OpenLLM-France/wikimedia huggingface dataset:
# Mold Web Course/Chapter 2/Lesson 6

​Lesson 6Crawl Spaces
Crawl spaces where relative humidity (RH) is high are common sites of hidden mold growth, particularly if the crawl space has a bare earth floor. The soil will wick moisture, through capillary action, from moist to dry areas. The relative warmth of the crawl space will dry the soil by evaporation, adding this moisture to the air in the crawl space where it can cause mold to grow. Also, in areas where the water table is high and weather conditions are suitable, ground water may enter a crawl space.
The moisture that accumulates in a crawl space may also enter another part of the building and contribute to mold growth there. Moisture can pass from a crawl space into a building through cracks in walls, floors, and ceilings.
Crawl spaces should be designed specifically to avoid moisture problems. For information on constructing crawl spaces and other building features, see the Resource List.
Drying Buildings, Building Materials, and Furnishings
Buildings and building furnishings will often get wet. They must be dried or "allowed to dry" quickly (within 24-48 hours) in order to avoid mold growth. In general, increasing air circulation and temperature will increase the speed of drying.
Commercial firms that do mold remediation work or work on water- and fire-damaged buildings often use large fans, dehumidifiers, and other equipment to dry wet buildings and items quickly before mold has a chance to grow. This action can save money in the long run, because if the building or furnishings are dried completely and quickly, mold will not grow, and a mold remediation will not be needed.
# Mold Web Course/Chapter 3/Knowledge Test

​Knowledge Test
Lesson1 Where to Look for Mold Contamination ‐ Building Investigation Question 1: Mold can grow on wet carpet and wet carpet backing or padding if they are not dried quickly. A.True B.False
Lesson 1 Where to Look for Mold Contamination ‐ Building Investigation Question 2: In which of the following areas of a building may mold problems be found? A.The crawlspace B.In pipe chases C.Behid walls D.All of the above
Lesson 1 Where to Look for Mold Contamination ‐ Building Investigation Question 3: A contaminated ventilation system (HVAC system) may spread mold throughout the building. A.True B.False
Lesson 2 Equipment Question 3.5: Personal protective equipment (PPE) is never needed for mold investigations. A.True B.False
Lesson 3 Mold Sampling Considered Question 6: Mold sampling should be conducted whenever a mold remediation is planned. A.True B.False
​Answer Key Question 1: Answer: “A” TRUE If there has been a leaking pipe in the basement, for example, items such as carpets, paneling, and drywall there should be checked for water damage or mold growth. It is important to dry items quickly to prevent mold growth; in most cases, items dried within 24‐48 hours will not become moldy. www.epa.gov/mold/moldcourse/chapter3.html#3.1
Question 2: Answer: “D” All of the Above Possible locations of hidden mold also include damp areas behind walls and in crawlspaces, inside pipe chases and utility tunnels (areas in walls where water and other pipes are run), on acoustic liners in ventilation ducts, and on roof materials above ceiling tiles. www.epa.gov/mold/moldcourse/chapter3.html#3.1
Question 3: Answer: “A” TRUE In some cases, water may enter the ventilation ducts from a leaky pipe. A contaminated ventilation system may spread mold spores throughout the building and should be considered a high priority for investigation and repair. www.epa.gov/mold/moldcourse/chapter3.html#3.1
Question 5: Answer: “B” FALSE The use of personal protective equipment (PPE) should be considered during a mold investigation. The primary function of PPE is to avoid inhaling mold and mold spores and to avoid mold contact with the skin and eyes. Professional judgment should be used when selecting PPE. www.epa.gov/mold/moldcourse/chapter3.html#3.2
Question 6: Answer: “B” FALSE Usually, if the mold can be seen, sampling is unnecessary. After finding mold, the goal is to clean it up and fix the underlying water problem. Unless the results would or could make a change in your plans, you don't need to sample. www.epa.gov/mold/moldcourse/chapter3.html#3.3
# Mold Web Course/Chapter 2/Lesson 3

