The following information is provided to support a Discussion & Debate on LinkedIn.
(After reading the articles, you may click the link at the bottom of this text to return to the LinkedIn discussion.)
Wildfire Sampling Papers Draw Critique From Authors of AIHA Technical Guidelines
EDITOR’S NOTE: Two recently published papers in JCS have drawn critical scrutiny from the authors of a technical guidance document published in 2018 by the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA). At the request of the AIHA Guidelines’ authors, their critique is published in full below. After their critique is a response from the authors of the papers published in JCS. The JCS authors have added a third paper for consideration. This paper was published in the IICRC Technical Journal in its Winter 2017 issue. All papers referenced here went through peer review prior to publication and all can be found on CIRI’s website www.ciriscience.org.
Letter to the Editor
As the primary authors of the 2018 AIHA Technical Guide for Wildfire Impact Assessments for the OEHS Professional (AIHA Technical Guidelines), founding members of the AIHA Wildfire Task Force, and other experts in the field of wildfire assessment, we are responding to the following sequential articles published in the Fall 2021 and Fall 2022 issues of the Journal of Cleaning Science:
Fall 2021 – “Comparison of the Wet Wipe and Tape Lift Methods for Sampling Surface Char in Residential Properties Impacted by Wildfire Smoke,” referred to as CIRI-1 in this response.
Fall 2022 – “Characterization of Wildfire Smoke Residues in Residential Properties,” referred to as CIRI-2 in this response.
(Click link below to read Letter to the Editor in full. Click links above to read referenced articles.)
Click here to read the Letter to Editor
The Author’s Response
The subject articles describe methods, sample results, and the interpretation of those results. The interpretation of sample results is always somewhat subjective. However, the AIHA Technical Guide (ATG) was not “misused and misrepresented.” The primary investigator simply chose to develop an independent sampling plan based on his education, training, and experience, that is, professional judgment. There was no intent to use the ATG, nor was there a known requirement that the ATG had to be either consulted or followed. Second, the ATG is the consensus of a small number of committee members that was supposedly developed to make useful information available to the wildfire community.
It does not contain any “scientific industry consensus methodology.” It is a guideline promulgated by a select committee, nothing more. Following are a series of assertions made in the Letter to the Editor concerning the papers published in JCS. Each assertion is followed by a response from Joe C. Spurgeon, the lead author of the papers. The responses have been approved by the co-authors. Please note that we are including a third paper as part of our response: “Post-Restoration Verification Sampling of Wildfire Smoke Contaminants” which was published in the Winter 2017 [vol.4, issue 1] issue of the Journal of Cleaning, Restoration & Inspection, published by the Institute of Inspection, Cleaning and Restoration Certification (IICRC). Hereinafter, it will be referred to
as JCRI-3 in this response.
(Click link below to read The Author’s Response in full. Click link above to read referenced article.)
Click here to read the Letter to Editor and The Author’s Response