£
<
33
\
£L
pR0^^°
0
J
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL
Catalyst for Improving the Environment
Evaluation Report
More Action Needed to Protect
Public from Indoor Radon Risks
Report No. 08-P-0174
June 3, 2008
CWO*1
¦ m ¦
¦
- 1 800"S°S"B
SURGEON GENERAL'S
WARNING:
Radon Causes Lung Cancer.
You Should Test Your Home.

-------
Report Contributors:	John Bishop
Tiffine Johnson-Davis
Dan Howard
Rick Beusse
Abbreviations
EPA	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
GAO	Government Accountability Office
IRA A	Indoor Radon Abatement Act
OAR	Office of Air and Radiation
OGC	Office of General Counsel
OIG	Office of Inspector General
OMB	Office of Management and Budget
pCi/L	Picocuries Per Liter (of air)
RRNC	Radon-Resistant New Construction
SIRG	State Indoor Radon Grant
Cover photos: U.S. EPA Radon Public Service Announcements at
http://www.epapsa.com/newradon/ and University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee,
Mechanical Engineering Department, Radon Reduction Technology
Laboratory at www.uwm.edu/Dept/radon/

-------
¦tfto sr/]^	08-P-0174
*. U.S. Environmental Protecti"" finon'>u	h onnQ
\ Office of Inspector General
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency	June 3,2008
At a Glance
CD
(+>/
PRO^^&
Catalyst for Improving the Environment
Why We Did This Review
Indoor radon is the leading
cause of lung cancer among
non-smokers and the second
leading cause of lung cancer
in America, according to the
U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and
U.S. Surgeon General. We
conducted this evaluation to
determine how EPA measures
indoor radon program results,
and whether changes at the
federal level could improve
program effectiveness. We
also identified challenges to
implementing changes.
Background
Radon is an odorless, tasteless,
and invisible gas produced by
decay of naturally occurring
uranium in soil and water.
Radon is found throughout the
United States. Indoor
residential exposure occurs
when radon gas enters through
cracks in floors, walls, and
construction joints, or gaps in
foundations around pipes,
wires, and pumps. According
to EPA, more than 20,000
Americans die from radon-
related lung cancer every year.
For further information,
contact our Office of
Congressional and Public
Liaison at (202) 566-2391.
To view the full report,
click on the following link:
www.epa.aov/oia/reports/2008/
20080603-08-P-0174.pdf
More Action Needed to Protect Public from
indoor Radon Risks
What We Found
Nearly two decades after passage of the 1988 Indoor Radon Abatement Act
(IRAA), exposure to indoor radon continues to grow. Efforts to reduce exposure
through mitigation or building with radon-resistant new construction have not kept
pace. Of 6.7 million new single family detached homes built nationwide between
2001 and 2005, only about 469,000 incorporated radon-resistant features. Of
76.1 million existing single family homes in the United States in 2005, only about
2.1 million had radon-reducing features in place.
The IRAA established the goal that indoor air should be as free of radon as
outdoor air. Since 1988, EPA has administered a voluntary program to reduce
exposure to indoor radon by promoting awareness, testing, installation of radon
mitigation systems in existing homes, and use of radon-resistant new construction
techniques. Still, building codes in some areas do not require new homes to be
built with radon-resistant new construction. Much of the progress made in
reducing exposure has occurred as a result of real estate transactions. In those
cases, a buyer, seller, mortgage lender, and/or real estate agent requested that a
home be tested. Some States and localities do not require testing or the disclosure
of test results during real estate transactions.
The radon program is not achieving greater results for several reasons. EPA's
ability to achieve results with a voluntary program is limited. Potential loss of a
sale represents a disincentive for real estate agents and sellers to conduct radon
tests during real estate transactions. Added expense represents a disincentive for
builders to use radon-resistant new construction. Opportunities exist within the
federal community to substantially increase the number of homes tested and
mitigated for radon. EPA has not decided how to use all the authorities or tools
available to it to achieve the Act's goals. Also, EPA has not been reporting
program results in relation to homes at risk in its performance reporting.
What We Recommend
We recommended that EPA develop a strategy for achieving the long-term goal of
the IRAA that considered using the authorities authorized by Congress or explain
its alternative strategy, which it agreed to do. We also recommended that EPA
identify limitations to meeting the goal to Congress. EPA responded that it does
not believe the IRAA goal is achievable. While EPA agrees that the problem of
radon exposure gets worse each year, it did not agree to notify Congress that the
goal set by the statute is unachievable. We consider this issue open and
unresolved. We also recommended improvements to how EPA measures and
reports program results, which it agreed to do.

-------
< jyi
# rr-m 'o	UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
0	S	WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
PRO"^
OFFICE OF
INSPECTOR GENERAL
June 3, 2008
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:	More Action Needed to Protect Public from Indoor Radon Risks
Report No. 08-P-0174
J	Jj
FROM:	Wade T. Najjum
Assistant Inspector General for Program Evaluation
TO:	Robert J. Meyers
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation
This is our report on the subject evaluation conducted by the Office of Inspector General (OIG)
of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This report contains findings that describe
the problems the OIG has identified and corrective actions the OIG recommends. This report
represents the opinion of the OIG and does not necessarily represent the final EPA position.
Final determinations on matters in this report will be made by EPA managers in accordance with
established audit resolution procedures.
The estimated cost of this report - calculated by multiplying the project's staff days by the
applicable daily full cost billing rates in effect at the time - is $629,228.
Action Required
In accordance with EPA Manual 2750, you are required to provide a written response to this
report within 90 calendar days. You should include a corrective actions plan for agreed upon
actions, including milestone dates. We have no objections to the further release of this report to
the public. This report will be available at http://www.epa.gov/oig.
If you or your staff have any questions regarding this report, please contact me at (202) 566-0827
or naiium.wade@epa. gov; or Rick Beusse, Director for Program Evaluation, Air & Research
Issues, at (919) 541-5747 or beusse.rick@epa.gov.

-------
More Action Needed to Protect
Public from Indoor Radon Risks
08-P-0174
Table of C
Chapters
1	Introduction		1
Purpose		1
Background		1
Noteworthy Achievements		6
Scope and Methodology		7
2	Risk of Exposure to Indoor Radon Grows Substantially
Despite EPA's Efforts		8
Problem of Exposure to Indoor Radon Grows Larger Each Year		8
Inconsistencies and Lack of Incentives Limit EPA's Ability to
Achieve Greater Results		11
Resources Limited for Achieving Indoor Radon Program Goals		14
Opportunities Exist for Federal Community to Increase
Radon Testing and Mitigations		15
Existing Statutory Authority Could Be Used to Achieve Radon Goals		17
Conclusions		17
Recommendations		17
Agency Comments and OIG Evaluation		18
Status of Recommendations and Potential Monetary Benefits		20
A	EPA's Map of Radon Zones		21
B	EPA Radon Program Goals and Progress Toward Achieving Goals		23
C	Details on Scope and Methodology		24
D	Summary of Homes at Risk and with Radon Reduction Features		27
E	Agency Response to Draft Report		29
F	OIG Evaluation of Agency Response		36
G	Distribution 		39

