor numbers. The second evaluation found approximately 1,000 spores per cubic metre indoors and approximately 6,000 spores per cubic metre outdoors. 

Kaufmann speculated that every time he opened his drawers, displaced air beneath the bed caused the mould spores to become airborne, and when the room was left for four days, the spores may have settled.

In 2009, Kaufmann was relocated back to suite 1013. He complained about the mould colony under his bed to SFU Ombudsperson Jay Solomon, and Kaufmann claims that Solomon confirmed in an email that “the mould was tested and came back as ‘food-based’ and was not considered toxic or dangerous.”

The email in question continued, “Unless you have testing results that contradict the results of the tests done by SFU, comments by others are simply opinions not based on fact.” As of press time, attempts by The Peak to contact Solomon have been unsuccessful.

When recently asked by The Peak why SFU did not undertake a comprehensive safety assessment in response to the earlier reports, SFU chief safety officer Terry Waterhouse stated that mould spore counts were not the be-all-and-end-all of air quality assessment, stating that “observation by a knowledgeable assessor” is the most important quantifier. 

He explained, “The assessment [done] provided evidence of significant problems with [Hamilton Hall], which were responded to in a very comprehensive manner.”