​Lesson 3Humidity
Sometimes, humidity or dampness (water vapor) in the air can supply enough moisture for mold growth. Indoor relative humidity (RH) should be kept below 60 percent — ideally between 30 percent and 50 percent, if possible. Low humidity may also discourage pests (such as cockroaches) and dust mites.
Humidity levels can rise in a building as a result of the use of humidifiers, steam radiators, moisture-generating appliances such as dryers, and combustion appliances such as stoves. Cooking and showering also can add to indoor humidity.
HVAC System One function of the building heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system is to remove moisture from the air before the air is distributed throughout the building. If the HVAC system is turned off during or shortly after major cleaning efforts that involve a lot of water, such as mopping and carpet shampooing or cleaning, the humidity may rise greatly, and moisture or mold problems may develop.
Condensation can be a sign of high humidity. When warm, humid air contacts a cold surface, condensation may form. (To see this, remove a cold bottle of water from a refrigerator and take it outside on a hot day. Typically, condensation will form on the outside of the bottle.) Humidity can be measured with a humidity gauge or meter; models that can monitor both temperature and humidity are generally available for less than $50 at hardware stores or on the Internet.
# Mold Web Course/Chapter 2/Lesson 7

​Lesson 7Floods
During a flood cleanup, the indoor air quality in your home or office may appear to be the least of your problems. However, failure to remove contaminated materials and to reduce moisture and humidity can present serious long-term health risks. Standing water and wet materials are a breeding ground for microorganisms, such as viruses, bacteria, and mold. They can cause disease, trigger allergic reactions, and continue to damage materials long after the flood.
Buildings that have been heavily damaged by flood waters should be assessed for structural integrity and remediated by experienced professionals.
Please note that the guidelines covered in this course were developed for damage caused by clean water (not flood water, sewage, or other contaminated water). See the Resource List, which includes the EPA Fact Sheet: Flood Cleanup - Avoiding Indoor Air Quality Problems, for more information.
# Mold Web Course/Chapter 3/Lesson 2

​Lesson 2Equipment
In general, the most important equipment is your own eyes and nose, although a good flashlight may help. Some investigators use borescopes to look for mold growth behind walls without significantly damaging the drywall. (A borescope is an optical probe, inserted through a small hole drilled into a wall, that lets an investigator inspect a small portion of the wall without causing extensive damage.) High humidity in a building can lead to mold growth, so humidity gauges may be useful for checking or monitoring humidity throughout the building.
Many investigators use moisture meters to find wet areas where mold may be growing. These meters measure the moisture in many types of building materials. They also can monitor the process of drying these materials. A moisture meter typically has a thin probe that can be inserted into the material to be tested or pressed directly against its surface. Moisture meters can be used on carpet, wallboard, wood, brick, and concrete. Because mold often grows where moisture is high, a moisture meter can help an investigator locate hidden areas of mold growth.
The use of personal protective equipment (PPE) should be considered during a mold investigation. The primary function of PPE is to avoid inhaling mold and mold spores and to avoid mold contact with the skin and eyes. Professional judgment should be used when selecting PPE. (See Table 1 for more on PPE. ) The use of PPE is indicated when mold is disturbed and likely to become airborne during an investigation. There are also other situations when PPE should be used based on professional judgment. Anyone using respirators and other PPE in the workplace must be trained, must have a medical clearance, and must be fit-tested by a trained professional. Note that all Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements must be met. (See the Resource List.)
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume I/Confessions/Book VII/Chapter 16

Chapter XVI.—Evil Arises Not from a Substance, But from the Perversion of the Will.
22. And I discerned and found it no marvel, that bread which is distasteful to an unhealthy palate is pleasant to a healthy one; and that the light, which is painful to sore eyes, is delightful to sound ones. And Thy righteousness displeaseth the wicked; much more the viper and little worm, which Thou hast created good, fitting in with inferior parts of Thy creation; with which the wicked themselves also fit in, the more in proportion as they are unlike Thee, but with the superior creatures, in proportion as they become like to Thee. And I inquired what iniquity was, and ascertained it not to be a substance, but a perversion of the will, bent aside from Thee, O God, the Supreme Substance, towards these lower things, and casting out its bowels, and swelling outwardly.

