Great! So I take it that ACAC will still be allowed to break the CMI copyright. I am glad you got things worked out.
No. Taking a course doesn’t allow one to circumvent Federal Trademark law.
I think this is great, should allow for some cheap continuing education credits. Florida will (does) require 14 hours and ACAC requires 40hours continuing professional development**[FONT=Arial].**[/FONT]
I have said several times that the NACHI mold courses are great now they are recognized by the only mold certifications we care about having in Florida. “DBPR has chosen ACAC to provide the license examinations required by Chapter 468”
Good work NACHI.
Council-certified Indoor Environmental Consultant (CIEC)
Required: 8 years experience consulting on indoor environmental issues including asbestos, lead, HVAC, building science, chemicals, mold and microbial contamination
Council-certified Indoor Environmentalist (CIE)
Required: 2 years experience investigating indoor environmental issues including asbestos, lead, HVAC, building science, chemicals, mold and microbial contamination
Council-certified Microbial Consultant (CMC)
Required: 8 years experience in designing and conducting microbial sampling regimens
Don’t think the mold assessors in Florida care about the CMI thing.
This is always interesting though. :twisted:
ARE YOU REALLY CERTIFIED?
These blurbs from Adam Andrews, Assistant Director of ACAC , shed some light on the term “certified”.
Nick ?? please chime in here. ??
Scary, isn’t it???.. when you start playing in the big leagues!!
The documents/opinions you linked to aren’t ours. They are from some other organization.
This has been discussed before. IAC2 does qualify as a certifying organization according to the ACAC claims.
Isn’t it funny??
Start the thread by stating that ACAC accepted INACHI IAQ/mould courses for re-certification by open book, unproctored online testing…then…when they say something that makes members think about their own certifications…dismiss the reasoned articles by the ACAC Assistant Director that clearly show the differences between truly professional organizations and those that mimic them!!
SPIN!!! SPIN!!! SPIN!!!
The doctor is in!!
I don’t see IAC2 mentioned there…must have been discussed in-house without any outside input…of course, the foxes would all agree!!!
Why would ACAC promote IAC2? If you follow their criteria, IAC2 would easily qualify.
I didn’t “dismiss” the articles. I didn’t read them. Do they have anything to do with InterNACHI or IAC2?
So you too easily say!!
Have you really look at their designations and the requiremenets to achieve them…IAC2 can’t even begin to be compared with them…LOL!!
BTW…Just visited your website…I can see why you’re so touchy about the certification thingy :mrgreen::mrgreen::mrgreen::roll::roll:…being …
The most certified inspector in central Missouri
If you are the most knowledgeable in your area, why keep it a secret.:mrgreen:
You do realize that IAC2 has as just one of its core requirements… membership in InterNACHI which in turn requires www.nachi.org/rigorous2006.htm ?
I read the links. It appears they have the opinion that a certification shouldn’t come from the organization that developed the training. IAC2 doesn’t develop training, but nevertheless… I seriously doubt that thinking will gain much traction, what with every college and university in the world issuing certifications and diplomas based on courses they both develop and teach. I think they’re swimming upstream with that one.
But I wish them luck and am happy they approved our mold courses.
Brian, when I talk about their criteria I am talking about this you posted. http://www.acac.org/forms/otherpdfs/NOCA1100.pdf
That’s OK Nick. ANSI standards are only recognized around the world by professionals like engineers and the like…can’t really mean much or be a good idea!!
I’m glad they liked our mold courses.
Our Super Low Price Special!
Certified Home Inspections starting as low as $245](http://www.inspectorasap.com/?D=78)
Why is the best in the area area having to advertise such “Super Low Prices”?
"Mold Air Sampling
The best way to determine if considered toxic mold is present. Taken to the IESO testing standard. Samples analyzed by an Industrial Hygienist, who is the top mold expert in the state."
What species have the experts considered to be “toxic” and at what levels of “contamination” are they “toxic”? Scare tactics such as these are dismaying to many experts…
•• John Bower, owner, The Healthy House Institute, Bloomington, Ind.:
"The worst thing that has happened to the indoor air quality marketplace in the last year or so is mould. This is because much of the media coverage is designed to sensationalize the topic and frighten the public - so much so, that the word ‘mould’ always seems to be preceded by the adjective ‘toxic’. Thus*, homeowners and building managers are scared to death** of any minor infestation that might possibly be toxic mould, and they often ignore other health issues, such as combustion byproducts, VOC’s, second-hand tobacco smoke and poor ventilation."*
•• Dr. Joseph Lstiburek, president, Building Science Corp., Westford, Mass.: "The biggest news is the insurance people getting out of covering mould claims. This is great news because the easy money is gone. Now we are dealing with real money——yours and mine; insurance money was always viewed as someone else’s. Now, attorneys are wary of taking mould cases on contingency. They actually have to work for their money" (and you still have to pay them whether you win or lose- our comment)
•• Larry D. Robertson, president and CEO, Mycotech Biological Inc, Jewett, Texas: "As industry leaders, our failure to have in place an appropriate outlet for public knowledge and education has resulted in* gross misrepresentations and misunderstandings of basic Indoor Air Quality fundamentals." ***
"If you see it or smell it, you do not have to test for it. It is more important to get rid of the mould rather than spend a lot of money trying to find out more about it***.***" (by sampling and identifying the species of mould- our comment) Dr. Joe Lstiburek, P. Eng., Phd…; Building Scientist and principle at Building Science Corporation (Website: www.buildingscience.com)
Why Air Sampling Results Are Undependable
By Jim H. White, Former senior researcher at CMHC
“The problem with most air sample methodologies is that they take a “snapshot” of a highly variable measurement. Several studies have shown that the number of viable spores in a building, at a given location, varies by orders of magnitude over a few days to weeks. This is due to changes in weather (and the way air moves through the building), changes in colony condition (moisture and food availability, energy available for sporulation, and so on), etc. Sampling outcomes are also highly dependent on the specific location of the sampling, especially if the mould is growing.”