-------
08-P-0174
Chapter 1
Introduction
Purpose
This project was initially proposed by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA's) then Acting Assistant Administrator for the Office of Air and
Radiation and the EPA Region 2 Regional Administrator. The Acting Assistant
Administrator requested assistance from the Office of Inspector General (OIG) on
how best to communicate indoor radon health risks to the public. He also asked
how to measure program results, and that we identify what additional measures, if
any, could be taken within EPA's limited budget to reduce indoor radon health
risks. In response to the request, we conducted this evaluation to:
•	Determine how EPA measures overall Indoor Radon Program results and
the results achieved at the regional and State levels with State Indoor
Radon Grant funds.
•	Identify potential changes and improvements to the Indoor Radon
Program at the federal level to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of
the program in meeting its short- and long-term goals, as well as identify
the challenges or obstacles to employing these potential program changes.
Background
EPA, the National Academy of Sciences, and the U.S. Surgeon General have
stated that indoor radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer in America,
after smoking. Indoor radon is also the number one cause of lung cancer among
non-smokers, according to EPA estimates. In 2005, the Surgeon General warned
the American public about the risks of breathing indoor radon by issuing a
national health advisory.
Radon is an odorless, tasteless, and invisible gas produced by the decay of
naturally occurring uranium present in soil, rock, and water throughout the United
States. Because radon, a carcinogen, can collect in the air in homes, it is the
public's greatest exposure to naturally occurring radiation. Radon gas can seep
into buildings through cracks in floors, walls, and construction joints, or gaps in
foundations around pipes, wires, and pumps. Figure 1-1 shows the many paths
through which radon gas enters homes.
1

-------
08-P-0174
Figure 1-1: Radon Can Enter Home via Many Paths
Source: U.S. Geological Survey
According to EPA, the concentration of radon measured in a house depends on
many factors, including the design of the house, local geology and soil conditions,
and the weather. When radon decay occurs in air, the decay products can cling to
aerosols and dust, and can then be inhaled into the lungs.
Indoor Radon Exposure Poses Significant Risks to Human Health
EPA estimates that about 20,000 lung cancer deaths each year in the United States
are related to indoor exposure to radon. A 1999 report by the National Academy
of Science estimated about 15,000 to 22,000 Americans die every year from
radon-related lung cancer.1 This represents from 10 to 14 percent of all persons
each year who die from lung cancer in the United States.
Although outdoor concentrations of radon are typically low, averaging about
0.4 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) of air (0.16 to 0.57 pCi/L2), it can seep into
structures and build up to much higher concentrations indoors. As shown in
1	Health Effects of Exposure to Radon: Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation VI. Committee on Health Risks of
Exposure to Radon. Board on Radiation Effects, Research Commission on Life Sciences, National Research
Council, National Academy Press, Washington, DC. 1999.
2	National Ambient Radon Study, Hopper RD, Levy RA, Rankin RC, Boyd MA. 1991. Proceedings of the 1991 EPA
International Symposium on Radon and Radon Reduction Technology; Las Vegas, NV; EPA-600/4-9 (pp. 9-79).
2

-------
08-P-0174
Table 1-1 and Appendix A, EPA categorizes U.S. counties into one of three zones
based on the predicted average indoor radon level3 in the area.
Table 1-1: Three Categories of Radon Zones and EPA's Estimate of Risk
Category
Predicted Average
Indoor Radon Level
Health Risk Potential
Zone 1
>4.0 pCi/L
Highest
Zone 2
2.0 to 4.0 pCi/L
Moderate
Zone 3
< 2.0 pCi/L
Low
Source: EPA's Radon Website.
Regardless of the radon zone in which a house is located, EPA emphasizes that
high radon levels have been found in homes in every zone in the United States.
EPA and the Surgeon General recommend testing all homes below the third floor
for radon. According to EPA, the average indoor radon concentration is about
1.3 pCi/L of air. However, it is not uncommon for indoor radon levels to be
found in the range of 5 to 50 pCi/L. Indoor radon levels have been found as high
as 2,000 pCi/L.
EPA Administers Voluntary Program to Address Indoor Radon
EPA's Indoor Environments
Division, within the Office of
Air and Radiation,
administers a voluntary
Indoor Radon Program. The
program promotes radon
awareness, testing, use of
radon-resistant new
construction (RRNC)
techniques, and installation
of radon mitigation systems
in existing homes. The
program promotes mitigation
systems when indoor radon
levels are above EPA's
recommended action level of
4.0 pCi/L of air. According
to EPA, the 4.0 pCi/L action
level is not the maximum
safe level for radon in the
home, since any exposure to
radon poses some risk.
3 EPA uses five factors to determine radon potential: indoor radon measurements, geology, aerial radioactivity, soil
permeability, and foundation type. These are discussed further in Appendix A.
Figure 1-2: Typical Radon Mitigation System
Exhaust
Seal around
entry
points
Fan
Radon Exhaust Pipe
m		 (Typically hidden in
closet or frefu'iSSH
walls)
System Failure
Warning Device
Source: EPA
3

-------
08-P-0174
Instead, 4.0 pCi/L of air was a decision based on EPA's assessment of technology
and cost.4 Figure 1-2 shows a typical mitigation system.
Generally, a radon mitigation system involves creating a negative field of pressure
below the lowest level of the house (slab or crawl space) to prevent the entry of
radon gas. A pipe is usually used to channel the air flow from under the house to
a safe discharging point above the roofline. A special exhaust fan (radon
mitigation fan) is connected to the pipe and used to continuously remove gas from
below the house. According to EPA, today's technology can reduce the levels in
most homes to 2.0 pCi/L or below. Pre-construction soil testing for radon is not
sufficient for determining whether a house should be built radon-resistant.
Although radon can be measured in soil, soil testing cannot accurately predict
radon levels in the finished home because it cannot predict the impact site
preparation will have on introducing new radon pathways or the extent to which a
vacuum will be produced by the house.
Testing for indoor radon is largely driven by real estate transactions. EPA's focus
on real estate transactions aims to raise the likelihood that the buyer, seller,
mortgage lender, and/or real estate agent is aware of indoor radon risks and
requests that the home be tested during a sale. EPA also encourages home
builders to build new homes with RRNC, as this approach is more cost effective
than mitigating an existing home. According to EPA, the cost to install a radon
mitigation system in an existing home is relatively inexpensive, and the cost to
install radon-resistant features during home construction is even less. However,
EPA no longer provides quantitative estimates of costs to mitigate indoor radon.
Authority and Goal of the 1988 Indoor Radon Abatement Act
The authority for EPA's indoor radon activities comes from the 1988 Indoor
Radon Abatement Act (IRAA). Although there is no safe level of exposure to
radon gas, the goal established by Congress in the 1988 IRAA is clear:
The national long-term goal of the United States with respect to radon
levels in buildings is that the air within buildings in the United States
should be as free of radon as the ambient air outside of buildings.5
4	According to EPA's 1992 Technical Support Document for the 1992 Citizen's Guide for Radon, EPA arrived at
the level of 4.0 pCi/1 by balancing the findings of its technical analysis on risk, testing accuracy, mitigation
technology, and cost effectiveness with information it collected from its risk communication outreach. The
Technical Support Document stated that lower action levels would introduce more testing uncertainty and that
elevated levels of radon can be reduced to 4.0 pCi/1 95 percent of the time. At that time EPA estimated that a level
of 2.0 pCi/1 could be achieved about 70 percent of the time.
5	Section 301 of the Toxic Substances Control Act, amended in 1988 to add Title III, Indoor Radon Abatement Act,
15 U.S. Code 2661.
4

