Question: I recently had my home remediated and the company [hired] did the clearance testing, I have been given different responses to whether or not this is appropriate, and was wondering if you can direct me to the proper documents, since the company follows the IICRC 520 and a third party inspection came back with elevated levels that are much higher than when the company first arrived.
Answer provided by SCRT Technical Director, Jeff Bishop: Sorry to hear about your situation.
According to IICRC S520:
post-remediation verification: an inspection and assessment performed by an IEP after a remediation project, which may include visual, olfactory and/or sampling methodologies to verify that the building, system or contents have been returned to a Condition 1 status.
S520 goes on to say:
12.2.12 Post-Remediation Verification
Following post-remediation evaluation by the remediator, it may be requested or required to verify the return of a structure, systems or contents to Condition 1. In such situations, post-remediation verification should be performed by an independent IEP. It is recommended that:
- The criteria and process used in the post-remediation verification be documented, and
- The remediator and IEP clarify the minimum performance requirements of post-remediation verification prior to commencement of work.
A remediation company can conduct its own post-remediation verification for the purpose of quality control; however, the most valid and legally acceptable post-remediation verification, which eliminates questions about the potential for a remediator to skew the results, would be to have it performed by an independent indoor environmental professional (IEP) who is hired by the property owner.
16 Indoor Environmental Professional
The IICRC S520 defines an indoor environmental professional (IEP) as an individual who is qualified by knowledge, skill, education, training, certification or experience to perform an “assessment” of the fungal ecology of structures, systems, and contents at the job site, create a sampling strategy, sample the indoor environment, submit to an appropriate laboratory or individual, interpret laboratory data, determine Condition 1, 2 and 3, and verify the return of the fungal ecology to Condition 1.
Using the IICRC S520 as guidance, a qualified remediator can use the preliminary determination to develop a scope of work (work plans, protocols or specifications) for a mold remediation project. However, when a pre-remediation assessment or post-remediation verification is requested or required, it should be performed by an IEP. The assessment information can assist the remediator in developing additional technical specifications, detailed protocols and post-remediation verification parameters.
It is preferable that the IEP be an unbiased resource. An IEP engaged to perform pre-remediation assessment or post-remediation verification should be independent of the remediator. In some jurisdictions, the law may require that the inspection and assessment function be performed by an individual or entity independent of the remediator. If there are complexities, complications or conflicts, a remediator may need to request additional input or guidance from the IEP.
Hopes this helps.
More details on this topic can be found at:
http://www.icsmag.com/Articles/Column/5111b515bbd88010VgnVCM100000f932a8c0
Additional information from SCRT member, Connie Morbach
