Home belongs to a HVAC Contractor. When he called to schedule a Radon Inspection with me, he advised that when they built the house in 2004 that he had high radon levels but wasn’t sure what the measurement was. He further advised that he installed a fan on his sump and that it had been running since 2005. The photos show what I found. Hard to see but the outlet, which is near a window and exhausts into a 12” wide space that abuts a shed, is capped off. This home owner has essentially been pumping gases from his sump into his home for 17 years. Test came in at 5 pCi/l on the main floor, basement is unfinished.
Where was the gas being pumped back in? Through the unsealed sump lid?
5 pCi/L would be pretty low for my area. Especially if the mitigation system is pumping back into the home, lol.
2 Likes
Fan was supposed to be exhausting outside, but the opening is plugged!
I would unplug the pipe, retest. As Ryan said, 5 is a low risk. In fact, if I were the homeowner I would do a long term test if time allows (91+ days)
4 Likes
Considering that 4 pCi/L is the equivalent to smoking a pack of cigarettes per day, there is no such thing as “low risk” when it comes to radon intrusion in a home or building! The W.H.O advises to fix the building at 2.7 pCi/L. In this case the sump cover isn’t sealed, the pipe isn’t sealed, the exhaust should be above the roofline and not within 10 feet of an operable window. There is so much going here. That being said, yes we unplugged the pipe and he does want to retest. Long term was also discussed.
Wow… Who said that?
EPA is 4. Where are you located?
Here is some interesting risks assessments from the EPA
2 Likes
Chad is correct, at least for those of us in MN. Although not the W.H.O., the state of MN requires us to include the below verbiage in our radon test reports…
3 Likes
Remember, our homes are closed up 5 months of the year, so breathing in radon is excessive when compared to more southern areas.
2 Likes
Yeah, I include that as well… Consider fixing when between 2 and 4.
I just state exactly what the EPA states. I don’t reach to other countries for guidance. But he can, I don’t care.
But I don’t freak out either. It takes both time and exposure for risks to ramp up.
When customers are between 2 and 4, IMO, a long term test would serve them best if they just aren’t sure what to do.
1 Like
That’s exactly what I tell my clients. If the test is close to, but under 4, I tell them (verbally) to consider doing a longer term test to make sure we didn’t catch it at a low point.
2 Likes
Maybe you can find it. It’s a chart produced by the EPA that extrapolates pcil levels and time (years) and risks of cancer. It’s out there somewhere lol.
1 Like
10 pCi/L = 1 pack of cigarettes per day, mis typed. Annual exposure to 4 pCi/l is the equivalent of 200 chest x-rays per year. The World Health Organization recommends indoor radon should not exceed 100 Bq/m3 (Becquerel per cubic meter) which equates to 2.7 pCi/L. Lung cancer risk rises 16% per 2.7 pCi/L increase in radon exposure.
Cut and dry really. If you are using a CRM, anything over 4 is “fix the building.” 2 - 4 is “consider fixing the building.” Not really a need to do a long term test if you are using a calibrated CRM and following your QC plan. If we are talking multi-family large building, makes more sense to do a long term test due to the $$.
So, for the customer who is between 2-4, the term “consider fixing” is a bit ambiguous. It really offers little guidance.
A 48 hour test is a very short snapshot in time meant solely to satisfy the real estate transaction. We all know weather conditions can both elevate and suppress radon levels for the duration of a short term test.
Therefore, a long term test can help the customer better understand their actual radon levels over time. This information is very useful when short term levels are between 2-4.
2 Likes
Ryan, do you mind reposting that graphic without the highlighting? Much appreciated.
Curious did you test the basement and what were the levels there?
1 Like
The basement is unfinished and used for storage, did not test.
According to the US EPA, that is now considered reason enough to test the basement.
Also, was the laundry facilities down there?
Any other reasons that someone may be in the basement for more than a very short visit?
Maintenance services?
People need to stay current with their information, thus the reason for required CE’s!!
3 Likes
Always test the lowest habitable level of the home. An unfinished storage area in a basement today could be a finished kids playroom next year. Here in IL the test report would be issued with an addendum indicating a non-compliant mitigation system was present in the home which is recommended for further review and corrective measures from a state licensed mitigation contractor. If you found 5 pCi/L on the main level, it is likely the basement may be significantly higher than that.
3 Likes
