For discussion... Mold (Mould for the Canuks)

If you can see mold (or a mold like substance), why should you test for it? Why not just clean it up, and fix the moisture source.

If you can’t see mold, what would cause you to test for it, and why?

The reason why you test is to know how to handle the mold. Considered toxic mold needs more steps taken in remediation than nontoxic mold. It is more cost effective to determine toxicity and the spore spread then to clean the whole home. Also most reputable mold remediators will not remove mold if the mold growth area is larger than 10 square feet without a remediation protocol written because of liability or insurability reasons.
The reason why you test without any visible signs of mold is if the occupants of the home are being effective by chronic symptoms or a buyer is hypersensitive to mold. I have clients that carry kits similar to bee sting kits just in case they walk into a building that contains a certain type of mold. Also if the occupant leaves the building for a couple days and feels better, then he reoccupies the building and his symptoms come back, is the only time I would suspect mold toxification without any visible signs of mold present.

James is on the money. If it’s a small amount (under 10 sf) the home owner can clean it up. If it’s a larger area of mould a remedation co requires, or atleast they should, 3rd party independant testing for pre & post (clearance )testing. How else would we know if our clean up was sucessfull? And Mark your right , the moisture intrusion needs to be fixed before remedation

Doug

sorry guys for stepping on this thread but I was wandering if u could point me in the right direction on mold remediation. Web site or some more info on how some of the guys in the area are doing this type of work. See I new allot of the guys in my area before they got in the mold business and im just wandering how they did it and what makes them qualified
Philip Cavalcante

Try this

I hope through education, through some of the organizations that certify mold inspectors. In my area it is obvious that the education is very minimal. ](*,)

Phillip, If your looking at remediation check the IICRC website for courses.

Doug

I’m gonna step on this thread too. I just have to say, testing certainly has it’s place, and that is with mold professionals. There are just way too many HI’s whipping out their swabs and sampling “suspect” surfaces- of course they’re sent down to nachi south… ahh hemm… I mean Prolab… Of course, because mold will be present on the swab, prolab will report “elevated mold”. This scenario is costing buyers and sellers time and money while delivering zip in benefit. A swab sample from the counter top in Mr. Clean’s kitchen will turn up mold spores. IMO, HI’s need to stop meaningless swab tests. If HI’s encounter mold, mold like substance, black, green or otherwise… just state it in your report, suggest further evaluation, and move on. Damnnn it frosts me when fellow HI’s flip out because a suspected fungal growth is black… color means nothing!

In response to the original thread, we treat all mold in the same way. Our protocol for stachy is the same for clad, or any other. Containment is containment, clean is clean, fungicide is fungicide. We have done many jobs without testing. Just as in lead paint regs, we can presume the existence of fungal growth and treat it as such. Often, the cost of remediation rivals the cost of proper testing.

I’m gonna step on this thread too. I just have to say, testing certainly has it’s place, and that is with mold professionals. There are just way too many HI’s whipping out their swabs and sampling “suspect” surfaces- of course they’re sent down to nachi south… ahh hemm… I mean Prolab… Of course, because mold will be present on the swab, prolab will report “elevated mold”. This scenario is costing buyers and sellers time and money while delivering zip in benefit. A swab sample from the counter top in Mr. Clean’s kitchen will turn up mold spores. IMO, HI’s need to stop meaningless swab tests. If HI’s encounter mold, mold like substance, black, green or otherwise… just state it in your report, suggest further evaluation, and move on. Damnnn it frosts me when fellow HI’s flip out because a suspected fungal growth is black… color means nothing!

In response to the original thread, we treat all mold in the same way. Our protocol for stachy is the same for clad, or any other. Containment is containment, clean is clean, fungicide is fungicide. We have done many jobs without testing. Just as in lead paint regs, we can presume the existence of fungal growth and treat it as such. Often, the cost of remediation rivals the cost of proper testing.

Amen

What do you mean by our protocol?
How do you know how much needs to be cleaned up? If the mold is in one corner of the basement do you clean just that corner, room, that room and rooms connecting, whole basement, whole house? Do you clean up things that are stored in closets or cabinets? Do you cleanup things stored in boxes? Do you clean the carpet or replace with new?
Do you have any clearance testing done after remediation from a third party? If you do, how are the samples based and where are the samples pulled?

“our protocol” is proprietary. My issue is with meaningless swab sampling.

John
but you also have to keep in mind that mold is the by product of a moisture problem and the moisture must be found, as to the majority of your post i agree unnecessary testing should be avoided and mold spores can be found everywhere

gee, thanks. I had know idea the two were related.

no offense meant John

I agree, with the swabbing part. It is the part about you assuming that concerns me.
Mold can be cleaned up without a protocol but it still needs to have a third party clearance. You assuming liability and endangering the occupants lives is not necessary.
The part about cost effectiveness does not add up to me. Either you are not charging enough for remediation or I am not charging enough for testing. Usually a proper remediation runs a good ten times the cost of testing in my area.

Your comment about endangeing occupants is certainly overblown and shows that you just don’t get it. All work is undertaken with the maximum occupant protections. Nothing I’ve argued in this thread should suggest otherwise. Safe work practices are what protect occupants, not testing.

The word is presume, not assume. As you know, the EPA, gives very little guidance, regulatory or otherwise, to mold remediators. The Ohio Dept of Health barely acknowledges mold. Therefore, remediators in OH are charged with developing their own protocol. Most pick and choose from various SOP’s, the City of NY’s rule, etc. I do the same except I allow for the “presumption” of mold growth (borrowed directly from HUD title X and Ohio lead paint law). I think it is a perfectly valid option… Observe visual mold growth, correct it. How do we correct it?? With the highest standard for occupant protections. The species of the mold makes no difference. Same negative air, same scrubbers, same fungicide. I understand and agree with the purpose of baseline samples for clearance targets. However, the majority of mold discovered by HI’s fall into deminimus values. We rarely have issues with air sample clearance.

No, I do not think you get it.
Why charge the client for the highest cleaning standards when it is most likely not needed, when testing is so much cheaper? Why assume (not presume) the liability?
You have said on your first post that “We have done many jobs without testing”, so I assumed (not presumed) that you did not do any testing at all, including clearance testing. If you are not have clearance testing done then you are endangering the occupants’ lives. That is what I meant.

Oy vey…