During his keynote address to the 2000 International Radon Symposium held in Brookfield, Wis., last October, Dr. R. William Field, provided a provocative summary of recent epidemiological studies of Iowa and Missouri residents which suggest that previous estimates of the risk from residential radon exposures may have been underestimated.

According to Dr. Field, who works in the Department of Epidemiology, College of Public Health at the University of Iowa, the Iowa Study found a statistically significant association between residential radon exposure and lung cancer. A 50 percent increased lung cancer risk was noted even at an average radon concentration equal to the EPA action level of 4 pCi/L.

Dr. Field also presented a summary of the Missouri Radon Study that was published last year by Dr. Michael Alavanja et al. According to Dr. Field, the Missouri study also found a positive association between radon exposure and lung cancer using a newly developed glass-based retrospective radon progeny detector.

The glass based radon progeny detector used by Field and Alavanja takes advantage of the fact that the first long-lived decay product of radon (Lead-210 with a half life of 22 years) can embed itself in glass objects such as windows and portrait glass. The alpha activity of Polonium-210 (a decay product of the embedded Lead-210) can be measured and used to determine long-term cumulative radon exposures in a subject home. This approach eliminates the inherent error associated with using present day, short-duration radon gas measurements to estimate radon progeny exposures to occupants incurred over several years of residence under varying environmental and building operating conditions.

In a follow-up discussion with Dr. Field he indicated:

"Although it is still too soon to draw an unequivocal conclusion, data from the Iowa and Missouri studies (along with other emerging etiologic studies using techniques to minimize cumulative radon exposure misclassification) suggest that previous estimates by EPA and the National Academy of Science may have underestimated the risk posed by residential radon exposures."

Dr. Field also announced plans to pool data from both studies to improve statistical confidence and study genetic factors that may have predisposed study participants to radon induced lung cancer. However, in this author's opinion, this work, when combined with previous work by the National Academy of Sciences, continues to affirm that residential radon exposure represents a significant, but controllable health risk.
More information on this topic can be found at www.aje.oupjournals.org/cgi/content/full/152/9/895 and www.cheec.uiowa.edu/misc/radon.html

Other Meeting Highlights

The conference actually consisted of two concurrent conferences sponsored by the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors (CRCPD) and the American Association of Radon Scientists and Technologists (AARST). According to John Mallon, AARST's Program Chair, the conference had a much larger international flavor than has been the case in the recent past with speakers and attendees from Ireland, United Kingdom, Germany, South Africa and Japan as well as from around the United States. Another observation by Mallon and others was the presence of several individuals and firms who have recently entered the radon field, signaling a healthy and growing industry.

A Feeling Of Closure

For those that have attended the national radon conference for the past two years, the privatization of EPA's radon proficiency program has been the subject of many acrimonious discussions and sessions. This year was different. During a joint CRCPD and AARST session a panel discussion was held where stakeholders shared their impressions of the program and plans for the future. Conrad Weiffenbach of the Wisconsin Division of Health perhaps best summarized overall comments by panelists and the audience when he gestured with a large "thumbs-up" regarding the current status of the privatized program. Panelists confirmed that all elements of EPA's program including performance tests and device evaluation programs are in place.

Although several program enhancements were identified such as more aggressive enforcement of quality assurance and quality control requirements and the need to increase the number of service providers, the mood was constructive and focused on developing a means by which states and industry can move forward.

Mary Smith, director of EPA's Indoor Environments Division, announced the agency would be accepting applications for a limited-time accreditation of non-federal privatization programs to assist states in evaluating the capabilities of a credentialing organization.
Marjorie Walle, chairman of CRCPD's E25 committee, indicated that CRCPD did not have any plans to modify or update their draft guidelines. To many attendees, this signaled confidence that the current program in place has the ability to work with both states and industry in making the proficiency program a value-added, consumer confidence based effort.

Presentations

The conferences provided a large number technical papers and sessions relating to radon-in-water issues, new home construction techniques, and mitigation techniques utilized in the U.S. and other countries. Too list them all would be impossible within this article. However, according to John Mallon, proceedings for this conference, as well as preceding conferences, are available from AARST (800/484-7551 code: 5130).

The next conference will be held in Daytona Beach, Fla., in the fall of 2001.

Doug Kladder is president of CVC Inc. in Colorado Springs, Colo., which is contracted to administer the NEHA NRPP and the Western Regional Radon Training Center. You can reach him by calling (719) 632-1215 or by e-mail at dougkladdr@aol.com.

back to top

IE Connections was up and down in the presidential election this year, just as we're sure most of this industry was. First, Al Gore looked liked a lock for the job, then George Bush, then, well... it was a toss up.

IE Connections spoke to a well-placed government official, who asked not to be named, last August who was worried about a Bush Administration.

"Everything we've done over the last few years will be gone," he said. "We finally got the funding up for these projects. If it's Gore, we're OK. If it's Bush, we're in trouble."

IE Connections has asked many professionals over the last month how the IAQ industry would fare with Gore or Bush in the White House. We found their answers really depended on who we asked. The government people wanted Gore, the business people wanted Bush, and the people who were involved with non-profit groups said it probably didn't matter.

Steve Ashkin of Seventh Generation, formerly with Rochester Midland Corp., was one of those that told us it probably didn't matter who was elected. He said that whoever won would face great pressures on every issue.

"Sometimes it helps non-profit groups when there's a president that people don't like," he said. "It make the groups fight harder for what they want and believe in."

Gary Caldwell of Video-Aire/Enviro-Mold IAQ Services Inc. told IE Connections that Bush would be better suited on indoor environmental issues for the business community.

"He's more in touch with the issues that help the business professional," he said.

There are no official statements from President-elect Bush on indoor air quality, and questions from IE Connections sent to his campaign office were unanswered as of press time.

However, the Bush campaign did make a statement on children's environmental health to the Children's Environmental Health Network last September. Bush said, "A strong and effective U.S. EPA Office of Children's Health Protection is vital to ensure that the EPA's standards and regulations protect children.... In a Bush Administration, every single employee will understand that caring for and protecting children is a sacred trust- that our children are the faces of our future, and the childhood we give them today will determine the future they give us tomorrow."

EPA's Office of Children's Health Protection was put into place two years ago and was a brainchild of Administrator Carol Browner. Most indoor air quality-related issues such as asthma as they relate to children are now a part of the mission of the new EPA office.

back to top

Members of ASHRAE SPC 62.2P met last month in Washington, D.C., to review and respond to the comments generated during the public review period of draft standard 62.2: Ventilation and Acceptable Indoor Air Quality in Low-Rise Residential Buildings.

The committee, chaired by Dr. Max Sherman of the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory at the University of California, voted on revisions to the draft standard and crafted responses to the approximately 1,100 comments that the committee received from 200 individual and organizational members.

The organizational member comments are allowed because of the standard's "high profile standard" designation by ASHRAE. This status is due to the, "higher level of interest and controversy" the draft standard is expected to generate among the general population, Sherman told IE Connections. This translates into more scrutiny and a higher level of approval for the standard within ASHRAE. The subcommittee also voted on preliminary revisions to the document and made changes to several clauses of the document.

Sherman noted at the outset of the meeting that the National Association of Homebuilders (NAHB) was responsible for approximately 90 percent of the comments received concerning the draft standard. However, the committee and all observers were reminded that the content of the comments was to be treated as confidential. The 12 voting members of the subcommittee represent academic institutions, government agencies, trade associations and private sector concerns.

To ensure that the finished standard will be of maximum benefit to those who will use it, the subcommittee has embraced a philosophy of "simplicity versus flexibility" toward the development of the standard to guide the committee members when making revisions to the document. For example, in an earlier version of the document, requirements for different climates were included. The subcommittee received numerous comments internally from ASHRAE members that this format was too complicated. The subcommittee ultimately agreed upon uniform requirements for all climates.

There was also discussion among committee members as to whether the standard should be applied to new or existing structures. According to Sherman this question was answered in Section 2 (Scope) of the draft, which does not restrict its application to either new homes or existing structures. This course of action has a two-fold advantage, according to Sherman. First, it avoids any potential conflicts with existing building codes. The second advantage is the potential use of the Standard in non-code venues such as home inspection and home energy ratings.

As to the revisions of the document, the committee voted for changes both small and substantive. Many of the changes approved were the removal of exceptions or simple "wordsmithing." One change of note was the deletion of Appendix C (Air Filtration for Residential Application). The content contained in this appendix was not part of the standard, but was originally included for informational purposes only. Another major deletion was the decision to exclude the clause mandating residential carbon monoxide monitors.

The committee members will now turn their attention to responding in writing to the various commenters regarding the persuasiveness of their suggestions. Sherman said that the committee members, "have decided in principle how to respond to the comments," and that after making the changes official, it is likely that the draft standard will be sent out for a second round of public comment. If this is the case, Sherman sees January 2002 as the "most optimistic" target date for publishing the standard. However, he believes that a more realistic timetable puts the release date of the standard sometime in the summer of 2002.

back to top