-------
08-P-0174
The IRAA authorizes EPA to:
•	Issue such regulations as may be necessary to carry out IRAA provisions;
•	Administer grants to help States establish radon programs, conduct radon
surveys, develop public information on radon, and conduct demonstration
and mitigation projects;
•	Report on studies of radon in federally-owned buildings;
•	Conduct a study of the extent of radon contamination in the Nation's
school buildings and report on the results of this study;
•	Create a Citizens Guide to radon;
•	Develop model construction standards and techniques;
•	Establish regional radon training centers;
•	Provide technical assistance to States; and
•	Establish proficiency programs for firms offering radon-related services.
EPA's Indoor Radon Program Goals and Estimated Lives Saved
EPA's Indoor Radon Program promotes voluntary actions at the State, local, and
tribal levels in an effort to achieve two goals:
•	Increase the number of homes built with RRNC.
•	Increase the number of homes mitigated for indoor radon.
EPA estimated that in 2005 nearly 194,000 additional homes6 included radon
reducing features (i.e., were either constructed with RRNC or mitigated for
radon). EPA's goal, as reported to the Office of Management and Budget, is to
increase the number of additional homes with radon-reducing features to 380,000
per year in 2012. EPA plans to accomplish this by providing radon information,
promoting testing, increasing awareness, and giving to States technical and
financial assistance. The Director of the EPA Center for Radon and Air Toxics
(within the Indoor Environments Division) called the 2012 goal "very
aggressive," as it represents a tripling of the current number of mitigations and
doubling current levels of new homes built with RRNC. EPA estimated, based on
risk assessments, that:
•	The estimated number of homes with radon-reducing features increased
from 153,598 during 2000 to 193,996 during 2005.
•	The estimated number of lives saved from additional homes having radon-
reducing features increased from 369 during 2000 to 577 during 2005.
•	The projected number of lives saved from additional homes having
radon-reducing features will increase from 645 during 2006 to 1,250
during 2012.
6 Data provided by EPA only included single family detached homes.
5

-------
08-P-0174
Appendix B provides additional details on those statistics, while Chapter 2
discusses EPA's goals further.
EPA Grants Help Address Indoor Radon Risks
Through its State Indoor Radon Grant (SIRG) program, EPA provides annual
grants to States and tribes for indoor radon risk reduction programs. Since 2000,
EPA has provided about $62.4 million in such grants via EPA regional offices to
address indoor radon. States and tribes are required to provide a minimum of
40 percent matching funds to receive SIRG funds.7 States and tribes may use
SIRG allocations for a variety of purposes, including to:
•	Educate consumers, real estate professionals, home inspectors, builders,
State and local building code officials, and others;
•	Persuade home builders to include RRNC in new homes;
•	Encourage local code officials to adopt radon-resistant building codes; and
•	Promote testing and mitigation in residential real estate transfers.
In addition, EPA publishes several radon guides for home buyers and sellers,
tenants, schools, physicians, home builders, and radon service providers (someone
who tests and/or mitigates homes for indoor radon gas).
Noteworthy Achievements
In 2001, the National Academy of Television, Arts, and Sciences selected one of
EPA's television public service announcements for a national Emmy Award. The
Academy recognized this public service announcement, known as "Take the
National Radon Test: Man on the Street," for its efforts to raise awareness of the
health effects of radon on the individual and family. The Indoor Radon Program
launched a new series of television, radio, and print public service announcements
in 2006 and 2007, encouraging people to test and fix their homes for radon. The
Agency distributed these radon public service announcements to thousands of
television stations, radio stations, and print media outlets across the country,
including over 100 real estate trade magazines.
During the course of this evaluation, EPA finalized its State Measures Checklist.
The checklist informs State programs of key performance measures, such as
estimated number of homes mitigated and estimated number of homes built with
RRNC. EPA encourages States to: (1) align their SIRG program activities with
the Agency's strategic goals; and (2) demonstrate and report results. EPA also
developed a required reporting template and guidance for States to use for Fiscal
Year 2007. Data collected through the template could assist the Agency in
7 The statutory match was 50 percent for States participating in the third year and beyond. In an effort to encourage
greater State participation, the matching requirement was reduced to 40 percent in the 2006 EPA appropriation.
6

-------
08-P-0174
rewarding better performing State programs with a greater share of SIRG funds in
the future.
Scope and Methodology
We conducted our field work from February through December 2007. We
conducted this performance evaluation in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform
the evaluation to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable
basis for our findings and conclusions based on our evaluation objectives. We
believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and
conclusions based on our evaluation objectives. Appendix C describes our scope
and methodology in more detail, including information on prior reports, data
limitations, and management control review.
7

-------
08-P-0174
Chapter 2
Risk of Exposure to Indoor Radon
Grows Substantially Despite EPA's Efforts
After nearly two decades of effort, potential exposure to indoor radon continues to
grow. As more homes have been built, efforts to reduce exposure through
mitigation or building with RRNC have not kept pace. Of an estimated
6.7 million new single family detached homes built nationwide between 2001 and
2005, only about 469,000 incorporated radon-resistant features, or about
7 percent. Inconsistencies in radon requirements among State and local
governments and a lack of incentives for key stakeholders to take voluntary actions
limit EPA's ability to achieve greater results. Federal agencies have opportunities
to reduce radon risks at housing they finance, underwrite, control, or own.
Further, EPA has not exercised all the authorities granted to it by the 1988 IRAA.
Due to insufficient progress, each year EPA falls further behind in achieving the
IRAA long-term goal that indoor radon levels be no higher than outdoor levels.
Problem of Exposure to Indoor Radon Grows Larger Each Year
As shown in Figures 2-2 and 2-3 below, the problem of indoor radon exposure
increased each year from 2001 to 2005. The number of RRNC actions and
mitigations did not keep pace with the number of new homes built nationwide.
The Agency's 2006 Performance and Accountability Report stated that:
Since the mid-1980s, there has been significant progress in reducing
the risk from exposure to radon in homes.
However, it is difficult to substantiate this claim because the radon performance
data in the Fiscal Year 2006 Performance and Accountability Report were
reported without a meaningful baseline for comparison. Instead, as indicated in
Figure 2-1, the results in this annual report were reported as the absolute number
of new homes built with RRNC and existing homes that were mitigated for radon.
These results were reported without any mention of the relationship of these
numbers to the magnitude of the problem (i.e., the numbers of homes at risk).
8

-------
08-P-0174
Figure 2-1: Excerpt from Performance and Accountability Report
?=*¦
§ ™
iso-
J IQD-
"5
I JO-
m
3 c
Annual Additional Hamas
Padori deducing hamres
¦ Trpt
AiQlJ
IW6 ' 2C03 ' 1004 ' 2005 ' 2004 ' 20Q7 ' 5«B
EPA's incbor
racbri program
promotes volun-
tary public action
to reduce risks
from radon in
indoor air Since
the mick 1990s,
there has been si£'
nificant prqsfess
Ln reducing the
Source: EPA's Fiscal Year 2006 Performance and Accountability Report
Of an estimated 6.7 million new single family detached homes built nationwide
between 2001 and 2005, only about 469,000 incorporated radon-resistant features,
or about 7 percent.8 As shown in Figure 2-2, the number of homes built with
RRNC compared to all homes at risk shows that the potential for indoor radon
problems continues to grow each year.
Figure 2-2: Total New Homes Built Nationwide Compared to Number of New Homes
Built Nationwide with RRNC Features, 2001 to 2005
Thousands
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
Total New Homes
in U.S.
1000
800
600
400
200
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Year
~ Total New Homes
Built in U.S.
¦ New Homes Built in
U.S. with RRNC
a In 2004, EPA began to exclude "Rough-in for Sub-Slab Ventilation" from qualifying as a radon-
reducing system. This explains the drop in RRNC between 2003 and 2004.
Source: OIG analysis of National Association of Home Builders data for total new housing starts
and estimated total homes built with RRNC information provided by EPA's Indoor Radon Team
(see Appendix D, Table D-1 for data).
8 Based on OIG analysis of National Association of Home Builders data for housing starts and estimated total homes
built with RRNC information provided by EPA's Indoor Radon Team.
9

