@font-face {
font-family: Tahoma;
}
@page Section1 {size: 8.5in 11.0in; margin: 1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; }
P.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
LI.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
DIV.MsoNormal {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
A:link {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlink {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
A:visited {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
SPAN.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {
COLOR: blue; TEXT-DECORATION: underline
}
P.MsoAutoSig {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
LI.MsoAutoSig {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
DIV.MsoAutoSig {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
P.Style2 {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
LI.Style2 {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
DIV.Style2 {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
P.style20 {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
LI.style20 {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
DIV.style20 {
FONT-SIZE: 12pt; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Times New Roman"
}
SPAN.emailstyle20 {
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: navy; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; TEXT-DECORATION: none
}
SPAN.EmailStyle21 {
COLOR: navy; FONT-FAMILY: Arial
}
SPAN.EmailStyle24 {
FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #993366; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; TEXT-DECORATION: none
}
DIV.Section1 {
page: Section1
}
The
regulated States require that all third-party persons providing radon mitigation
be certified / licensed. The States
give an exemption that allows the homeowner or occupant to lower the levels in
his/her own home without being certified / licensed. I
believe The builder exemption came from the fact that a builder is a
homeowner. If so maybe its
possible to remove the exemption for builders.
John
Mallon
----- Original Message -----
From:
Terry
Howell
To: RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 7:42
PM
Subject: Re: [RNPROF] Time Sensitive
Opportunity; PLEASE Provide Input on Healthy Peo...
I would offer that
I dont think that in most of the licensing states an amendment would be
required. I think that most of the existing rules and regulations, and
laws already have something to the effect of anyone performing radon or radon
related services for a fee or other remuneration
. must be licensed
(registered or certified) already in them. The problem is that just
because it is a law, rule, or regulation does not mean that anyone is required
to enforce it. And no one chooses to enforce it. The question is
simply, why?
JMO!
Terry
-----Original
Message-----From:
International Web Resource for Radon Professionals
[mailto:RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU] On Behalf Of Smith, MartinSent: Thursday, April 02,
2009 7:18
PMTo:
RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDUSubject: Re: [RNPROF] Time Sensitive
Opportunity; PLEASE
Provide Input on Healthy Peo...
I agree
with Terry, this is a great thread. So whats the next step? It seems obvious
to me, but I am probably not thinking it through correctly.
We have
the ears of most, if not all, of the professional radon community through this
list serv. We have members of CRCPD and EPA also. We probably have the
individuals who crafted the legislation in the few states (or counties of)
that require the installation of PSD systems in new
construction.
So how
hard would it be to amend the legislation requiring that the PSD systems by
installed only by a nationally certified (or state certified depending on the
state of course) individuals?
The hard
part was already done. An amendment cant be so tough
can
it?
Moving
forward, using a mit professional should be a requirement in any new
legislation requiring PSD systems in new construction.
But it
needs to go a bit further, as many have already mentioned. We also need an
amendment that would required testing the home upon completion, again by a
nationally certified person, and if its 4 or more, make the system
active.
I
realize I am stating the obvious here, and its bound to be much more
difficult to accomplish than I am thinking. But we already know what needs to
be done
the real question is, whos going to do it?
Can
AARST lobby for an amendment in one state and then build from that? We have to
start somewhere. Just pick one and go for it. AARST and EPA joint effort? Add
CRCPD, you have a formidable front.
My
2
Martin
From:
International Web Resource for Radon Professionals
[mailto:RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU] On Behalf Of Terry HowellSent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 6:29
PMTo:
RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDUSubject: Re: [RNPROF] Time Sensitive
Opportunity; PLEASE Provide Input on Healthy Peo...
I think
you are only partially correct here. I think it is
both.
Elevated
levels of indoor radon is not considered a material defect and therefore the
public does not have a leg to stand on, especially the ones that already own
the property or have a binding contract to purchase the property. They
are stuck with only their own negotiating skills as
protection.
Until
the science can uphold and the government will take the position that a home
with indoor radon concentrations above some level are unsafe and therefore are
unacceptable for occupancy, nothing is going to change very much.
As to
the data from New Jersey on testing, as long as the dont test for radon
here maps are being utilized, the public will continue to feel safe if they
are in one of those zones and not bother to do anything. They think
their safe just like the buyers of homes with something called radon whatever
built into it.
This is
one of the best threads yet and I hope this dialogue continues. This
problem is fixable but the public and private sectors have to come together in
order to do it.
Terry
-----Original
Message-----From:
International Web Resource for Radon Professionals
[mailto:RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU] On Behalf Of James McNeesSent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 5:25
PMTo:
RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDUSubject: Re: [RNPROF] Time Sensitive
Opportunity; PLEASE Provide Input on Healthy Peo...
Totally agree with
Laraine.
When a majority of the public decides they will
no longer tollerate living in elevated radon, we will have turned the
corner on the radon problem.
The solution is a social marketing problem
not a scientific problem.
Jim McNees
Alabama---
On Thu, 4/2/09,
Koehler.Larainne@EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV
wrote:
From:
Koehler.Larainne@EPAMAIL.EPA.GOV
Subject: Re: [RNPROF] Time
Sensitive Opportunity; PLEASE Provide Input on Healthy Peo...To:
RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDUDate: Thursday, April 2, 2009,
3:18 PM
People
need to understand that new home buyers DO NOT test their
homesregardless of whether or not they have RRNC installed.
Its not thatRRNC discourages testing - that's what NJ thought
until they actuallylooked at the numbers. In
fact, according to a study done by theEastern Regional Radon
Training Center for NJ, which requires RRNC intheir Tier 1 areas
highest risk areas - the rate of testing for newhomes was about 3
times as high as in Tier 2 but ONLY 15.7%. Only
5%of the new homes in TIER 2 tested for radon.Statewide over
the period of the study ( 1999-2003) about 38% of thereal estate
transactions included a radon test. The study did
notevaluate the reasons for it, but some of them are likely to be
; no homeinspector involved in transaction; no real estate agent;
new homecontracts are often different than those for existing
homes,So the following is my take on this and does not
represent Agencypolicy....Whether or not RRNC is used or
is cost effective isn't the relevantpoint. The issue
is to get EVERY new home to test. If RRNC is costeffective
builders will use it, if not they will install systems inhomes
that test high. Either way we will get risk reduction where
weare only getting a fraction of the reduction
now. One potential way toget homes tested is for
areas that requires a certificate of occupancyis to require radon
levels be below 4 before a final CO is issued.( that is something
that might be marketed to HP 2020) Another waywould be where
there are new home warranties make it a condition of thewarranty
that the home is tested.And finally - for those of you looking
for work in this slow real estatemarket - most of those new homes
in your market never had a radon
testdone.LLarainne KoehlerRadon & Indoor
Air CoordinatorRadiation and Indoor Air Branch - 25th FloorUS
Environmental Protection Agency - Region 2290 BroadwayNew
York, NY 10007-1866212-637-3745212-637-4942(fax)For
radon information in New York, please call 1-800-458-1158 ext
27556or visit http://www.nyhealth.gov/radiation For radon
information inNJ, please call 1-800-648-0394 or visithttp://www.state.nj.us/dep/rpp/radon/index.htm Radon
& Indoor Airinformation is available from the EPA website at
www.epa.gov/iaqFOR UPDATED INFORMATION ABOUT GRANITE COUNTERTOPS
VISITwww.epa.gov/radon AND CLICK ON FREQUENT
QUESTIONS
Kevin
Stewart
To
Sent by:
RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU
International
cc
Web Resource for
Radon
Subject
Professionals
Re: [RNPROF] Time Sensitive
04/02/2009 02:46
PM
Please respond
to
Kevin Stewart
David,One point I think I
should make here:In my experience, the EPA people with whom I
have worked (Region III andNational) have not claimed that RRNC
would work to be an all-sufficientstandalone radon prevention
system obviating the need for any additionalwork. I am
curious what evidence the builder you cite produced to showhow he
got that specific impression. The official information I
haveseen about RRNC has always recognized that it may provide
partial Rnreduction, but that there was no guarantee of this, and
