Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facility Remediation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Three contractors present competing remediation plans for AT Johnson complex; SERVPRO bids ~$1.19M
Summary
Three remediation contractors—PBM, SERVPRO of Dale City–Lakeridge, and Bay Restoration—presented methods, certifications and differing scopes to address mold and water damage at the AT Johnson complex. SERVPRO's protocol‑based estimate was $1,189,094.81; Bay Restoration reported multi‑zone contamination and detailed testing results; the board delayed decision.
The Westmoreland County Board of Supervisors heard presentations from three remediation firms on a multi‑zone mold and water‑damage project at the AT Johnson complex. Each firm described its inspection findings, remediation methodology and approach to phasing work to limit disruption to county services.
Colleen Wenger, owner of SERVPRO of Dale City–Lakeridge, presented a protocol‑based scope that follows an industrial hygienist’s protocol and includes containment, HEPA vacuuming, negative‑air systems, controlled removal of affected structural materials, antimicrobial treatment, moisture verification and third‑party clearance coordination. SERVPRO provided a cost estimate of $1,189,094.81 based on the protocol and Xactimate pricing.
A PBM representative and owner Justin Thacker described PBM as a full‑service, locally owned restoration firm with certifications in duct cleaning and mold remediation, and emphasized phased work, thermal imaging, moisture mapping, and chain‑of‑custody documentation. PBM indicated contingency for scope changes once walls are opened and noted experience on large government projects.
Neil Horth, operations manager for Bay Restoration, summarized an inspection dated Dec. 16, 2025, that identified seven zones across the property, 17 surface samples and 14 indoor air samples (plus one outdoor sample). Bay Restoration reported visual growth and laboratory findings that included Aspergillus, Cladosporium and Penicillium in several areas and proposed removal of affected materials along exterior walls up to 1 foot and a broader cleaning of horizontal surfaces and HVAC systems, followed by zone‑by‑zone clearance testing.
Board members questioned whether proposals included replacement of removed drywall and duct cleaning. SERVPRO confirmed its price covered the protocol work (removal) and third‑party clearance but not some nonvisual items or the replacement of drywall unless separately contracted; PBM said its proposal included replacement and air duct cleaning in its cost; Bay Restoration said its proposal included cleaning of 16 HVAC systems and testing but indicated repairs beyond remediation would be bid separately.
The board thanked the companies for detailed proposals but did not vote on contracting that evening and deferred procurement steps for later consideration.