-------
08-P-0174
Of more than 1.5 million new single family detached homes built in high radon-
potential Zone 1 areas between 2001 and 2005, less than 282,000 (or
18.4 percent) incorporated radon-resistant features. Nationwide, after 17 years,
only about 2.1 million of 76.1 million single family homes in the United States
(2.8 percent) had radon-reducing features in place as of 2005. EPA estimates that
about 5.1 million homes (6.7 percent) have indoor radon levels above EPA's
recommended action level of 4.0 pCi/L. The other 71 million homes are not
necessarily safe - they are just estimated to be below the 4.0 pCi/L level.9 As
shown in Figure 2-3, the number of existing homes that have undertaken actions
to mitigate indoor radon gas is also significantly less than the total number of
homes.
Figure 2-3: Number of Single Family Homes and Number with
Radon-Reduction Features (RRF), 2000 to 2005
80
70
60
Millions of U.S. 50
Single Family 40
Homes
30
20
10
0

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
~ Number of U.S. Homes
Nationwide
¦ Number of U.S. Homes
with RRF Nationwide
Source: OIG analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data on homes and gross annual radon fan
sales data supplied by fan manufacturers to EPA's Indoor Radon Team.
Appendix D provides details on the number of new homes built with RRNC
features nationwide, the number in Zone 1 areas, the number of existing homes at
risk, and the number with radon-reducing features.
The Executive Director of the American Association of Radon Scientists and
Technologists told us that the rate of radon mitigation and testing is so slow that
the efforts are not even keeping up with new construction rates. He pointed out
that the nation is building more homes in radon problem areas at a faster pace
than testing and mitigations are taking place in existing homes. Therefore, an
9 See Footnote 4.
10

-------
08-P-0174
even larger radon exposure problem is being created in the country over time,
not a lesser problem.
Concerns that the Agency's voluntary strategy could not achieve the long-term
IRAA goals had been identified previously. A 1997 EPA OIG report10 on
voluntary programs concluded that voluntary programs can be an effective tool,
but they rely heavily on outside organizations in reducing risks. Consequently,
voluntary programs must use good management practices, including educating
people about incentives, providing quality support, obtaining commitments, and
evaluating progress and making adjustments. Still, the report noted good
management practices do not guarantee success. Data for 2000 to 2005 show that
only limited results have been achieved in reducing radon risks with EPA's
voluntary program. Also, a 1992 U.S. Government Accountability Office report11
stated:
Because of the influence federal housing agencies and federally
chartered secondary mortgage institutions have on the housing
industry, requiring them to address radon could stimulate radon
testing for the nation's homes.
Inconsistencies and Lack of Incentives Limit EPA's Ability to
Achieve Greater Results
Since the 1988 IRAA, EPA has administered a voluntary program to reduce
exposure to indoor radon by promoting awareness, testing, installation of radon
mitigation systems in existing homes, and use of RRNC techniques in new homes.
However, inconsistencies in radon-related requirements among State and local
governments, a lack of incentives, and misuse of the radon map limit EPA's
ability to achieve greater results with a voluntary program. Details follow.
Adoption of Radon Codes and Regulations Inconsistent
EPA has partnered with some federal and State governmental and non-
governmental agencies to promote radon-resistant construction of new homes and
encourage radon testing when existing homes are sold. However, codes and
regulations for indoor radon vary widely between locations. Some States and
localities have not adopted radon building codes,12 while others have done so.
These codes include disclosure of indoor radon test results during real estate
transactions, the required use of RRNC in homes built in certain areas, and/or
10	Risk Reduction Through Voluntary Programs, EPA OIG Rpt. No. 7100130, April 21, 1997.
11	Actions to Promote Radon Testing, GAO/RCED-93-20, December 1992.
12	Because EPA does not maintain current data of areas where builders are required to use RRNC or which States
require radon service providers to be certified, we were unable to quantify the number of States that require such
measures.
11

-------
08-P-0174
certification requirements for radon service providers. Some States only require
that radon be listed along with a list of other potential environmental hazards.
Although we did not contact State and local agencies, we discussed State and
local radon codes and requirements with the radon staffs of 4 of EPA's 10
regional offices (Regions 2, 4, 7, and 9). Region input confirmed that radon
disclosure policies for real estate transactions vary widely between areas. For
example, some areas require that the test results be disclosed if a radon test has
been performed, while in other areas radon disclosure is voluntary.
Lack of Incentives for Key Stakeholders to Voluntarily Adopt
Indoor Radon Policies and Practices
EPA relies on voluntary actions by key stakeholders such as real estate agents,
home buyers and sellers, home builders, and home inspectors, to reduce the
public's exposure to indoor radon.13 However, there are disincentives for key
stakeholders. According to EPA, much of the progress made over the past
15 years can be attributed to EPA's collaboration and partnerships with States,
the radon business community (radon industry, training centers), and other
non-governmental entities. Nonetheless, more can be done.
Real Estate Agents and Sellers
According to the Associate General Counsel of the National Association
of Realtors,14 testing for radon and/or disclosing test results during a real
estate transaction adds an additional layer to an already taxing house
buying process. This has created a disincentive for real estate agents and
sellers to bring up radon issues during a sale. The representative said
radon is not a high priority in many real estate transactions, and adding
another step to the transaction process could be "a negative." Instead, he
stated that the Association's position is that radon is a public health issue
that individuals should be concerned about irrespective of an impending
real estate transaction. He noted that in areas where radon is known to be
a problem, it may be beneficial for a seller to obtain a test in advance of
putting the home on the market so that results are known to buyers.
Radon testing by the seller, while not commonly undertaken, can also be
problematic. Due to an inherent potential conflict of interest, sellers may
have little motivation to obtain accurate results or follow the appropriate
13	According to EPA, the bulk (85%+) of the testing/mitigation activity is real estate driven (buying, selling, and
relocation primarily). However, some limited amount of "do-it-yourself' testing is done by sellers who test their
homes in preparing to sell, and by homeowners/renters concerned about their family's health.
14	"Realtor" is a trademarked term describing a member of the National Association of Realtors, which claims over
one million members. The generic term for a member of the profession is generally a real estate agent or
professional.
12

-------
08-P-0174
radon testing protocols. The testing process itself takes time and can
create a potential snag in negotiations.
Home Builders
While EPA has indicated the cost to build a new home radon resistant is
relatively low, home builders have a financial incentive to keep building
costs as low as possible. The Director of the Market Research Division
for the National Association of Home Builders told us that there are many
hazards in the home, not all of which could be affordably addressed by
builders. He told us home builders prefer an approach outlining
prescribed techniques that would allow them to satisfy due diligence in
constructing a home. He further stated there may be situations where
builders might not be able to get the indoor air quality below the EPA-
recommended action level.
The International Residential Code - the building code used to guide
home construction at the State or local level in 45 States and the District of
Columbia - does not require RRNC as a standard part of the code. RRNC
techniques are only included in the International Residential Code's
appendix and are optional.
Home Inspectors and Radon Service Providers
Home inspectors and radon service providers who test and mitigate homes
could have a financial incentive to perform services. However, we were
told by two leading home inspection trade organizations that it is often
difficult to make a profit from these services, due to several factors:
•	The radon tester must, at a minimum, coordinate two trips to a
home site - to set up and later retrieve a test kit. Accurate test
results also rely upon the test materials remaining undisturbed for
the duration of the test. For example, windows cannot be opened
and doors must be kept closed (except for normal entry and exit).
Keeping test materials undisturbed is a condition frequently
violated. Multiple visits are sometimes needed because the testing
process must be repeated. Repeat tests are sometimes conducted at
the expense of the radon service provider.
•	Lack of certification requirements within a State can undermine
the profitability of legitimate, certified radon service providers.
Unqualified and/or untrained providers can operate at lower costs,
and increase the risk of inaccurate testing or mitigation systems
that do not work. Home inspectors said improperly installed and
working mitigation systems were not uncommon. Also, according
to the American Association of Radon Scientists and
Technologists, the cost often quoted in radon publications for
13

-------
08-P-0174
testing and mitigating homes may understate the true cost. As
such, it is difficult for some radon service providers to recover
their actual costs for proper radon testing and mitigation.
• Obtaining and maintaining professional certification(s) to perform
radon-related services can be relatively expensive. Radon testers
and service providers can incur hundreds of dollars in initial and
annual expenses for certification courses and exams, required
continuing education classes, and organizational membership fees.
Properly conducted, radon testing takes hours of work. Yet, as the
program is currently implemented, it is not economically viable for
legitimate radon service providers in some cases. Thus, there are
disincentives for home inspectors to offer radon services.
Radon Zone Map Sometimes Misused
Another factor contributing to difficulty in achieving the long-term radon goal is
misuse of EPA's radon zone map. This map (see Appendix A), created in 1993,
classifies areas of the United States into three radon-potential zones. EPA
intended the map to be used by State and local agencies and national
organizations to target their resources in higher radon-potential zones and to
implement radon-resistant building codes where they were most needed.
However, EPA has consistently recommended that all homes be tested for radon
because this is the only way to know whether radon is at an elevated level. EPA's
radon Website warns that the map was not intended to determine if a home in a
given zone should be tested, and homes with elevated levels of radon have been
found in all three zones. However, regional representatives and the Executive
Director of the American Association of Radon Scientists and Technologists
(which represents radon service providers), said the map is often used as a "risk"
map to determine whether certain homes should be tested and/or built with
RRNC. According to EPA, being in a "high risk" zone is only one of several
factors used to determine allocation of SIRG funds to individual States.
Resources Limited for Achieving Indoor Radon Program Goals
EPA Headquarters and regional representatives told us they would like to do more
in terms of radon outreach, education, and other key program activities, but
resource constraints have prevented them from doing more. EPA's Indoor
Environments Division Director said the States' primary source of funding for the
radon program is SIRG money. This money is allocated to the regional offices
for distribution to States and tribes. Authorized annual appropriations have been
$10 million; however, actual appropriations have been less. Table 2-1 shows the
funding for the SIRG program from Fiscal Years 2000 to 2007. In addition to
SIRG funds, EPA Headquarters had about $1 million in 2006 for discretionary
money that it used to conduct outreach and media campaigns.
14

-------
08-P-0174
Table 2-1: Annual Funding for SIRG Grants
Fiscal Year
EPA Funding for SIRG Grants
2000
$8,158,000
2001
8,139,900
2002
8,139,900
2003
8,087,000
2004
8,101,900
2005
6,944,100
2006
7,439,000
2007
7,439,000
Source: EPA Office of Radiation and Indoor Air
In 2007, EPA asked States and tribes to estimate the amount of additional
resources they believed they could reasonably use while also meeting the required
40-percent matching funds. The 47 States and 7 tribes that responded told EPA
they could use about $15.6 million more in SIRG funds.15 This is more than
double the $7.4 million in SIRG funds EPA allocated in Fiscal Year 2007. As
discussed in the "Noteworthy Achievements" section in Chapter 1 of this report,
EPA in 2007 created a required reporting template for States to use in reporting
what they achieved with their radon grant funds. Data collected through this
template could assist the Agency in rewarding better-performing State programs
with a greater share of SIRG funds in the future.
EPA has six to seven full-time equivalent positions dedicated to indoor radon at
the Headquarters level. EPA regional representatives we contacted said regional
radon programs are typically administered by one to three staff, with most staff
sharing time between radon and other indoor air issues (such as asthma or
environmental tobacco smoke).
Opportunities Exist for Federal Community to Increase
Radon Testing and Mitigations
Opportunities exist within the federal community to substantially reduce public
health risk by having homes tested and mitigated for radon. Housing financed,
underwritten, controlled, or owned by federal departments and agencies represent
a significant number of homes that could be tested, mitigated, or built radon
resistant. Examples of such federal organizations include the Department of
Housing and Urban Development, Department of Defense, Department of
15 EPA called this informal exercise the "Blue Sky" exercise; the estimate was based on Fiscal Year 2007 program
investment and presumption of the current 60/40 match requirement (60 percent Federal, 40 percent States/tribes).
EPA does not know whether all estimates were approved by management; however, the estimates were provided by
individuals most familiar with their State program's capability/capacity, according to the Indoor Radon Team.
15

-------
08-P-0174
Veterans Affairs, and Department of Agriculture. (We did not solicit input from
these organizations for our report).
Government-sponsored enterprises such as the Federal Home Loan Bank System,
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (also known as Freddie Mac), and
Federal National Mortgage Association (also known as Fannie Mae) represent the
largest source of housing finance in the United States. The construction of new
homes financed or underwritten by these and other federal departments and
agencies present a substantial opportunity to increase the number of homes built
with RRNC or mitigated for radon. In January 2005, the Federal Environmental
Executive in the Office of the Federal Environmental Executive (a White House-
based office) stated that:
Based on national averages, we can expect that many of the homes
owned or financed by federal government programs would have
potentially elevated radon levels. The federal government has an
opportunity to lead by example on this public health risk. We can
accomplish this by using the outreach and awareness avenues we
have, such as EPA's Web site, to share information and encourage
action on radon to reduce risks.
According to EPA's Indoor Environments Division Director, EPA has worked
over the years with other federal agencies to promote radon reduction policy as
part of their residential real estate portfolios. Although several agencies have
acted in one way or another to address radon, more could be done to
institutionalize policies to increase radon awareness, testing, and mitigation by the
general public, according to EPA. For internal purposes, EPA staff in 2004
prepared a conceptual document listing several possible actions the federal
community might take to increase action on radon in federal housing programs.
For any housing financially underwritten by the federal government, the staff-
identified actions included:
•	Providing radon information to home mortgage applicants at the time of
application;
•	Ensuring subsidized homes are built with RRNC; and
•	Ensuring that existing homes are tested for radon and, if appropriate,
mitigated.
According to EPA, implementing these actions might involve such complex
undertakings as executive orders, Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
bulletins, or even regulations.
EPA chose to focus its radon program on working with States, industry, and
non-governmental organizations to take actions voluntarily, rather than with other
federal agencies, on more complex undertakings. EPA has continued to promote
radon awareness and action among members of the federal community through
16

-------
08-P-0174
such venues as the Federal Interagency Committee on Indoor Air Quality, the
Office of the Federal Environmental Executive, and interagency working groups
and forums devoted to healthy homes and green buildings.
Existing Statutory Authority Could Be Used to Achieve Radon Goals
Although the 1988 IRAA does not require EPA to issue regulations to address
indoor radon, it does not prohibit EPA from doing so either. Congress authorized
the EPA Administrator in Section 310 "to issue such regulations as may be
necessary to carry out" the provisions of the IRAA. To date, 19 years after the
IRAA was enacted, EPA has not proposed any indoor radon regulations.
In the nearly two decades since passage of the IRAA, exposure to indoor radon
has grown annually. Homes continue to be built in high radon-potential areas
without installation of radon reducing features. According to EPA, there are
technical and policy limitations on the ability to attain levels of 0.4 pCi/L for
indoor air (the average level for outdoor air) at an affordable cost. Nonetheless,
EPA needs to consider using the full extent of the authorities authorized by
Congress to achieve the goal specified in the IRAA or explain its alternatives.
Agency officials noted the scope and limits of this authority have never been
tested.
Conclusions
As currently designed and implemented, EPA's voluntary indoor radon program
has not achieved the goals envisioned in the IRAA. In fact, the number of
homeowners potentially exposed to excessive radon has increased each year.
Multiple factors contributed to the limited progress made, including disincentives
for real estate agents, home inspectors, and home sellers to conduct radon tests
during real estate transactions. Disincentives also exist for builders to voluntarily
build homes using radon-resistant techniques. Given the Agency's limited
progress from its voluntary approach for the past 19 years, it is time for the
Agency to consider other means to achieve the 1988 IRAA goal. EPA should
assess how it can use the authorities granted in the law to achieve long-term
IRAA goals or identify alternatives for achieving the desired results.
Recommendations
We recommend that the Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation:
2-1 Develop a strategy for achieving the long-term goal of the IRAA by
considering using the authorities authorized by Congress under Section
310 of that Act, or explain its alternative strategy.
17

-------
08-P-0174
2-2 Identify limitations in the authorities authorized by Congress, as well
as other limitations that would preclude achieving the long-term IRAA
goal, and report these limitations to Congress as appropriate.
2-3 Revise the Agency's performance measuring data to include metrics
that will better measure the magnitude of the potential radon problem
in relation to the number of homes at risk.
2-4 Revise how the Agency reports the Indoor Radon Program results in
EPA's Annual Performance and Accountability Report.
Agency Comments and OIG Evaluation
The Agency agreed with Recommendation 2-1. The Agency agreed to develop a
strategy as recommended by the OIG in the context of EPA's available
approaches, authorities, and resources. EPA also noted that the level of radon in
outdoor air averages about 0.4 pCi/L. The Agency said that radon mitigation
methods currently available can significantly reduce the public's exposure to
radon from high levels to appreciably lower levels, well below EPA's
recommended action level of 4 pCi/L in many cases. However, the Agency said it
cannot typically or reliably achieve a level so low as 0.4 pCi/L in a given
dwelling, and certainly not in all dwellings. EPA stated that it lacks
technologically or economically feasible ways to meet the statutory goal.
However, the Agency acknowledged that greater progress to reduce public-health
risk from radon is needed and possible. The Agency also stated that before EPA
can begin strategizing about how the regulatory authority offered by Section 310
might be utilized to meet the statutory goal, EPA must address the physical and
technological limitations to achieving the national goal. We accept that the
Agency's voluntary program has contributed to slowing the rate of growth in
exposure, but each year EPA gets further away from - not closer to - its goal of
protecting the public from indoor radon levels above EPA's action level of 4.0
pCi/L. EPA's position that the goal is unachievable, coupled with results showing
an expanding radon problem, calls for more than continuing the same strategy.
We believe that EPA needs to consider using all the authorities the statute grants
and describe how it will achieve the long-term goal of the statute. The
recommendation will remain open until the Agency action plan is completed.
The Agency disagreed with Recommendation 2-2. While EPA agrees that the
problem of radon exposure gets worse each year, it did not agree to notify
Congress that the goal set by the statute is unachievable. Since the Agency
believes that the goal is unachievable, it should report this to Congress along with
the limitations that preclude the Agency from achieving better results. As stated
in the Agency's response, radon mitigation methods currently available can
significantly reduce the public's radon exposure from high levels to appreciably
lower levels, well below EPA's action level of 4.0 pCi/L in many cases. EPA
also said that it plans to conduct a strategic review of its radon program to include
18

-------
08-P-0174
the rationale and strategy for achieving any alternative to the long-term goal of
the IRAA. In our view EPA needs to seek Congress' approval of any alternate
long-term goal. The Agency's response was not responsive to the
recommendation. We consider this issue open and unresolved.
The Agency agreed with Recommendation 2-3. The Agency said that tracking
radon risk reduction in relation to total homes at risk is another useful way to
measure progress. The recommendation will remain open until the Agency action
plan is completed.
The Agency agreed with Recommendation 2-4. The Office of Air and Radiation
(OAR) committed to pursue this change in annual reporting with the Office of the
Chief Financial Officer and OMB and, if approved, to revise how the Agency
reports the Indoor Radon Program results in its Annual Performance and
Accountability Report. If the proposed performance measure is not approved, in
our opinion there are other reports where the measure could be published, such as
prominently displaying this on the Agency's Indoor Radon Website. The
recommendation will remain open until the Agency action plan is completed.
The Agency's complete written response is in Appendix E. Our evaluation of
those comments is in Appendix F.
19

-------
08-P-0174
Status of Recommendations and
Potential Monetary Benefits
RECOMMENDATIONS
POTENTIAL MONETARY
BENEFITS (In $000s)
Rec.
No.
Page
No.
Subject
Status1
Action Official
2-1 17 Develop a strategy for achieving the long-term goal
of the IRAA by considering using the authorities
authorized by Congress under Section 310 of that
Act, or explain its alternative strategy.
2-2 18 Identify limitations in the authorities authorized by
Congress, as well as other limitations that would
preclude achieving the long-term IRAA goal, and
report these limitations to Congress as appropriate.
2-3 18 Revise the Agency's performance measuring data
to include metrics that will better measure the
magnitude of the potential radon problem in
relation to the number of homes at risk.
2-4 18 Revise how the Agency reports the Indoor Radon
Program results in EPA's Annual Performance and
Accountability Report.
Planned
Completion
Date
Claimed
Amount
Agreed To
Amount
Principal Deputy
Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation
Principal Deputy
Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation
Principal Deputy
Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation
Principal Deputy
Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation
1 0 = recommendation is open with agreed-to corrective actions pending
C = recommendation is closed with all agreed-to actions completed
U = recommendation is undecided with resolution efforts in progress
20

-------
08-P-0174
Appendix A
EPA's Map of Radon Zones
The purpose of this map is to assist national, State, and local organizations in targeting their
resources and implementing radon-resistant building codes. This map is not intended to be used
to assess risk in any given area, nor is it to be used to determine if a home in a given zone should
be tested for radon. Homes with elevated levels of radon have been found in all three zones.
Important points to note:
•	All homes should test for radon, regardless of geographic location or zone designation.
•	There are many thousands of individual homes with elevated radon levels in Zones 2
and 3. In addition to Zone 1, elevated levels can be found in Zone 2 and 3 counties.
•	All users of the map should carefully review the map documentation for information on
within-county variations in radon potential and supplement the map with locally available
information before making any decisions.
•	The map is not to be used in lieu of radon testing during real estate transactions.
The map was developed using five factors to determine radon potential: indoor radon
measurements, geology, aerial radioactivity, soil permeability, and foundation type. Radon-
potential assessment is based on geologic provinces.
Sections 307 and 309 of the IRAA of 1988 directed EPA to list and identify areas of the United
States with the potential for elevated indoor radon levels. EPA's Map of Radon Zones assigns
each of the 3,141 counties in the United States to one of three zones based on radon potential:
¦si
Zone 1 counties have a predicted average indoor radon screening level
greater than 4 pCi/L (red zones)
Zone 2 counties have a predicted average indoor radon screening level
between 2 and 4 pCi/L (orange zones)
Zone 3 counties have a predicted average indoor radon screening level
less than 2 pCi/L (yellow zones)
Highest
Potential
Moderate
Potential
Low Potential
21

-------
08-P-0174
EPA Map of Radon Zones
- Prsknurtpfy
Designation
Legerxj
¦ ZoiW 1
Zona 2
Z&»3
Source: EPA Website
22

-------
08-P-0174
Appendix B
EPA Radon Program Goals and
Progress Toward Achieving Goals
Year
EPA Goal -
Additional Homes
with Radon
Mitigations and
New Home RRNCs
Estimated
Additional Homes
with Radon
Reducing
Features
Estimated Number
of Lives Saved from
Additional Homes
with Radon-
Reducing Features3
Projected Number of
Lives Saved from
Additional Homes
with Radon-
Reducing Features
2000
1
153,598
369
...
2001
1
97,205
395
...
2002
1
126,801
430
...
2003
149,000
145,620
471
...
2004
162,000
143,182
519
...
2005
173,000
193,996
577
...
2006
180,000
...
...
645
2007
190,000
...
...
715
2008
225,000
...
...
795
2009
265,000
...
...
890
2010
280,000
...
...
995
2011
330,000
...
...
1,110
2012
380,000
...
...
1,250
1	EPA did not include estimated goal information for 1997 to 2002 in its report to the Office of Management and
Budget nor in its Fiscal Year 2006 Performance and Accountability Report.
2	EPA estimated additional homes with radon reducing features by (1) collecting data annually on the number of
new homes built with radon-resistant features based on annual surveys of homebuilding practices conducted by
the National Association of Home Builders Research Center, and (2) collecting data annually on the number of
existing homes mitigated for elevated radon levels based on radon mitigation fan sales data obtained through
voluntary reporting by the fan manufacturers.
3	EPA's Indoor Radon Team's corrected figures to EPA's Fiscal Year 2006 Performance and Accountability Report.
Source: OIG-developed table from data provided in the Measure Implementation Plan that EPA submitted to the
Office of Management and Budget for the Program Assessment Rating Tool review (annual goals starting with 2003)
and estimated actual information provided by the EPA's Indoor Radon Team.
23

-------
08-P-0174
Appendix C
Details on Scope and Methodology
Our evaluation focused on the Indoor Environments Division within EPA's Office of Air and
Radiation, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, located in Washington, DC. In addition, we
interviewed managers and staff from EPA Regions 2 (New York), 4 (Atlanta), 7 (Kansas City),
and 9 (San Francisco) regarding various issues throughout the review. These regions and their
staff were recommended by EPA's Indoor Radon Team. We also interviewed representatives of
the following non-government stakeholder groups: the National Association of Home Builders,
the National Association of Realtors, the American Society of Home Inspectors, the National
Association of Certified Home Inspectors, and the American Association of Radon Scientists and
Technologists. We also reviewed materials provided by the American Radon Policy Coalition.
To determine how EPA measures indoor radon program results and whether changes at the
federal level could improve program effectiveness, we reviewed documents and studies related
to indoor radon. These included:
•	The National Academy of Sciences' 1999 report, Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation
VI Report: The Health Effects of Exposure to Indoor Radon.
•	EPA public information and consumer pamphlets regarding indoor radon, including
EPA's use of the U.S. Geological Survey's radon-potential map.
•	Relevant EPA and U.S. Surgeon General Websites and publications, including television,
radio, and print media public service announcements.
•	EPA's National Residential Radon Survey: Summary Report.
•	Results of an Office of Management and Budget Program Assessment Rating Tool on
EPA's Indoor Air Program.
•	EPA's Annual Performance and Accountability Report(s).
•	EPA's congressional justification(s).
•	Summary reports containing performance data used by the Agency to measure progress
toward its Indoor Radon Program goals.
We also examined EPA's State Indoor Radon Grant Program Website, the SIRG Results
Measures Template, the SIRG State Measures Hierarchy, and the State Measures Template
Checklist.
To identify potential changes and improvements to the Indoor Radon Program at the federal level
and challenges to implementing potential program changes, we discussed these issues with the
aforementioned EPA and key non-governmental stakeholder groups.
24

-------
08-P-0174
Review of Management (Internal) Controls
Generally accepted government auditing standards require that auditors obtain an understanding
of internal controls significant to the audit objectives and consider whether specific internal
control procedures have been properly designed and placed in operation. We examined
management and internal controls as they related to our objectives. We reviewed the laws that
impact indoor radon and EPA's authority related to indoor radon with assistance from the OIG
Office of Counsel. We focused on the responsibilities and authorities that EPA has to protect
human health from exposure to indoor radon, including the extent to which EPA has statutory
authority to develop a regulatory-based program. We reviewed the policies and procedures,
performance measures, and reporting requirements that EPA has established to carry out its
voluntary indoor radon program. We reviewed results of an Office of Management and Budget
Program Assessment Rating Tool for the Indoor Air Program. We also reviewed analytical,
documentary, and testimonial evidence from EPA's Indoor Environments Division and EPA
Regions 2, 4, 7, and 9. Chapter 2 identifies findings and recommendations where EPA can
improve its management of the Indoor Radon Program.
Limitations
We did not verify the accuracy of EPA data, including EPA performance data. EPA collects two
sets of performance data annually, both of which depend on voluntary reporting. First, EPA
collects data on the number of new homes built with radon-resistant features. This data is based
on a voluntary survey of homebuilding practices conducted by the National Association of Home
Builders Research Center. In 2005, this survey only achieved a 4.5-percent response rate.
Second, EPA collects data on the number of existing homes mitigated for elevated radon levels.
This data is based on radon mitigation fan sales data obtained through voluntary reporting by fan
manufacturers. Radon mitigation fans have an estimated life of 10 years. When estimating the
number of new radon mitigations annually in existing homes, the data from fan manufacturers is
adjusted based on the assumption that previously-installed radon mitigation systems will have
their fans replaced once every 10 years. Since these were voluntary measures, we could not
independently verify EPA's calculation of the number of new homes built with radon-resistant
features, number of existing homes mitigated for elevated radon levels, and estimated future
premature cancer deaths prevented.
We also did not perform a detailed analysis of the accuracy of the assumptions EPA used to
develop these estimates. We did not review the accuracy of indoor radon tests or mitigation
systems, or how well RRNC features are installed. We interviewed 4 of the 10 regions and did
not interview State or local officials. We did not interview representatives of other federal
agencies that are involved in the housing market or solicit input from them.
Prior Reports
Neither the EPA OIG nor the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has issued any recent
reports that addressed EPA actions related to indoor radon. The EPA OIG issued a 1997 report,
Risk Reduction Through Voluntary Programs (Report No. 7100130, April 21, 1997) that
discussed management practices that worked well and areas where improvements were needed in
25