that the focuswas on providing (in theory, at least) a lower-cost
alternative topost-construction installation, an alternative that
might get sufficientreductions if operated passively, but that
could be transformed into anactive system should that prove
necessary.Kevin StewartDirector of Environmental
HealthAmerican Lung Association of the Mid-AtlanticFrom:
International Web Resource for Radon Professionals[mailto:RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU]
On Behalf Of David GrammerSent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 2:04
PMTo: RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDUSubject:
Re: [RNPROF] Time Sensitive Opportunity; PLEASE Provide Inputon
Healthy Peo...Terry,These are good points.New Jersey
has had a radon hazard sub code in place since 1991.There is no
restriction on who can install the passive piping &
thecompleted product infrequently works without many fixes.The
list of defects found with this type work is long & the cost
torepair these mistakes usually exceeds the installation cost of
acomplete system by a qualified person. Unfortunately for the home
buyersa past Governor of NJ (Jim McGreevy) signed into the radon
hazard subcode law that if followed, the Builders liability was
relieved.This rrnc installation is such a small part of the new
constructionoverall picture in relation to all of the other
components requiringinspection. Its importance to the construction
code officials usuallydoesnt even deserve examination. As an
example this could explain howbuilders could have used perforated
pipe to run a system up thru a houseas the passive vent pipe
portion of rrnc without detection.Tom Kelley heard a builder pled
their side of the issue at the newconstruction meeting in
Washington, DC 2 years ago. This meeting wasspecifically for
interested parties concerned about radon control in
newconstruction. In this case multiple home buyers accused the
builder ofpersonally misrepresenting that RRNC was a product
designed to controlradon in their new homes and it would actually
work as a standalonecomponent. That builder paid the additional
cost for adding fans to thesystems but he could not factor this
cost into his building plan sincehe believed the USEPA that rrnc
was adequate. His complaint was not justthe additional unplanned
cost to activate the pipe but he felt that bymisrepresenting the
benefit of rrnc his reputation had been damaged withexisting
buyers. This damaged reputation transferred from existing
homebuyers to future home buyers by word of mouth. The new home
buyers wereunhappy when they realized that the builder
misrepresented RRNC afterconducting a radon test months after
moving into their new home. Thehome buyers complained that it was
unconscionable to allow then toexpose their families to elevated
radon levels & not allowing them toknow the rrnc was only a
partial installation. The builders realcomplaint was he was
mislead by the USEPA to expect that rrnc actuallyworked. He would
have had no problem doing more work to control theradon in the
homes he was building but he was misled into a false senseof
security by the USEPAs claims of success. He wanted to know why
hewas not properly informed about rrnc.There was also a
mitigator there who explained that new constructionrrnc was more
expensive to install than radon treatment in an existinghome. He
explained that rrnc took several trips to complete & usually
agenerator was required since the new homes had no power at the
phase therrnc is installed. This mitigator also explained that the
buildersalways had scheduling conflicts such as the sheetrock was
alreadyinstalled or the framing was incomplete when he arrived.
This is aflawed process that can be improved but not until the
USEPA accepts thereality of the issue. This is not a cheap
alternative to radonmitigation. The material & labor cost is
not less than installing aradon system in an existing
home.David GrammerFrom: International Web Resource
for Radon Professionals[mailto:RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Terry HowellSent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 11:25
AMTo: RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDUSubject:
Re: [RNPROF] Time Sensitive Opportunity; PLEASE Provide Inputon
Healthy Peo...Phil, AllOnce again you have stated the
issues very clearly and correctly.Thanks again!What I, and I
believe others have been trying to get across for a longtime is
that builder installed systems do not work, usually becausewhoever
was responsible for it knows nothing about what it takes
toactually make a system work, and without that knowledge and
experience Ithink nothing will ever change in this part of the
problem.I think what is needed is really very simple.1.
Passive radon control systems for new
construction shouldonly be installed by licensed/certified
mitigation professionals.2.
Diagnostic evaluation of the pressure field
extension shouldbe required at the time rough-in is performed and
additional measurestaken as required at that time.3.
A radon test must be performed by a
licensed/certifiedtesting professional either before occupancy
(preferred) or with X daysof occupancy (very
problematic).4. I elevated
levels are found, then the system should beactivated and another
test performed, all within X days.Survey Question:
How many states require that
onlylicensed/certified be allowed to install radon control systems
in newconstruction?Based on all the data we have now I do
not agree that all homes shouldhave active radon systems.
Much, much, more data is needed.Conversely, all homes should be
tested and mitigated when elevatedlevels are found.Just my
thoughts!Terry E. Howell
-----Original Message----- From: International
Web Resource for Radon Professionals
[mailto:RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Phillip H. Jenkins
Sent: Thursday, April 02, 2009 10:33 AM
To: RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU
Subject: Re: [RNPROF] Time Sensitive Opportunity; PLEASE
Provide Input on Healthy Peo...
I am not a mitigator, but an interested observer.
It seems to me that the caveat associated with
RRNC is always "if installed correctly."
I am willing to believe that there is benefit to RRNC
"if installed correctly." The question that I have is
"how can we ensure that RRNC will be installed
correctly?". The stories that I hear
tend to make me believe that the general rule, at least
today, is that fixing the job that was botched by the
builder negates any cost savings that RRNC
might have presented. I sincerely hope
that I'm wrong. Further, I tend to believe that
builders' claims that systems they installed, which in reality
do nothing to reduce radon, give the
buyers/home owners a false sense that they
don't need to test because the builder took care of it.
Phil Phillip H. Jenkins,
PhD, CHP Senior Health Physicist
Bowser-Morner, Inc. Mail: P.O.
Box 51 - Dayton, OH 45401 Delivery: 4514
Taylorsville Road - Dayton, OH 45424 Voice:
(937) 236-8805 x248 Fax: (937)
233-2024 E-mail: pjenkins@bowser-morner.com
Web: www.bowser-morner.com
From: Dave Hill [mailto:dhill@SPRUCE.COM]
To: RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU
Sent: Wed, 01 Apr 2009 09:45:06 -0400
Subject: Re: [RNPROF] Time Sensitive Opportunity; PLEASE
Provide Input on Healthy Peo...
I would also like to point out that if the radon system
"rough-in" is done correctly, a 14-20 watt fan
is all that is necessary to make the home
"resistant" to radon and get the benefits Henri is
referring to. That would drop the annual fan operating cost
to below $20. Dave
Hill From: International Web Resource
for Radon Professionals [mailto: RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU]
On Behalf Of Henri Boyea Sent: Wednesday,
April 01, 2009 12:47 AM To: RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU
Subject: Re: [RNPROF] Time Sensitive Opportunity; PLEASE
Provide Input on Healthy Peo...
Jim McNees presents some interesting data, but it seems
to me that the cost of running a mitigation
fan in Alabama would be more than offset by
the redduction in runtime of the A/C and de-humidifiers
due to moisture reduction. If I recall correctly, the
study to quantify moisture reduction showed an
average 20-30% moisture reduction in homes
with the mitigation fan running. This takes
quite a load off the A/C and de-humidifier, which have
compressors, and therefore use quite a bit of
electricity.