## Footnotes

* ↑ See v. sec. 2, note 1, above.
* ↑ Ecclus x. 9. Commenting on this passage of the Apocrypha (De Mus. vi. 40), he says, that while the soul’s happiness and life is in God, “what is to go into outer things, but to cast out its inward parts, that is, to place itself far from God—not by distance of place, but by the affection of the mind?”
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume I/Confessions/Book VII/Chapter 3

Chapter III.—That the Cause of Evil is the Free Judgment of the Will.
4. But I also, as yet, although I said and was firmly persuaded, that Thou our Lord, the true God, who madest not only our souls but our bodies, and not our souls and bodies alone, but all creatures and all things, wert uncontaminable and inconvertible, and in no part mutable: yet understood I not readily and clearly what was the cause of evil. And yet, whatever it was, I perceived that it must be so sought out as not to constrain me by it to believe that the immutable God was mutable, lest I myself should become the thing that I was seeking out. I sought, therefore, for it free from care, certain of the untruthfulness of what these asserted, whom I shunned with my whole heart; for I perceived that through seeking after the origin of evil, they were filled with malice, in that they liked better to think that Thy Substance did suffer evil than that their own did commit it.
5. And I directed my attention to discern what I now heard, that free will was the cause of our doing evil, and Thy righteous judgment of our suffering it. But I was unable clearly to discern it. So, then, trying to draw the eye of my mind from that pit, I was plunged again therein, and trying often, was as often plunged back again. But this raised me towards Thy light, that I knew as well that I had a will as that I had life: when, therefore, I was willing or unwilling to do anything, I was most certain that it was none but myself that was willing and unwilling; and immediately I perceived that there was the cause of my sin. But what I did against my will I saw that I suffered rather than did, and that judged I not to be my fault, but my punishment; whereby, believing Thee to be most just, I quickly confessed myself to be not unjustly punished. But again I said: “Who made me? Was it not my God, who is not only good, but goodness itself? Whence came I then to will to do evil, and to be unwilling to do good, that there might be cause for my just punishment? Who was it that put this in me, and implanted in me the root of bitterness, seeing I was altogether made by my most sweet God? If the devil were the author, whence is that devil? And if he also, by his own perverse will, of a good angel became a devil, whence also was the evil will in him whereby he became a devil, seeing that the angel was made altogether good by that most Good Creator?” By these reflections was I again cast down and stifled; yet not plunged into that hell of error (where no man confesseth unto Thee), to think that Thou dost suffer evil, rather than that man doth it.

## Footnotes

* ↑ See iv. sec. 26, note, above.
* ↑ See iii. sec. 12, note, and iv. sec. 26, note, above.
* ↑ Ps. vi. 5.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume I/Confessions/Book VII/Chapter 15

Chapter XV.—Whatever Is, Owes Its Being to God.
21. And I looked back on other things, and I perceived that it was to Thee they owed their being, and that they were all bounded in Thee; but in another way, not as being in space, but because Thou holdest all things in Thine hand in truth: and all things are true so far as they have a being; nor is there any falsehood, unless that which is not is thought to be. And I saw that all things harmonized, not with their places only, but with their seasons also. And that Thou, who only art eternal, didst not begin to work after innumerable spaces of times; for that all spaces of times, both those which have passed and which shall pass, neither go nor come, save through Thee, working and abiding.

