[ RadSafe ] Fw: Radon consensus question

Fri May 14 12:31:06 CDT 2010

Hi, Harry.

If your home tested at 80 pCi/l, would you do something about it?

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Harry Reynolds
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 10:28 AM
To: Sam Iverstine; radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Fw: Radon consensus question

I believe that and all other risk data from BEIR are based purely on LNT. 

Harry Reynolds
ASRSO
ENERGYSOLUTIONS
801-649-2219 Desk
801-349-9036 Cell 

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Sam Iverstine
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2010 11:17 AM
To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Subject: [ RadSafe ] Fw: Radon consensus question

 Sam Iverstine, MS, CHP
Board Certified and Licensed Consultant Physicist Miami, FL 

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Sam Iverstine <sam_iverstine at yahoo.com>
To: radsafe at radlab.nl
Sent: Fri, May 14, 2010 7:13:33 AM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radon consensus question

http://www.radonseal.com/radon-health-risks.htm

This is a good resource based on BIER IV. With website calculation, a non-smoking 40 yr old male's risk of radon induced lung cancer from living in 80 pCi/l radon home is 14.4%. Or, 14.4 people out of 100 could get cancer from radon in this enviroment.  

I tested my home once at 20pCi/l and felt I needed to do nothing about it other than open the windows more often. I would certainly do more if I measured 80 pCi/l. 
 Sam Iverstine, MS, CHP
Board Certified and Licensed Consultant Physicist Miami, FL 

________________________________
From: Dan W McCarn <hotgreenchile at gmail.com>
To: "Brennan, Mike (DOH)" <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV>
Cc: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Sent: Thu, May 13, 2010 7:26:31 PM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radon consensus question

Hi Mike:

I cannot answer your question, however there are very practical reasons why remediation, namely that the house may not be saleable without remediation.

Given that the technology exists to easily lower the concentration significantly (active ventilation, etc.) at a moderate cost; then I think the ALARA principle is applicable. Part of that also depends, of course, on the house construction.  Perhaps active ventilation of the basement would be sufficient. I would also be concerned that the radon test might not be accurate depending on the season, type of air-conditioning system, etc. Is the "mid-eighties" number from spring / summer / autumn when the windows and doors might be open, diluting the concentration?

A secondary issue are the personal habits and circumstances of the current
owner: do they smoke? Are there young children in the house?

A tertiary consideration is that the house may not be saleable without remediation. Eventually the homeowner must make the investment whether for their own (possible) benefit, or the ability to sell the house.

Dan ii

--
Dan W McCarn, Geologist
108 Sherwood Drive
Los Alamos, NM 87544-3425
+1-505-310-3922 (Mobile - New Mexico)
HotGreenChile at gmail.com (Private email) HotGreenChile at gmail dot com

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Brennan, Mike
(DOH)
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 15:27
To: Radsafe
Subject: [ RadSafe ] Radon consensus question

I recognize there are people on Radsafe that do not agree with the EPA Action Level of 4 pCi/l of radon in air, and I respect that.  I am a little curious about how high the levels have to be before there is consensus that something should be done.  

As an example, I have been helping a person who tested her home, which is located in a high radon potential area, and has a average in the mid 80s.  The test appears to have been done correctly, and the level, while high end of what is seen in that area, is not particularly out of line.
The space tested is used as living area.  

Is there anyone on Radsafe who believes that an annual average concentration of 80 pCi/l is not worth taking corrective actions over? 
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://health.phys.iit.edu

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu