Guest guest Posted August 30, 2006 Report Posted August 30, 2006 I am concerned that this discussion is going down a path that is in a fundamentally different direction than what is presented and intended by the IICRC S520. The S520 is a document for professional mold remediation. It has been written to set a standard for the remediation industry not indoor environmental professionals. The diversity of backgrounds represented by this discussion group demonstrates the varied paths that each of us has followed to become professionals in this field. Remediation contractors have been looking to us for clear answers regarding how they should perform their work. This fundamental concept has not changed between the first and second editions of the S520. Page 6 of the first edition states (in bold): " S520 is not intended to establish procedures or criteria for assessing mold contamination in an indoor environment. These issues are most appropriately addressed by professional organizations that represent Indoor Environmental Professionals (IEPs). Since these professional organizations have not agreed upon threshold exposure limits or levels of visible mold growth that constitute a concern for occupant and worker safety, the IICRC Mold Remediation Standard Committee decided not to establish action levels or procedures based upon the quantity or size of the area of visible mold growth. " The use of Condition 1, 2, and 3 is in my opinion the remediation contractor's best way of dealing with the vagueness and disagreements represented by IEPs. Remediation contractors should be commended for coming up with a standard and terms that allow them to communicate and perform their work in the absence of IEPs developing a standard of care for IEPs. Banta, CAIH Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.