Hartford hearing finds lab results showing fentanyl but lacks on-site documentation tying tests to 4 Magnolia Street

A hearing officer in Hartford reviewed testing results and company records that show fentanyl was detected at an apartment at 4 Magnolia Street, but said she still lacks on-site documentation tying the lab results definitively to that unit.

The hearing focused on testimony from the owner of Assured Decontamination Services, who described his company’s testing process and the chain-of-custody paperwork submitted to EMSL, the independent laboratory that analyzed the wipes.

The hearing officer said the submitted chain-of-custody and wipe-analysis records do not include an address and asked the firm to produce photographs and the testimony of the field inspector who collected samples. “I need these photographs to come from the inspector, not from anyone else,” the hearing officer said.

Assured Decontamination Services’ owner, identified in the record as Mr. Sullivan, told the hearing that his firm “tests for fentanyl and methamphetamine” and that the operation is a daily business. He said the company performed composite wipes and forwarded samples to EMSL; the lab’s results, which were in the record, indicate the kitchen/stove area and a bathroom vent tested positive for fentanyl and negative for methamphetamine.

Sullivan described the company’s sampling method as a composite wipe: “It means we swiped 4 areas for each test,” he said, adding that composite wipes pool four adjacent swipes into a single sample submitted to the lab. He said his operations manager, Jason Sullivan, collected the samples and signed the chain-of-custody form that was submitted to EMSL.

Counsel for the property owner and the city questioned the scope and documentation of the inspection. The hearing officer noted that, although the submitted lab cover letter and other materials reference the company and dates, the wipe-analysis sheets and chain-of-custody forms in the record lack an explicit address linking them to 4 Magnolia Street. The hearing officer repeatedly asked the company to produce photographs and any field notes that would place the inspector in the specified unit on the date of sampling.

Attorney Osborne (questioning at the hearing) added that the city had subpoenaed the company’s records and that some documents — including an invoice and the chain-of-custody signed by Jason Sullivan and the EMSL time stamp of October 14, 2024 — had been produced. Mr. Sullivan agreed to re-send his invoice and the company’s full file following the hearing.

The record also shows the company had a remediation proposal for the property covering Jan. 3–5, 2025, with a quoted cleanup price of about $17,000; Sullivan testified the tenants were billed roughly $2,400–$2,900. State licensing questions were raised in the record: the company is based in Minneapolis and Sullivan said some states require in-state certification for cleanup work.

The hearing officer directed counsel for the city to obtain the field inspector’s testimony (the operations manager, Jason Sullivan) and any photographs or inspection notes from Assured Decontamination Services. The officer tentatively set a follow-up hearing for April 2, 2025, and asked parties to confirm witness availability.

Why this matters: The presence of fentanyl in a residence is a public-health concern that can trigger orders to vacate or require remedial work. The hearing officer said she needs direct testimony from the person who collected the samples and documentary proof (photos/field notes linking the samples to the address) before deciding whether to modify or uphold any public-health orders tied to the property.

Next steps: The hearing was continued for collection of additional evidence and live testimony from the field inspector; the city’s counsel is to confirm availability and produce any additional records the subpoena requested.