Update on Toxic Mold Protection Act
About two years ago, California SB 732 – Toxic Mold Protection Act of 2001 was passed into law and many of its provisions went into effect January 1, 2002. The act effectively amended Section 1102.6 of the California Civil Code, and added Chapter 18 (commencing with Section 26100) to Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code.
The legislation was enacted to regulate allowable structural mold exposure limits. The exposure limits, however, cannot be adopted until the State Department of Health Services ("DHS") conducts studies and develops standards, known as permissible exposure limits. Task forces were to be formed to assist in developing these standards, as well as the forms, procedures and penalties. DHS was to report its progress by July 1, 2003. That date has come and gone, with the California budget crisis claiming responsiblity for preventing further progress.
According to a December 2003 status report, the DHS claims that in order to implement the statute, additional funding is necessary to assess the health threat, determine valid methods for sampling and identifying fungus, provide guidance on removal and abatement of water intrusion, disclose presence of mold in real property, and consider the need for standards for mold assessment and remediation professionals.
In fact, DHS is seeking voluntary contributions to The Public Health Protection from Indoor Mold Hazards Fund, authorized by AB 442. For more information, visit the Department's website at www.dhs.ca.gov, and use "toxic mold" as your search words.
The DHS has set forth a two-phase plan to initiate and complete its legislative mandate. Phase I will require an estimated $518,000, and take approximately two years to complete. DHS will not be able to proceed until the entire amount has been raised. Once Phase I is underway, additional funding will be sought for Phase II, which will set forth the guidelines for preventing water damage and mold in new construction, new regulations that may be proposed during Phase I, and training for local city and county health and building code enforcement officials if new regulations are passed. According to DHS, Phase II will require an additional $646,000 and take two and a half years to complete.
As of November 2003, there were approximately 195 volunteers for the task force that will be assisting DHS. Once funding is available, DHS will contact the volunteers and begin the process of choosing those who will actually serve. Additional volunteers are still being sought. Based on these reports by DHS, it appears that we will not see an outcome for another four to five years.
This means that in the interim, both the public and businesses will be forced to utilize the accepted industry standards set forth by associations such as the American Industrial Hygiene Association (www.aiha.org) and other related organizations.
If you neeed additional information about this or any other post, please feel free to contact us me at req@moldlawyer.cc
About two years ago, California SB 732 – Toxic Mold Protection Act of 2001 was passed into law and many of its provisions went into effect January 1, 2002. The act effectively amended Section 1102.6 of the California Civil Code, and added Chapter 18 (commencing with Section 26100) to Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code.
The legislation was enacted to regulate allowable structural mold exposure limits. The exposure limits, however, cannot be adopted until the State Department of Health Services ("DHS") conducts studies and develops standards, known as permissible exposure limits. Task forces were to be formed to assist in developing these standards, as well as the forms, procedures and penalties. DHS was to report its progress by July 1, 2003. That date has come and gone, with the California budget crisis claiming responsiblity for preventing further progress.
According to a December 2003 status report, the DHS claims that in order to implement the statute, additional funding is necessary to assess the health threat, determine valid methods for sampling and identifying fungus, provide guidance on removal and abatement of water intrusion, disclose presence of mold in real property, and consider the need for standards for mold assessment and remediation professionals.
In fact, DHS is seeking voluntary contributions to The Public Health Protection from Indoor Mold Hazards Fund, authorized by AB 442. For more information, visit the Department's website at www.dhs.ca.gov, and use "toxic mold" as your search words.
The DHS has set forth a two-phase plan to initiate and complete its legislative mandate. Phase I will require an estimated $518,000, and take approximately two years to complete. DHS will not be able to proceed until the entire amount has been raised. Once Phase I is underway, additional funding will be sought for Phase II, which will set forth the guidelines for preventing water damage and mold in new construction, new regulations that may be proposed during Phase I, and training for local city and county health and building code enforcement officials if new regulations are passed. According to DHS, Phase II will require an additional $646,000 and take two and a half years to complete.
As of November 2003, there were approximately 195 volunteers for the task force that will be assisting DHS. Once funding is available, DHS will contact the volunteers and begin the process of choosing those who will actually serve. Additional volunteers are still being sought. Based on these reports by DHS, it appears that we will not see an outcome for another four to five years.
This means that in the interim, both the public and businesses will be forced to utilize the accepted industry standards set forth by associations such as the American Industrial Hygiene Association (www.aiha.org) and other related organizations.
If you neeed additional information about this or any other post, please feel free to contact us me at req@moldlawyer.cc
posted by Richard Quintilone II Esq at
10:21 PM
|
0 comments
