Vendor tells Three Rivers board its UV air systems and tracer tests can reduce airborne transmission; trustees ask about costs and evidence

John Papp, CEO of PlanMDA, told the Three Rivers School District board on Feb. 19 that upper‑room UV germicidal irradiation (UVGI) systems combined with on-site tracer testing can provide a practical, lower‑cost way to reduce airborne pathogen transmission in classrooms.

Papp said his company and partners used a saliva‑surrogate tracer and DNA tagging during demonstrations in district classrooms and that the tracer data can be modeled to estimate a level of disinfection. “We thought that that science‑based approach … actually has a proven track history of reducing the transmission by about 80 to 90 percent,” Papp said, describing prior peer‑reviewed studies and laboratory work his team uses to calibrate field measurements.

Superintendent Dave Valenzuela introduced the vendor and said the district has deployed some solutions in special‑education and life‑skills settings and is exploring scalable options. Valenzuela noted that a complete HVAC overhaul to meet new ASHRAE recommendations would be far more expensive than targeted UV or air‑cleaning interventions.

Trustees asked for specifics on measured effectiveness, portability, and price. A PlanMDA representative said the tracer tests yield a site‑specific estimate of aerosol removal and inactivation for the devices installed; they cautioned that modeled outcomes depend on the pathogen and room conditions. A trustee asked whether the technology is portable for surge deployment during a local outbreak; the vendor said units can be moved and that only one or two devices might be needed per classroom depending on the configuration.

Board members also pressed cost comparisons. A district staff member explained that, while HVAC upgrades can cost millions and require lengthy engineering work, the vendor’s approach is presented as “several‑thousand‑dollars” per classroom as a phased, more affordable alternative; the exact pricing and scope would be determined if the board chose to pursue procurement.

What it means: The presentation framed UVGI plus tracer validation as a potentially affordable mitigation tool and as a method for generating site‑specific effectiveness estimates. District leaders said they are watching national standards such as emerging ASHRAE guidance and collaborating with research and government partners to validate results. The board did not take action on the vendor’s recommendation at the meeting; trustees asked administration to continue exploring options, including possible pilot deployments and funding sources.

Sources and context: Papp referenced peer‑reviewed literature and earlier deployments used in healthcare settings; he and other presenters described national interest in scalable infection‑risk management approaches that do not require full HVAC replacement. The board’s discussion focused on the difference between vendor claims and independent, site‑specific validation and on the district’s budgetary constraints.

Next steps: Administration and the board indicated they would continue discussions about pilot testing, procurement cost estimates and potential grant or utility support to offset implementation costs.