## Footnotes

* ↑ See xi. secs. 15, 16, 26, etc., below.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume I/Confessions/Book VII/Chapter 18

Chapter XVIII.—Jesus Christ, the Mediator, is the Only Way of Safety.
24. And I sought a way of acquiring strength sufficient to enjoy Thee; but I found it not until I embraced that “Mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus,” “who is over all, God blessed for ever,” calling unto me, and saying, “I am the way, the truth, and the life,” and mingling that food which I was unable to receive with our flesh. For “the Word was made flesh,” that Thy wisdom, by which Thou createdst all things, might provide milk for our infancy. For I did not grasp my Lord Jesus,—I, though humbled, grasped not the humble One; nor did I know what lesson that infirmity of His would teach us. For Thy Word, the Eternal Truth, pre-eminent above the higher parts of Thy creation, raises up those that are subject unto Itself; but in this lower world built for Itself a humble habitation of our clay, whereby He intended to abase from themselves such as would be subjected and bring them over unto Himself, allaying their swelling, and fostering their love; to the end that they might go on no further in self-confidence, but rather should become weak, seeing before their feet the Divinity weak by taking our “coats of skins;” and wearied, might cast themselves down upon It, and It rising, might lift them up.

## Footnotes

* ↑ 1 Tim. ii. 5.
* ↑ Rom. ix. 5.
* ↑ John xiv. 6.
* ↑ John i. 14.
* ↑ Christ descended that we may ascend. See iv. sec. 19, notes 1 and 3, above.
* ↑ Gen. iii. 21. Augustin frequently makes these “coats of skin” symbolize the mortality to which our first parents became subject by being deprived of the tree of life (see iv. sec. 15, note 3, above); and in his Enarr. in Ps. (ciii. 1, 8), he says they are thus symbolical inasmuch as the skin is only taken from animals when dead.
# Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume I/Confessions/Book VII/Chapter 4

Chapter IV.—That God is Not Corruptible, Who, If He Were, Would Not Be God at All.
6. For I was so struggling to find out the rest, as having already found that what was incorruptible must be better than the corruptible; and Thee, therefore, whatsoever Thou wert, did I acknowledge to be incorruptible. For never yet was, nor will be, a soul able to conceive of anything better than Thou, who art the highest and best good. But whereas most truly and certainly that which is incorruptible is to be preferred to the corruptible (like as I myself did now prefer it), then, if Thou were not incorruptible, I could in my thoughts have reached unto something better than my God. Where, then, I saw that the incorruptible was to be preferred to the corruptible, there ought I to seek Thee, and there observe “whence evil itself was,” that is, whence comes the corruption by which Thy substance can by no means be profaned. For corruption, truly, in no way injures our God,—by no will, by no necessity, by no unforeseen chance,—because He is God, and what He wills is good, and Himself is that good; but to be corrupted is not good. Nor art Thou compelled to do anything against Thy will in that Thy will is not greater than Thy power. But greater should it be wert Thou Thyself greater than Thyself; for the will and power of God is God Himself. And what can be unforeseen by Thee, who knowest all things? Nor is there any sort of nature but Thou knowest it. And what more should we say “why that substance which God is should not be corruptible,” seeing that if it were so it could not be God?
# National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius/Dissent Thomas

* Court Documents
* Case Syllabus
* Opinion of the Court
* Concurrence/Dissent Ginsburg
* Dissenting Opinions Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito Thomas
JUSTICE THOMAS, dissenting.
I dissent for the reasons stated in our joint opinion, but I write separately to say a word about the Commerce Clause. The joint dissent and THE CHIEF JUSTICE correctly apply [p708] our precedents to conclude that the Individual Mandate is beyond the power granted to Congress under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause. Under those precedents, Congress may regulate "economic activity [that] substantially affects interstate commerce." United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 560 (1995). I adhere to my view that "the very notion of a 'substantial effects' test under the Commerce Clause is inconsistent with the original understanding of Congress' powers and with this Court's early Commerce Clause cases." United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598, 627 (2000) (THOMAS, J., concurring); see also Lopez, supra, at 584–602 (same); Gonzales v. Raich, 545 U.S. 1, 67–69 (2005) (THOMAS, J., dissenting). As I have explained, the Court's continued use of that test "has encouraged the Federal Government to persist in its view that the Commerce Clause has virtually no limits." Morrison, supra, at 627. The Government's unprecedented claim in this suit that it may regulate not only economic activity but also inactivity that substantially affects interstate commerce is a case in point.
# National Fertilizer Association v. Bradley

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
301 U.S. 178
National Fertilizer Association v. Bradley
Argued: April 5, 1937. --- Decided: April 26, 1937
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Western District of South Carolina.
Messrs. W. C. McLain, of Columbia, S.C., Daniel S. Murph, of St. Matthews, S.C., and Martin W. Meyer, of Washington, D.C., for appellants.
Messrs. J. Ivey, Humphrey, of Columbia, S.C., and Wm. C. Wolfe, of Orangeburg, S.C., for appellees.
Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford v. Thompson

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
281 U.S. 331
National Fire Insurance Company of Hartford v. Thompson
Argued: Jan. 16, 1930. --- Decided: April 14, 1930
Messrs. Robert J. Folonie, of Chicago, Ill., William S. Hogsett, of Kansas City, Mo., and John S. Leahy, of St. Louis, Mo., for appellant.
Messrs. Floyd E. Jacobs and John T. Barker, both of Kansas City, Mo., for appellees.
[Argument of Counsel from page 332 intentionally omitted]
Mr. Justice BUTLER delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Morrison v. Stalnaker

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
104 U.S. 213
Morrison v. Stalnaker
ERROR to the Supreme Court of the State of Nebraska.
This was an action brought in the District Court of Cass County, Nebraska, by Morrison, to recover the possession of a tract of eighty acres, being part of an even-numbered section of land situate in that county.
Morrison claimed under a patent from the United States dated May 10, 1873, conveying to him the demanded premises.
Stalnaker, the defendant, settled upon them, they being public land, Jan. 18, 1871. On the sixteenth day of the following month his declaratory statement required by the preemption law was filed in the proper office, and he continuously thereafter resided upon them. They had, prior to those dates, been offered at public sale, and are within the limits of the lands which, under the act of July 1, 1862, c. 120 (12 Stat. 489), and the acts amendatory thereof, the Land Department withdrew from market to cover the grant made to the Burlington and Missouri River Railroad Company.
The act of March 6, 1868, c. 20 (15 Stat. 39), provides that nothing in those acts shall be held to authorize the withdrawal or exclusion from settlement and entry, under the provisions of the pre-emption or homestead laws, the even-numbered sections along the routes of the several roads therein mentioned which have been or may be hereafter located, provided that such sections shall be subject only to entry under those laws. The Secretary of the Interior was thereby authorized and directed to restore to homestead settlement, pre-emption, or entry, according to existing laws, all the even-numbered sections of land belonging to the government and then withdrawn from market on both sides of the Pacific Railroad and baranches, wherever they had been definitely located.
Stalnaker, about June 1, 1872, appeared with his witnesses at the local land-office, and offered to prove all the facts necessary to entitle him to enter the premises. He at the same time tendered the requisite sum of money. His offer and tender were refused, upon the ground that, by reason of his failure to make the proofs within one year from the date of settlement, he had forfeited his right of pre-emption.
Stalnaker's answer to Morrison's petition is in the nature of a bill in chancery, and sets up that, in fraud of his pre-emption rights, and by mistake of the Land Department in regard to them, a patent of the United States for the land was issued to the plaintiff. Judgment was rendered in the court of original jurisdiction in favor of Morrison. It was reversed on appeal to the Supreme Court, and he sued out this writ of error.
Mr. Willis Drummond and Mr. Robert H. Bradford for the plaintiff in error.
No counsel appeared for the defendant in error.
MR. JUSTICE MILLER, after stating the facts, delivered the opinion of the court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse
# Morrison v. California

* related portals: Supreme Court of the United States.
* sister projects: Wikidata item.
United States Supreme Court
291 U.S. 82
Morrison v. California
Argued: Dec. 12, 13, 1933. --- Decided: Jan 8, 1934
Appeal from the Supreme Court of the State of California.
Mr. J. Marion Wright, of Los Angeles, Cal., for appellants.
Mr. James S. Howie, of Los Angeles, Cal., for the People of State of California.
Mr. Justice CARDOZO delivered the opinion of the Court.

## Notes

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).
Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse