The “The Buck Stops Here” generated some interesting feedback.  An attorney experienced in consultant liability commented to me on the three Environmental Professionals (EPs) who clashed on the findings of a site assessment, yet they all agreed to sign as the EP.  Here is a summary of him “thinking out loud” on potential liability concerns posed by the scenario.

The attorney said that this “significant disagreement” could be a deposition gold mine. He saw three issues which an aggressive plaintiff’s lawyer might choose to try and exploit. He stressed that at the moment these are merely legal theories, with no cases to say that these ideas would or would not work.... 

“Corners cut and beers downed at Fed-run OSHA classes,” was the headline of a recent NY Daily News article that caught my eye. It chronicles the undercover investigation of a 10-hour safety course intended to save worker lives at a time of record construction deaths in New York City.  The reporter observed disinterested workers and a “certified” instructor make a mockery of the class.  Unfortunately, this type of fraud is a national problem that is challenging for even federal and state safety officials to control.  How widespread is the problem?  How seedy are the scofflaws?  A little searching uncovers many cases, including:

• A trade school in Queens allegedly allowed asbestos workers to use fake social security numbers and then provided them answers to pass the exam.  Subsequently these workers used their credentials to work at high-security facilities.
• The investigation of a New York City scaffolding worker who fell to his death revealed that the owner of the firm allowed an untrained, uncertified foreman with fake credentials supervise the project at the time of the accident.
• The owner of the largest asbestos training school in Massachusetts convicted of falsifying identification, forging licenses and evading taxes.

In a recent commonground discussion on Price Cutting in the Phase I ESA industry, Jack Huntress posted about a stakeholder effort aimed at training and qualifying environmental professionals.  As one of the volunteers, it has been encouraging to see an industry come together to build a “Due Diligence University.”  But when it comes to oversight of the training, we will need to keep in mind the lessons learned by those who have come before us: beware of crooks who will risk everything for a few bucks.

This letter commenting on a recent “New York Toxic Mold Safety” bill (AB 648) by the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) is informative for all commonground members who conduct “limited mold assessments” in conjunction with a Phase I ESA.  It includes strong opinions regarding the state of the mold assessment and remediation industry that are worth a look.  Here is what it says about assessors:

“AIHA does not believe the skills necessary to conduct proficient mold assessments can be obtained through attendance at a training course held over a period of a few days.  Combining education and demonstrating competency in specific areas of knowledge, is essential.” 

And:

“AIHA considers the following minimum qualifications and competencies necessary to define a “competent professional”:

• Bachelor of Science in industrial hygiene, environmental health, or an engineering, life science, chemistry or physics discipline;

• Two years of experience under the direction of a CIH, CSP and/or licensed Professional Engineer with significant experience in building science, mold assessments, and exposure assessment.  At least one of the two years must involve the performance of indoor environmental quality assessments.

• In addition to the qualifications above, the competent professional should have competence (from education, training and experience) in: Exposure assessment, Indoor Environmental Quality (IAQ), Heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC), Microbial assessment and remediation, Building science, Legal/communication, Microbiology/mycology, Health effects”

While AIHA is not the only credible organization for mold professionals, their opinion is noteworthy and may prompt Environmental Professionals to re-examine: what are the appropriate qualifications and training for ESA staff conducting mold inspections?

K-Gap credit to TomL for the referral