Environmental Testing near you

Mold air sampling is the most commonly sold and the least commonly needed. EPA states that in most cases, if visible mold growth is present, sampling is unnecessary, and that because no EPA or other federal limits have been set for mold or mold spores, sampling cannot be used to check a building's compliance with federal mold standards. EPA also states that it does not certify mold remediators or inspectors, which removes the federal authority that a company's marketing may imply. Where sampling is done, EPA notes it should be carried out by professionals with specific experience in designing sampling protocols, sampling methods and interpreting results, which is a warning about how easy it is to produce a dramatic-looking report from a poorly designed sample.

The same skepticism applies to broad indoor air screens marketed with long lists of analytes. A number with no threshold to compare it against and no action attached to it is an invoice, not information. Before agreeing to any test, ask three questions: what standard or action level will this result be compared against, what will I do differently depending on the answer, and does the company performing the test also sell the remedy. If the first two have no clear answer, the third is the only one that matters.

A test result is only as good as the laboratory behind it, and the United States has separate accreditation schemes for each hazard. For lead, EPA runs the National Lead Laboratory Accreditation Program, which it describes as defining the minimum requirements and abilities a laboratory must meet to attain EPA recognition as an accredited lead testing laboratory. Recognized laboratories must undergo on-site assessments by a participating accrediting organization and perform continually in the Environmental Lead Proficiency Analytical Testing program, and recognition can cover paint chips, dust and soil.

For asbestos, accreditation runs through NIST. The National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program's asbestos fiber analysis program, as NIST describes it, provides assurance that laboratories are competent to analyze asbestos samples using polarized light microscopy or transmission electron microscopy, and NIST notes that the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act of 1986 requires laboratories analyzing samples taken from public or private elementary or secondary schools to be NVLAP accredited. There is no reason to accept a lower standard for samples from your own house.

For drinking water, the accreditation lives with the states. EPA's guidance to private well owners is to use only laboratories that are certified to do drinking water testing, and to find one through a state-certified laboratory list or a local health department, which may test private wells free of charge. For radon, EPA does not certify professionals itself but recognizes the National Radon Proficiency Program and the National Radon Safety Board and requires states receiving indoor radon grants to publish lists of credentialed providers.

For lead, sampling is a certified activity rather than a free-for-all. EPA requires individuals and firms who perform lead-based paint inspections, risk assessments and abatement projects in pre-1978 target housing and child-occupied facilities to be certified and to follow specific work practices, and it is emphatic that abatement and the Renovation, Repair and Painting program are two separate programs with different certifications, regulated differently. If someone offers you a lead evaluation, ask which certification they hold and which of the two programs they are operating under.

For asbestos, the inspection discipline sits inside the Model Accreditation Plan EPA issued under AHERA, which established five required training disciplines including inspector, with EPA stating that state training programs must be at least as stringent as the MAP and that accreditation certificates are issued by states or by training providers the state authorizes. For mold, several states license the assessor role directly: New York requires a mold assessment license for anyone engaging in mold assessment on a project, Texas licenses mold assessment through its Department of Licensing and Regulation, and Florida regulates mold assessors by statute. In every one of those states, the person who assesses is barred from also doing the remediation on that job.

The structural problem in home environmental testing is that the person generating the number often profits from the number being high. American regulators have responded to this in the few areas where they regulate at all. New York's mold program prohibits a licensee from performing both the assessment and the remediation on the same project and requires an independent assessment to define the remediation scope. Texas prohibits a licensee from conducting both mold assessment and remediation activities on the same project, with a narrow school district exception. Florida's statute bars a mold assessor from performing remediation on a structure the assessor's company assessed within the last 12 months, and the reverse for remediators, along with bars on accepting compensation or inducements from a remediator for referrals.

EPA applies the same reasoning to radon without needing a statute, recommending an independent follow-up measurement after a mitigation system is installed and saying plainly that having an independent tester perform the test, or doing the measurement yourself, eliminates any potential conflict of interest. That principle generalizes cleanly. Where you can, buy the measurement from one company and the remedy from another. Where you cannot, at least make sure the report separates the measurements from the recommendations, so you can take the first to a second contractor for a competing view of the second.

Testing is priced on the number of samples, the analytical method and the time spent on site designing and taking them, plus the report. What moves it is how many materials or rooms are in scope, whether the method is a quick field measurement or a laboratory analysis, whether destructive sampling is needed to reach a cavity or a substrate, whether the report has to meet a standard for a real estate transaction or an insurance claim, and how far the technician travels. A quote that names the laboratory, the accreditation and the method is comparable with another that does the same. A quote that promises a whole-home assessment without naming any of them is not.

LokalMatch is where you collect those comparable quotes. Describe the situation once: what you want measured and why, the age and type of the building, what triggered the question, and whether the result is needed for a sale, a claim or your own peace of mind. Testing and inspection firms serving your area receive the request and the interested ones contact you. Homeowners pay nothing and pros pay for the requests they receive. LokalMatch does not perform testing, does not interpret results, does not set prices, and does not vet, rank or recommend any company, so checking the certification, the laboratory's accreditation and whether the firm also sells the remedy stays with you.