Guest guest Posted November 27, 2006 Report Share Posted November 27, 2006 : " whoops " ?!? you've burst upon the scene in this group spreading marginally accurate information from day one. " whoops " is only the start. PLEASE slow down, get your facts straight, and expect rather fierce scrutiny of your proclamations. this group includes newbies as well as those of us who've been doing this work far longer than you. Wane <><><><><><><><><><><> Wane A. Baker, P.E., CIH Division Manager, Indoor Air Quality MICHAELS ENGINEERING " Real Professionals. Real Solutions. " Phone , ext. 484 Cell Fax mailto:wab@... On the web at: http://www.michaelsengineering.com " To love what you do and feel that it matters - how could anything be more fun? " - Graham > > > > > > Sorry if I was a bit crude. You are right. > > > > > > But back to the testing discussion ... > > > > > > Liability ... > > > > > > If you are concerned that there is something that the courts will > > find in the Bioaerosols handbook that requires you to test or test to > > a species level that's not the case. That is a technical guide > > written for hygienists. It does not apply to the real world of mold > > remediation that we live in today. Attorneys and juries will not > > understand it. > > > > > > Testing ... > > > > > > A more up to date testing guide would be the IESO standard of care > > for mold testing. Go to www.IESO.org to find it for $25.00. Or you > > can go to my book on Amazon.com " Locating Hidden Toxic Mold " and pay > > $9.95 and get the IESO standard free in an appendix. > > > > > > What the courts are interested in, is today's standard of care. And > > did you do a good job getting rid of the mold. > > > > > > Standard of Care ... > > > > > > According to S520 p 15 ... when the scope of work can be determined > > without sampling, engagement of an IEP for assessment may not be > > necessary. > > > > > > The EPA makes it even more clear ... In most cases, if visible mold > > growth is present, sampling is unnecessary. This statement is on page > > 13 of the EPA Mold Guidelines. If you copy that page and show it to > > an attorney complaining that you did not test, that will be the end > > of the coversation. It is hard to fight these EPA guidelines. But > > there should never be any complaints about testing or not testing so > > long as the job is done right. > > > > > > About expense ... > > > > > > Your clients will disagree with you about expense. In everything we > > do money is important. If you can do a good job without spending > > their money on exotic species ID testing for every day jobs that is > > important. Given that limited funds are available for remediation > > work, quite often extensive testing means that the actual mold > > remediation work cannot be completely or properly done. Now that is a > > disservice to the client and that can become a potential liability > > problem. > > > > > > In summary, if the only reason you are testing to the species level > > is to protect yourself from liability that does not make sense. There > > is absolutely nothing in today's standard of care that requires that > > for typical jobs. Sure special medical claims and court cases require > > extensive testing but that is the exception. And yes ... assuming > > that culture testing can give you a reasonable indication of the > > relative number of species present is no longer accepted as true. > > Splitting samples and doing parallel PCR (DNA) and culture testing > > has shown that results of culture testing have no relationship to > > reality. Temperature, competing species, media, and many other > > factors would appear make this form of testing more or less obsolete. > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > Rosen, Ph.D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ ______________ > Cheap talk? > Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. > http://voice.yahoo.com > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 28, 2006 Report Share Posted November 28, 2006 Wayne, accepted his haircut already and acknowledged the mistake. Lets be kind to one another so we can all grow together. Bob/Ma.. From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of Wane A. Baker Sent: Monday, November 27, 2006 11:36 PM To: iequality Subject: Whoops! : " whoops " ?!? you've burst upon the scene in this group spreading marginally accurate information from day one. " whoops " is only the start. PLEASE slow down, get your facts straight, and expect rather fierce scrutiny of your proclamations. this group includes newbies as well as those of us who've been doing this work far longer than you. Wane <><><><><><><><><><><> Wane A. Baker, P.E., CIH Division Manager, Indoor Air Quality MICHAELS ENGINEERING " Real Professionals. Real Solutions. " Phone , ext. 484 Cell Fax mailto:wabmichaelsengineering On the web at: http://www.michaelsengineering.com " To love what you do and feel that it matters - how could anything be more fun? " - Graham > > > > > > Sorry if I was a bit crude. You are right. > > > > > > But back to the testing discussion ... > > > > > > Liability ... > > > > > > If you are concerned that there is something that the courts will > > find in the Bioaerosols handbook that requires you to test or test to > > a species level that's not the case. That is a technical guide > > written for hygienists. It does not apply to the real world of mold > > remediation that we live in today. Attorneys and juries will not > > understand it. > > > > > > Testing ... > > > > > > A more up to date testing guide would be the IESO standard of care > > for mold testing. Go to www.IESO.org to find it for $25.00. Or you > > can go to my book on Amazon.com " Locating Hidden Toxic Mold " and pay > > $9.95 and get the IESO standard free in an appendix. > > > > > > What the courts are interested in, is today's standard of care. And > > did you do a good job getting rid of the mold. > > > > > > Standard of Care ... > > > > > > According to S520 p 15 ... when the scope of work can be determined > > without sampling, engagement of an IEP for assessment may not be > > necessary. > > > > > > The EPA makes it even more clear ... In most cases, if visible mold > > growth is present, sampling is unnecessary. This statement is on page > > 13 of the EPA Mold Guidelines. If you copy that page and show it to > > an attorney complaining that you did not test, that will be the end > > of the coversation. It is hard to fight these EPA guidelines. But > > there should never be any complaints about testing or not testing so > > long as the job is done right. > > > > > > About expense ... > > > > > > Your clients will disagree with you about expense. In everything we > > do money is important. If you can do a good job without spending > > their money on exotic species ID testing for every day jobs that is > > important. Given that limited funds are available for remediation > > work, quite often extensive testing means that the actual mold > > remediation work cannot be completely or properly done. Now that is a > > disservice to the client and that can become a potential liability > > problem. > > > > > > In summary, if the only reason you are testing to the species level > > is to protect yourself from liability that does not make sense. There > > is absolutely nothing in today's standard of care that requires that > > for typical jobs. Sure special medical claims and court cases require > > extensive testing but that is the exception. And yes ... assuming > > that culture testing can give you a reasonable indication of the > > relative number of species present is no longer accepted as true. > > Splitting samples and doing parallel PCR (DNA) and culture testing > > has shown that results of culture testing have no relationship to > > reality. Temperature, competing species, media, and many other > > factors would appear make this form of testing more or less obsolete. > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > Rosen, Ph.D. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta. > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ ______________ > Cheap talk? > Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call rates. > http://voice.yahoo.com > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.