Re: Arkansas, New laws for Mold Inspectors in 2010, an open l...

[Guest guest]

You raise some interesting questions about costs and recertification.

In my days in medical device manufacturing I was certified thru the American

Society of Quality as a Quality Auditor, Quality Engineer and Biomedical Quality

Auditor. All aquired at different times. But the ASQ allows you to sync your

certifications together so you can renew them (every 3 yrs) at one time for one

recert fee and the continuing education credits apply to all. And the recert fee

wasnt $350. These certs are international certs and often required for working

in the quality field including for ISO auditors. The certification exams are

open book (and were the hardest exams I have ever sat) and previous exam

questions are available to purchase for training as the ASQ creates new exams

every year. I dont think my CMRS from 'ACAC' is in the same league as the ASQ.

As my new employer is paying me to do IICRC training it is likely that I will

let my CMRS expire. (But I may do the CMC just to mess with the 'consultants' I

have to deal with.) Based on the classes I have done so far the training and

quality is comparable as is the CE requirements. But the recert fee is only $50.

So is the CMRS really worth the $350 fee? What does that get me? The 'right' to

say Im certified? In what other profession does such a minimal certification

trump the rest of the experience on ones resume? I have come across many in this

industry who are 'certified' but not qualified. I think the bigger story in the

'certification' saga is just how successful the certifying bodies have been in

convincing the greater pop'n that only 'certified' people are the ones with

knowledge and ability to deal with IAQ issues.

Stuart

> >

> > Hello,

> >

> > I would like to thank, Charlie Wiles, the Executive Director of the ACAC,

who responded to me and provided some information that I did not have at the

time of writing the previous message. The pass rate for the CIE or CIEC (I'm not

sure which) was 64% in 2008. Denying 36% of the lowest scoring examinees

accreditation is a strong improvement from the days when the course provider

proctored the exam. That is good news and obviously CESB, ANSI, and ISO agree.

Other accreditation bodies post the passing rate by year/semester and list the

names of new certificants by year/semester. This would be a nice feature for the

ACAC website. Show some evidence of the process being selective. Credibility is

the primary goal behind accreditation. Word of mouth being the most effective

route e.g. " The CIEC test was difficult. " and " I flunked the first time. " can go

far, well assuming who the speaker is of course.

> >

> > 20 credits in microbiology would be a very nice tool to have in your tool

box. If that's the only tool you have, hmm, good luck.

> >

> > As well, a CIH must abide by the Code of Ethics and refuse work if they

aren't qualified, regardless of Arkansas law.

> >

> > Thanks,

> >

> >

> >

> > P. McCaffrey, CIEC, CIH, CHMM

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Re: Re: Arkansas, New laws for Mold Inspectors in 2010,

an open l...

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > It will be interesting to see how this one plays out.

> >

> > Although they may not have all the pieces to the puzzle in place or in the

correct order, I think it is a step in the right direction to require some sort

of legal licensing for those professing to be professional mold investigators.

> >

> > I would love to see the disclosure statements and liability disclaimers

attached to these inspection reports that clients will be required to sign.

> >

> > From the way it sounds, real estate agents in Arkansas were the driving

force behind this law; which means that the primary intent pertains to mold

found when ownership is transferring.

> >

> > If I were a professional mold investigator, who now had a license on the

line if I severely messed up; the FIRST thing I would require of the seller's

agent before I would agree to inspect is that the seller disclose to me their

knowledge of any and all prior water damage on the property and what they did to

rectify the problem, A clue of where to look for potential problems and a CYA if

I was not provided full disclosure to be able to do my job properly.

> >

> > I hope this does not get out of hand and every home inspector in Arkansas

now recommends a secondary mold inspection on every property sold in Arkansas.

> >

> > It is going to be interesting to watch this one and the impact on the issue.

Personally, I am wishing them all the best, even with the shortcomings that

Stuart accurately states. I commend the state of Arkansas for trying to do

something to help get control over the mold issue.

> >

> > Sharon

> >

> > In a message dated 12/10/2009 5:50:47 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,

smmccallum@ writes:

> >

> > I dont think the qualifications as listed in the Arkansas are sufficient.

The director of my local EMSL lab has a PhD in micro and readily admits that he

knows nothing about inspections and has never been in a crawlspace. So pure

micro doesnt give the necessary training.

> > As far as the CIE/CMC certs go - is pretty difficult to fail an exam afer

youve just spent 3/4 days on a course studying the material required to pass

said exam. Especially if you already have a college degree. But if that degree

is in music or journalism (Ive seen both...) are you qualified to be a CIE just

cos you passed the exam?

> > Where in these requirements is the building construction experience or the

HVAC fundamentals?

> > If you dont have all the necessary knowledge for a full building inspection

then you'd better know people who can make up for your own limitations.

> >

> > Stuart

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it, contain

> > information that may be confidential and privileged. The

> > message is intended for a specific individual and purpose, and

> > its unintended use is prohibited by law. If you are not the

> > intended recipient you may not disseminate, distribute or copy

> > this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if

> > you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail

> > from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are

> > notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any

> > action in reliance on the contents of this information is

> > strictly prohibited.

> >

> > Warning: Although the company has taken reasonable precautions

> > to ensure no viruses are present in this email, the company

> > cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising

> > from the use of this email or attachments.

> >

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it, contain

> information that may be confidential and privileged. The

> message is intended for a specific individual and purpose, and

> its unintended use is prohibited by law. If you are not the

> intended recipient you may not disseminate, distribute or copy

> this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if

> you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail

> from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are

> notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any

> action in reliance on the contents of this information is

> strictly prohibited.

>

> Warning: Although the company has taken reasonable precautions

> to ensure no viruses are present in this email, the company

> cannot accept responsibility for any loss or damage arising

> from the use of this email or attachments.

>