HOME
Caution
Recent Articles
Identification
Photographs
The Inspection
Our Reports
Self Assessment
File Complaint
Testimonials
Validate Inspector
Contact Us
FAQ |
Identification
Unfortunately, there is no easy answer to this question. Understanding that every drywall panel, only some panels or individual rooms may have the problem product, determining the correct protocol for inspection and testing is therefore difficult. Should you cut open every drywall panel, conduct material testing on every panel? There are approximately 200 drywall panels per 2000 square foot house. For low risk homes this can be very expensive and very intrusive for any homeowner. Should homeowners that are experiencing no problems or issues at all and who live in low risk areas go to this expense? Should new home buyers buying homes go to this expense?
At present, there are two options for homeowners/buyers concerned about this problem, the visual assessment method and the material testing method, the latter or a combination being more conclusive.
There are presently no rules or protocols in relation to the inspection or testing processes for this problem. The methods below are based on the information available on the Department Of Health’s web site and other. The visual only approach has been taken as a process of elimination from an inspection perspective but not guarantee, as conditions may change. This is why material testing and inner wall evaluations provide much more confidence from a results perspective. Visual assessments can catalog the visual conditions present at the time of the inspection, which can be used in assessing the risk of home purchase the same way a home inspection is conducted today. Risk minimization but not risk elimination. Without testing or inner wall evaluations identifying the products used, visual reports should be taken as a condition in time of what was visible and accessible only.
Our visual assessment includes two levels of inspection, Method 1 and Method 2. Material testing and indoor air testing are separate and can be added in addition to both Methods 1 and 2 at the request of the client or if the inspector finds conditions that elevate the home to necessitate this additional testing.
Why 2 methods? Affordability and homeowners objectives. Existing homeowners want reassurance that there is no corrosive evidence or resulting conditions in their home and that is all. They do not want to open up walls or conduct material testing at the time of scheduling because they have not experienced continual breakdowns, do not suspect an issue, have not experienced staining/darkening of furnishings and/or are not/have not been continuously sick. Many of these home owners are concerned because of the recent press releases and alerts and want to make sure their home is OK by undertaking an affordable assessment approach as a base line review and not an expensive full blown testing and invasive evaluation. Clients may also be new home buyers that have heard of the issue too.
Method 1 was established as a baseline precautionary assessment for homes / homeowners. Method 1 does not include inner-wall evaluations. This means that the reason for the inspection is precautionary only. If corrosive issues of any nature are found during a Method 1 evaluation, then the inspector will immediately move to a Method 2 assessment and possible testing, with the agreement of the homeowners.
The protocol for a visual only Method 1 assessment is more affordable and less intrusive, but still gives the inspection findings relating to the conditions noted to the relevant areas backed up with a detailed report with photographs. Some dismantling of equipment and electrical fixtures is required for this analysis. An attic inspection in various locations is also conducted with this assessment. Here is an overview of our Method 1 assessment based on a 2000 Sq. Ft. Home.
- Homeowner interview.
- Removal of 10 receptacles/cover plates (at least one per room).
- Removal of 10 light switches/plates.
- Removal of air handler covers for coil analysis.
- Attic access review – three confirmed manufacturer locations, if accessible.
- Review of attic vertical wall surfaces if present and/or accessible in attic.
- Interior review on room by room basis.
- Examination of all exposed copper piping under kitchen/bathroom sinks etc.
- Visual review of appliances. (No dismantling included). If any conditions arise from the inspection that determine the possible presence of conditions associated with this drywall, inspectors will recommend additional testing procedures.
Our method 2 assessment includes the following.
The second visual assessment, or Method 2, is more involved and is needed for homes where the inspector cannot identify the drywall product or for a real estate transaction purpose where new homeowners want more conclusive reporting. It involves more examinations of the electrical outlets/switches, inner-wall evaluations by using a video boroscope or drywall cut-outs, in addition to the inspection protocol of Method 1. This method does identify the manufacturer's stamps in at least 5 locations throughout the home, in addition to all other areas inspected. An overview of method 2 is as follows:
- Homeowner interview.
- Removal of all accessible receptacles/cover plates throughout the house.
- Removal of all accessible light switches/plates.
- Removal of air handler covers for coil analysis.
- Attic access review – three confirmed manufacturer locations, if accessible.
- Review of attic vertical wall surfaces if present and/or accessible in attic.
- Interior review on room by room basis.
- Examination of all exposed copper piping under kitchen/bathroom sinks.
- Visual review of appliances. (No dismantling included).
- Boroscope analysis of back of drywall in 5 locations.
Some ask, "Why would you conduct invasive testing procedures or testing of materials? "
The correct answer is that right now there are no standards or protocols whatsoever for this analysis. From a practical perspective, buyers in a real estate transaction are going to want more reassurance when it comes to the risk of a home purchase and inner-wall invasive measures are needed. Most buyers are now required to sign a Florida Association of Realtors (FAR) disclosure which further heightens the buyers concerns, and any home built within the time periods mentioned are at risk. Some homeowners may also want the same degree of reassurance depending on the conditions the inspector finds or they are experiencing.
Remember also that reportedly 36,000 – 40,000 homes in the state were built with this product during the time period 2003-2007. This is only a percentage of the total number of homes built in those years. We are also finding that there are some areas of the state more prone to this issue than others.
Inspectors, while not excluding any home from a thorough assessment, will classifying these homes into categories ranging from high risk to low risk. High risk homes are those built by certain builders, located in certain known neighborhoods, periods, areas where homeowners have disclosed issues, areas or homes where inspectors have noted corrosive conditions, etc. Homes may also move to higher risk during the inspection process because of the conditions that may have been noted. In the cases of high risk homes, invasive testing and possible materials testing is needed to identify the product. Where no issues are noted and/or where no inner wall or testing is conducted, homeowners are advised accordingly to continually monitor their surroundings to changing conditions.
As far as material testing, to date there is no actual testing protocol approved. Our assessment objective is to find corrosive conditions or confirmed presence of the product. If none are noted from Method 1, then the next step is to conduct representative sampling if the homeowner still wants additional reassurance. The testing that is being offered is very expensive. It can range from $500 to $1200 per test! Some say a test is needed per panel of drywall, that’s a lot of testing! Testing and/or inner wall analysis’s always recommended if we cannot identify the product manufacturer stamp or if any possible corrosive conditions are found.
If conditions are noted within the home relating to this problem, and/or the product is found through invasive testing, the focus should move toward remediation procedures, not additional testing.
In all, the more conclusive the inspection, the better. If budgets allow for a complete detailed analysis with invasive inner-wall evaluations, then this should be conducted by all clients.
For full details of our assessments please call our office at (800)991-0142.
Please check back soon for updates.
Click below to receive a free quote for a Chinese Drywall Documentation Inspection by Ameripro.
*The material provided on this web site is for informational purposes only and should not be used to determine if you do or do not have Chinese drywall. As the facts relating to this subject change almost daily, the information provided cannot be guaranteed to be accurate or complete.
|
Download a flyer for your sellers here.
For more information, request an office presentation by completing the
form here.
Click to get a FREE quote
|
