The following message is from InterNACHI’s NJ Chapter:
The DEP Radon Section (https://www.njradon.org/) has proposed changes to the current Radon Testing & Mitigation Regulations in New Jersey. Many of the changes are the result of their attempt to comply with national radon testing and mitigation standards (we will now be required to use duplicates 100% of the time, etc.). Some of the other changes are the result of perceived deficiencies in the regulations revealed during the recent lawsuit between the DEP and Radiation Data. All of the proposed regulatory changes and NJ DEP commentary, can be found here (actual regulations begin on page 96):
The NJ NACHI Board of Directors has reviewed the proposed regulations and has some concerns which we will be forwarding to the NJ DEP as part of the public comment period on behalf of our membership. Please see the comments below for these concerns - we think you will feel as we did during our meeting Thursday night. However, if we truly want to affect change to the current language before it is published, effort is required on the part of all the licensed home inspectors in the state. As they say, there is strength in numbers.
We are asking all certified Radon Measurement Technicians to participate in the public comment period, which ends this Friday! HERE’S HOW….
Please take a minute to click on the link below to submit a public comment. You can copy and paste from some of the language below, or submit your own comments. Please send your comments in by midnight this Thursday, 6/3/21, to be sure they are received. Any questions, contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT:
Click on the link: NJDEP-Rules & Regulations-Comment on DEP Rulemaking
Fill in your first and last name (all other information is optional).
If you choose to fill in affiliation (optional), please use: NJ Licensed Home Inspector
From the drop down box directly above the comment box select:
DEP Dkt. No. 04-21-03, Certification of Radon Testers & Mitigators
Insert your comments and hit submit when completed.
Below are excerpts from NJ NACHI’s public comment, which you are welcome to use (cut and paste into the comment box) or you can generate your own. The numbers in front of the comments reference the specific parts of the regulation, and should be copied/included with any text.
NJAC 7:28-27A.3 The language in this section would appear to reverse the policy on the accepted practice of the labs sending results to the METs for distribution to the home buyer, and require that a written waiver be received from the homeowner in order for the MET to be included in radon test results distribution. This will create an unnecessary burden on METs, and likely discourage their participation, which in turn would make the MEB responsible for distributing the results to the home buyer. At the same time, the language in the comments section of the regulation suggests that real estate agents are ‘legal agents’ of a home buyer and may therefore receive results. The decision to include one licensed real estate professional under the confidentiality umbrella and not the other is arbitrary and discriminatory. Home Inspectors/METs should be included within the confidentiality umbrella of either the MEB and/or the real estate professional’s exception.
N.J.A.C. 7:28-27A.32 In theory, NJ NACHI has no issue with any changes to the regulation that further define or explain the roles and responsibilities of ‘Affiliates’, and believes that all METs should be responsible for their work. However, since the ‘Affiliate Form’ has not been posted on www.njradon.org per the proposed rule changes, there are concerns that this form could be too broad and over-reaching, when it should be inclusive of only items 1-6 listed in the proposed regulations.
NJAC 7:28-27A.13 This section allows the DEP to limit the number of Affiliates associated with a MEB. It also allows the DEP to limit the number of MEBs an Affiliate is associated with. Concerns exist that this policy could limit an MET’s ability to freely source vendors with regard to pricing, service and/or other considerations that are the basis of a free market economy.
NJAC 7:28-27A.33 This section seems to be requiring fees for a certification that has already been paid for by METs. While it is entirely reasonable to require METs to apply under the new regulations if renewal comes up during the 120-day window after the adoption, the unilateral fee for existing certifications is inequitable. The concept of requiring additional fees for any state certification(s) that have previously been paid for is simply wrong.
Thank you in advance!