From Name
James McNees

Terry, et.al, 
Consider this statement of yours:
 
"That was what the studies were looking for to get DOE and utility companies off the hook for homes weatherized prior to 1988 and that is where it stopped."
 
I take considerable umbrage with your implication that Alabama’s 1987 study was done with any specific out come in mind other than an honest determination of if the addition of storm windows and storm doors to residences made a statistically valid difference in the radon concentrations inside those residences.  Yes it was funded in part with DOE money received via the Alabama Department of Energy, but also with an EPA contribution.  I was the primary designer of the study and a more accurate statement concerning the questions dealing with storm windows and storm windows would be that it was done to make an honest determination of if storm windows and storm doors were associated with increased indoor radon.   The answer was that there is no statistically valid difference in the indoor radon between houses with storm windows and storm doors and those without storm windows and storm doors.
As to foundation types a significant difference was found.   On average, Alabama houses with basements have greater indoor radon than Alabama houses that are slab on grade, and Alabama houses that are slab on grade have greater indoor radon than Alabama houses that have crawl space foundations.
The truth does not change just because it is not what you want it to be.
 
 
Jim McNeesMontgomery, Alabama
From: Terry Howell To: RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 11:40 AMSubject: Re: [RNPROF] Conflicting Energy Office Policies
Glad to see this has sparked some discussion.  There needs to be a lot more.
 
First, Andy and Jim are correct that studies that only test the homes after they are weatherized does not show any higher distribution than homes that have not.  That was what the studies were looking for to get DOE and utility companies off the hook for homes weatherized prior to 1988 and that is where it stopped.  But for an individual home, where is the proof that weatherization did not cause and increase in radon levels and therefore an increase in the probability of lung cancer for an occupant?  This is what the last study by the DOE was to address and has not released.
 
Second, the EPA has seen this report (and may have provided funding) and is forbidden by DOE from discussing it publicly although they did make a statement at the conference that was interesting: DOE is going to be training their contractors to perform testing and mitigation.
 
Third, the DOE now has decided to forbid radon testing (before or after it seems) on homes that are being weatherized.  If they do not know that the radon levels may likely increase, why would they do this?  Because they can and they will crush any other government entity that dares to rise against them.
 
The people of the US do not understand that laws, regulations, and rules are passed and implemented to protect the rich and powerful and not the public.  The majority still think that radon is a scam because “if radon were as bad as the EPA says it is, the government would do something about it”.  Sadly, these same people think that our seat belt laws are to keep them from being killed in a car crash and blind to the fact that they are to keep the liability insurance companies from having to pay out when insured hits someone head on while driving drunk.
 
Lastly, Jim stated “With no money to pay for mitigation, there is little need to test” and DOE loves you for your devotion.  Sadly in today’s political climate this is the popular opinion.  It is only the one-per centers that need to worry about radon because they can afford it.  Of course there is likely an avalanche of tax credits available to them that are not to the rest of us, just as an incentive to protect themselves.
 
 
Terry E. Howell, President
Radalink, Inc.
5599 Peachtree Rd.
Atlanta, GA  30341-2309
THowell@Radalink.com
800-295-4655
 
From: International Web Resource for Radon Professionals [mailto:RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU] On Behalf Of Gary HodgdenSent: Thursday, August 23, 2012 8:50 AMTo: RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDUSubject: Re: [RNPROF] Conflicting Energy Office Policies
 
 
I think concepts here need to be parsed...  
 
1) If testing the "as is" condition of homes that are weatherized compared to leaky homes, the overall data should not indicate significant differences. This overall data is saliently dependent upon soil potency. 
 
2) If testing to compare what happens in a specific home when you substantially change dilution and pressure characteristics:  There can be a substantial change in the driving force of radon entry plus the more potent concentrations under the building enter but meet less dilution air.  One should also expect that these effects to be more pronounced in regions where seasonal pressure/temperature changes are normally dramatic and coincidently these regions hold a stock of existing homes that see huge benefits from weatherization. One might define regions with dramatic seasonal changes to include the northern half of US (such as Kansas where normal prolonged periods of yearly temperature fluctuations routinely range from  -5F to +110F). For many homes within these regions, there will be little effect.  For many others, it can be dramatic. 
 
I thought it was worth parsing the two different conceptual situations. 
 
Gary Hodgden
President: AAIR Professionals, Inc. 
913-780-2000    
Fax 913-780-2090
25005 W. 129th Terr.
Olathe, KS.  66061
 
On Aug 22, 2012, at 10:02 PM, Don Francis wrote:
True. We do wratherizatipn work and some houses have a decrease in radon. Building type is variable. "sometimes, not always, it depended,"Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 22, 2012, at 7:16 PM, "James McNees" wrote:
It might depend on what one defines as weatherization when it comes to the question of if  weatherization increases radon risk and by how much.  
 
Jim McNeesMontgomery, Alabama
 
From: Don Francis To: RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 8:56 PMSubject: Re: [RNPROF] Conflicting Energy Office Policies
They did a study for BPA and found that air sealing increased radon. I have report. Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 22, 2012, at 6:39 PM, "Andreas George" wrote:
I think back in the 1980's Berkelly Laboratory under a DOE contract did some radon studies and found that weatherization had no impact on radon increase.  I also did some similar studies in the mid 1980's in Pennsylvania and I found no effect either.
 
Andy George
 
In a message dated 8/22/2012 12:28:52 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, thowell@RADALINK.COM writes:
Chrys
This really comes as no surprise.  DOE has always been opposed to radon testing.
Last year at the conference it was announced that the study they conducted where measurements were made before and after weatherization was complete but it has never been released to my knowledge and no one at EPA will talk about it either.  Rumor is it showed just what we thought it would; weatherization can make radon levels increase.  This brings in liability issues and may be the first true RI$K associated with radon.  However if the owners are prevented from doing a radon test then it will be hard for them to prove that the levels increase.
DOE is more powerful that God and is probably the reason EPA is abandoning the radon program.
 
Terry E. Howell, President
Radalink, Inc.
5599 Peachtree Rd.
Atlanta, GA  30341-2309
THowell@Radalink.com
800-295-4655
 
From: International Web Resource for Radon Professionals [mailto:RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDU] On Behalf Of Kelley, ChrysSent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 11:36 AMTo: RADONPROFESSIONALS@LIST.UIOWA.EDUSubject: [RNPROF] Conflicting Energy Office Policies
 
Hi all-  I was wondering if anyone else is seeing a direct conflict of interest between DOE’s participation in the Federal Radon Action Plan and what is happening in your state weatherization programs.  A directive that recently came out of Colorado’s Energy Office for grantees with weatherization grants (see attached) PROHIBITS pre and post weatherization radon testing without a waiver and the waivers are being denied unless the grantees can raise separate funding for mitigation.  This is causing problems for us as we gave sub grants from the SIRG to several weatherization entities for radon test kits and now they aren’t allowed to use them.  Very frustrating to say the least.  Input?  Note, I have not sent this email to the SIRG listserve as it does not allow attachments.  Thanks-  Chrys 
 
"A graceful taunt is worth a thousand insults" -Louis Nizer
 
Chrystine Kelley
Radon Program Manager
Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division
Colorado Dept. of Public Health & Environment
4300 Cherry Creek Dr. S.
Denver, CO 80246
p-303-692-3442
f-303-759-5355
http://www.coloradoradon.info/
 
Radon Professionals - Subscription changes and archives - http://list.uiowa.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=RADONPROFESSIONALS&A=1
 
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.
Radon Professionals - Subscription changes and archives - http://list.uiowa.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=RADONPROFESSIONALS&A=1
Radon Professionals - Subscription changes and archives - http://list.uiowa.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=RADONPROFESSIONALS&A=1
Radon Professionals - Subscription changes and archives - http://list.uiowa.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=RADONPROFESSIONALS&A=1
 
 
Radon Professionals - Subscription changes and archives - http://list.uiowa.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=RADONPROFESSIONALS&A=1
 
Radon Professionals - Subscription changes and archives - http://list.uiowa.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=RADONPROFESSIONALS&A=1
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.
Radon Professionals - Subscription changes and archives - http://list.uiowa.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=RADONPROFESSIONALS&A=1
Radon Professionals - Subscription changes and archives - http://list.uiowa.edu/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=RADONPROFESSIONALS&A=1