A compilation of data from earlier studies of 172 homes in the Pacific Northwest indicated that approximately 65 percent of the 46 homes tested in the Spokane River Valley/Rathdrum Prairie region of eastern Washington/northern Idaho had heating season indoor radon (222Rn) concentrations above the U. S. EPA guideline of 148 Bq m-3 (4 pCi L-1). A subset of 35 homes was selected for additional study. The primary source of indoor radon in the Spokane River Valley/Rathdrum Prairie was pressure-driven flow of soil gas containing moderate radon concentrations (geometric mean concentration of 16,000 Bq m-3) from the highly permeable soils (geometric mean permeability of 5 x 10(-11) m2) surrounding the house substructures. Estimated soil gas entry rates ranged from 0.4 to 39 m3h-1 and 1 percent to 21 percent of total building air infiltration. Radon from other sources, including domestic water supplies and building materials was negligible. In high radon homes, winter indoor levels averaged 13 times higher than summer concentrations, while in low radon homes winter levels averaged only 2.5 times higher. Short-term variations in indoor radon were observed to be dependent upon indoor-outdoor temperature differences, wind speed, and operation of forced-air furnace fans. Forced-air furnace operation, along with leaky return ducts and plenums, and openings between the substructure and upper floors enhanced mixing of radon-laden substructure air throughout the rest of the building.

No abstract

Fourteen single-family detached houses in Spokane, Washington, and Coeur D'Alene, Idaho, were monitored for two years after high concentrations of indoor radon had been mitigated. Each house was monitored quarterly using mailed alpha-track radon detectors deployed in each zone of the structure. To assess performance of mitigation systems during the second heating season after mitigation, radon concentrations in seven houses were monitored continuously for several weeks, mitigation systems in all houses were inspected, and selected other measurements were taken. In addition, occupants were also interviewed regarding their maintenance, operation, and subjective evaluation of the radon mitigation systems. Quarterly alpha-track measurements showed that radon levels had increased in most of the homes during many follow-up measurement periods when compared with concentrations measured immediately after mitigation. Mitigation-system performance was adversely affected by (1) accumulated outdoor debris blocking the outlets of subsurface pressurization pipes; (2) fans being turned off (e.g., because of excessive noise or vibration); (3) air-to-air heat exchanger, basement pressurization, and subsurface ventilation fans being turned off and fan speeds reduced; and (4) crawl-space vents being closed or sealed.

PurposeThe goal of this project was to develop practical strategies for preventing building‐related symptoms in office buildings, based on the experience of those who investigate buildings with health complaints, and suitable for use by those who own, lease, or manage office space.Design/methodology/approachIdeas from six experienced building investigators on primary causes and key prevention strategies were gathered and prioritized through consensus and voting in a structured, multi‐day workshop.FindingsIEQ investigators from diverse climatic regions agreed on the most important problems causing symptom complaints in office buildings, and the key strategies for prevention. The top ranked problems identified were, in priority order: excessive building moisture, inadequate outdoor air, excessive dust, pollutant gases and odors, inadequate thermal control, and inadequate attention by management to indoor environments. The highest priority recommended prevention strategies for building‐related symptoms were: managing moisture at building exteriors, operating ventilation systems per design intent, providing at least the minimum recommended ventilation rates, and maintaining indoor temperatures at 72°F±2° (22°C±1°). Available scientific findings were generally consistent with these recommendations.Research limitations/implicationsValidity of these findings, from a subjective synthesis of empirical knowledge, not from scientific research, has not yet been scientifically confirmed.Practical implicationsThese recommendations, including managing moisture at building exteriors, providing adequate ventilation, and controlling indoor thermal conditions, provide practical, empirically based guidelines for those who own, manage, or maintain office buildings.Originality/valueThe empirical knowledge of practitioners, concentrated and synthesized here, offers more direct guidance for health‐protective strategies in office buildings than current science.

Two suggestions for sources of indoor 220Rn (thoron) have appeared in the literature: 1) building materials and outside air, and 2) soil beneath the house. Due to the difficulty of 220Rn measurement and limited data, both suggestions lack sufficient supporting evidence. We have investigated sources of indoor 220Rn in seven occupied houses in northern New Mexico, U.S. A two-filter system was used to measure indoor 220Rn levels continuously, and 220Rn progeny were measured with single filters and specialized alpha-track detectors. The amount of 220Rn entry from soil was curtailed by cutting off soil gas flow to the indoor air with subfloor depressurization mitigation systems. Four of the houses showed significant reductions in 220Rn with mitigation systems on. The average effect for these houses was to reduce indoor 220Rn levels by 70%. The other three houses had no clear reductions but in one of these houses, the mitigation system was not effective for stopping soil gas flow. Our results provide some of the most clear evidence to date supporting soil as an important source of indoor 220Rn.