BODY{font:10pt Tahoma, Verdana, sans-serif;}I believe that the situation here in Ohio is that the law states that you can test, mitigate, whatever, on property that you own. And, the logic is that the builder owns the property until it sells. Therefore, the builder can do anything, related to radon that is, that he/she desires without training, without a license, etc., just like I can test my own house without a license, but I can't test someone else's. I can't even talk to someone else about mitigation, or radon entrance pathways, or dose from radon, without a mitigators license. So, don't ask me about any of those topics, cause I can't tell you. ;-) I don't know about other states, but their legislation may be similar.
Phil Phillip H. Jenkins, PhD, CHPSenior Health PhysicistBowser-Morner, Inc.Mail: P.O. Box 51 - Dayton, OH 45401Delivery: 4514 Taylorsville Road - Dayton, OH 45424Voice: (937) 236-8805 x248Fax: (937) 233-2024E-mail: pjenkins@bowser-morner.comWeb: www.bowser-morner.com
From: Terry Howell [mailto:thowell@RADALINK.COM]To: RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDUSent: Thu, 02 Apr 2009 19:42:02 -0400Subject: Re: [RNPROF] Time Sensitive Opportunity; PLEASE Provide Input on Healthy Peo...
I would offer that I don’t 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 what’s 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 can’t 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 it’s 4 or more, make the system active.
I realize I am stating the obvious here, and it’s 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, who’s 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 “don’t 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 usuallydoesn’t 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 builder’s 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 USEPA’s 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)
@font-face {font-family:Tahoma;panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
p.MsoNormal,li.MsoNormal,div.MsoNormal {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link,span.MsoHyperlink {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited,span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed {color:blue;text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAutoSig,li.MsoAutoSig,div.MsoAutoSig {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p.Style2,li.Style2,div.Style2 {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p.style20,li.style20,div.style20 {margin:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.emailstyle20 {font-family:Arial;color:navy;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none none;}
span.EmailStyle21 {font-family:Arial;color:navy;}
span.EmailStyle24 {font-family:Arial;color:#993366;font-weight:normal;font-style:normal;text-decoration:none none;}
@page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in;margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1 {page:Section1;}
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.
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
Phillip H. Jenkins
From Address
pjenkins@BOWSER-MORNER.COM