Henri Boyea
Radon
Control Products
www.radoncontrolproducts.com
RN PROF (Subscription changes - archives) - http://list.uiowa.edu/archives/radonprofessionals.html
***** RN LEADERS - http://www.radonleaders.org/ **** RN Linked
In: http://www.linkedin.com (Search radon) RN PROF
(Subscription changes - archives) -
http://list.uiowa.edu/archives/radonprofessionals.html
***** RN LEADERS - http://www.radonleaders.org/ **** RN Linked
In: http://www.linkedin.com (Search
radon) NOTICE: This
transmission is sent on behalf of Bowser-Morner, Inc.
and it may be privileged, proprietary
or confidential. It is intended only for
the intended recipient. If you are not the
intended recipient or a person responsible
for delivering this transmission to the
intended recipient, you may not
disclose, copy or distribute this transmission
or take any action in reliance on it. If
you received this transmission in error,
please notify us immediately by telephone
at 937-236-8805 ext 228 or by e-mail at postmaster@bowser-morner.com
or by facsimile transmission at
937-233-2016, and please destroy all copies of
this transmission. Thank you.This
email message and any attachments accompanying it may
containconfidential and privilegedinformation belonging to
Radalink, Inc. This information is intendedonly for the use of the
individualor entity for which it is addressed. If you are not the
intendedrecipient, you are hereby notifiedthat any disclosure,
copying, distribution or taking any action on thecontents of this
information isstrictly prohibited. If you have received this email
in error, pleasenotify us at 800.295.4655 immediately.RN PROF
(Subscription changes - archives) -http://list.uiowa.edu/archives/radonprofessionals.html
***** RN LEADERS- http://www.radonleaders.org/ **** RN Linked
In:http://www.linkedin.com. (Search radon) RN PROF
(Subscription changes -archives) - http://list.uiowa.edu/archives/radonprofessionals.html
*****RN LEADERS - http://www.radonleaders.org/ **** RN Linked
In:http://www.linkedin.com. (Search radon)RN PROF
(Subscription changes - archives) -http://list.uiowa.edu/archives/radonprofessionals.html
***** RN LEADERS- http://www.radonleaders.org/ **** RN Linked
In:http://www.linkedin.com. (Search
radon)RN PROF (Subscription changes - archives) -http://list.uiowa.edu/archives/radonprofessionals.html
***** RN LEADERS- http://www.radonleaders.org/ **** RN Linked
In:http://www.linkedin.com. (Search
radon)
RN PROF (Subscription changes -
archives) - http://list.uiowa.edu/archives/radonprofessionals.html ***** RN
LEADERS - http://www.radonleaders.org/ **** RN Linked In:
http://www.linkedin.com (Search radon)
This email message and any attachments accompanying it may contain confidential and privilegedinformation belonging to Radalink, Inc. This information is intended only for the use of the individualor entity for which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notifiedthat any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action on the contents of this information isstrictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify us at 800.295.4655 immediately.
This email message and any attachments accompanying it may contain confidential and privilegedinformation belonging to Radalink, Inc. This information is intended only for the use of the individualor entity for which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notifiedthat any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking any action on the contents of this information isstrictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify us at 800.295.4655 immediately.RN
PROF (Subscription changes - archives) -
http://list.uiowa.edu/archives/radonprofessionals.html ***** RN LEADERS -
http://www.radonleaders.org/ **** RN Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com
(Search radon) RN PROF (Subscription changes - archives) -
http://list.uiowa.edu/archives/radonprofessionals.html ***** RN LEADERS -
http://www.radonleaders.org/ **** RN Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com
(Search radon) RN PROF (Subscription changes - archives) -
http://list.uiowa.edu/archives/radonprofessionals.html ***** RN LEADERS -
http://www.radonleaders.org/ **** RN Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com
(Search radon)
No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG -
www.avg.com Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.39/2038 - Release
Date: 04/02/09 19:07:00
RN PROF (Subscription changes - archives) - http://list.uiowa.edu/archives/radonprofessionals.html ***** RN LEADERS - http://www.radonleaders.org/ **** RN Linked In: http://www.linkedin.com (Search radon)
From Name
John Mallon
From Address
john@RADONDETECTIONANDCONTROL.COM