-------
08-P-0174
voluntary programs, including indoor radon. GAO's most recent report that addressed indoor
radon was issued in 1992. We reviewed the following GAO reports:
•	GAO/RCED-88-103 - April 6, 1988, Indoor Radon: Limited Federal Response to Reduce
Contamination in Housing
•	GAO/T-RCED-91 -48 - May 1991, Radon Testing in Federal Buildings Needs
Improvement and HUD's [Department of Housing and Urban Development 'sjRadon
Policy Needs Strengthening
•	GAO/RCED-92-8 - October 1991 - Indoor Air Pollution Federal Efforts Are Not
Effectively Addressing a Growing Problem
•	GAO/RCED-93-20 - December 1992 - Actions to Promote Radon Testing
26

-------
08-P-0174
Appendix D
Summary of Homes at Risk and with
Radon Reduction Features
Table D-1: Total Homes Built Compared to Total Number of Homes Built With RRNC
(Single Family Detached)
Year
Total New Housing Starts
in U.S.
Total New Homes Built
with RRNC in U.S.
Percent of Total New Homes
Built with RRNC
2001
1,159,000
65,205
5.6 %
2002
1,239,000
87,001
7.0 %
2003
1,311,000
100,620
7.7 %
2004a
1,392,000
85,182
6.1 %
2005
1,626,000
130,996
8.1 %
Total
6,727,000
469,004
7.0 %
a In 2004, EPA began to exclude "Rough-in for Sub-Slab Ventilation" from qualifying as a radon-reducing system.
This explains the drop in RRNC between 2003 and 2004. For Rough-in for Sub-Slab Ventilation only the sub-slab
pipe is installed and the vent pipe is stubbed above the slab. This is not the recommended method. It is not a
functioning system until vented to the outside.
Source: OIG analysis of National Association of Home Builders data for total new housing starts and estimated total
homes built with RRNC information provided by EPA's Indoor Radon Team.
Table D-2: Homes Built in High Radon-Potential Zone 1 Compared to Number of Homes Built
With RRNC in Zone 1 (Single Family Detached)
Year
New Housing Starts in
High Radon-Potential
Zone 1 Only
Total New Homes Built
with RRNC In Zone 1 a
Percent of Total New Homes
Built with RRNC in Zone 1
2001
255,000
39,123
15.3%
2002
266,000
52,201
19.6%
2003
313,000
60,372
19.3%
2004a
323,000
51,109
15.8%
2005
370,000
78,597
21.2%
Total
1,527,000
281,402
18.4%
a EPA estimates that 60 percent of all homes built with RRNC are in Zone 1.
Source: OIG analysis of National Association of Home Builders data for new starts in Zone 1 and estimated total
homes built with RRNC information provided by EPA's Indoor Radon Team.
27

-------
08-P-0174
Figure D-1: Total New Homes Built In Zone 1 Areas Compared to Number of
New Homes Built with RRNC Features In Zone 1 Areas, 2001 to 2005
Thousands
450n
400-
350-
300-
Total New Homes in 250-
Zone1 200-
150-
100-
50-
0-

^1



~ Total New Homes Built in Zone 1
¦ Total New Homes Built in Zone 1 with RRNC
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Year
a New homes built with RRNC in Zone 1 is based on EPA's estimate that 60 percent of all
homes built with RRNC are in Zone 1.
Source: OIG analysis of National Association of Home Builders data for total new housing starts
in Zone 1, and estimated total homes built with RRNC provided by EPA's Indoor Radon Team.
Table D-3: Total Radon Reducing Features Nationwide, 2000 to 2005
Year
Number of
Homes
Nationwide
(a)
Estimated
Total Number
of Homes with
Radon-
Reducing
Features
Nationwide
(b)
Percent
of Total
Homes
with
Radon-
Reducing
Features
(c)
Net New
Mitigations
Annually
(Existing
Homes)
(d)
Cumulative
Mitigations
(Existing
Homes)
(e)
Total New
Homes
Built with
RRNC In
U.S.
(f)
Cumulative
New Homes
Built with
RRNC In
U.S.2
(g)
2000
70.0 million
1,345,374
1.9%
25,100
397,100
128,498
948,274
2001
70.8 million
1,442,579
2.0%
32,000
429,100
65,205
1,013,479
2002
72.4 million
1,569,380
2.2%
39,800
468,900
87,001
1,100,480
2003
73.6 million
1,715,000
2.3%
45,000
513,900
100,620
1,201,100
2004
75.1 million
1,858,182
2.5%
58.000
571,900
85,182
1,286,282
2005
76.1 million
2,052,178
2.8%
63,000
634,900
130,996
1,417,278
1.	Percent of Total Homes with Radon-Reducing Features = column a / column b.
2.	Cumulative New Homes Built with RRNC in U.S. = column b - column e.
Source: OIG analysis of estimated total homes built with RRNC and number of existing homes with added radon-reducing
features information provided by EPA's Indoor Radon Team. The number of single family detached structures (column a
above) is from U.S. Census Bureau data.
28

-------
08-P-0174
Appendix E
Agency Response to Draft Report
May 28, 2008
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT: Comments on the Draft Evaluation Report: More Action Needed to
Protect Public from Indoor Radon Risks
FROM: Robert J. Meyers
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator
Office of Air and Radiation
TO:	Wade T. Najjum
Assistant Inspector General for Program Evaluation
Office of Inspector General
The EPA Office of Air and Radiation appreciates the opportunity to review and comment
on the OIG's draft report "More Action Needed to Protect Public from Indoor Radon Risks "
(Assignment No. 2007-000308). We are grateful to have OIG's input on the important public
health challenge of reducing indoor radon exposure.
While we acknowledge that the public health risk of indoor radon exposure remains high,
EPA believes our accomplishments to date are significant and should be noted. Due to EPA's
work with States and industry, more than two million measured or potentially high-risk U.S.
homes now have radon-reducing features, with the result that an estimated 6,000 lung cancer
deaths have been prevented to date. We have helped establish a revitalized State and industry
infrastructure (a key to organizing risk reduction in a voluntary/market-driven program). This
includes development of a private proficiency program for measurement and mitigation, the
establishment of a system of State programs (through State Indoor Radon Grant (SIRG) and the
institution of training capability (through the Regional Radon Training Centers) to support the
radon community at large.
EPA has also helped broker broad-scale scientific consensus on radon risk, garnered
millions of dollars of donated media time for the Agency's radon media campaigns, and
generated high levels of awareness among the public, identifying radon as a health hazard. More
recently, EPA's partners have responded to EPA's call to reinvigorate action on the radon issue.
This effort is already yielding an important resurgence in interest and action, including a
substantial increase in reported State and local public outreach events occurring during National
Radon Action Month.
29

-------
08-P-0174
Below are OAR's responses to OIG's specific recommendations.
Develop a strategy for achieving the long-term goal of the IRAA by considering
using the authorities authorized by Congress under Section 310 of that Act, or
explain its alternative strategy.
Response: The goal of IRAA, stated in Section 301, is to "reduce radon levels in all
buildings to that of ambient outdoor air." The level of radon in outdoor air averages
about 0.4 pCi/L. Radon mitigation methods currently available can significantly reduce
the public's exposure to radon from high levels to appreciably lower levels, well below
our recommended action level of 4 pCi/L in many cases. They cannot typically or
reliably achieve a level so low as 0.4 pCi/L in a given dwelling, and certainly not in all
dwellings. Lacking technologically or economically feasible ways to meet the statutory
goal, the regulatory authority offered by Section 310 to meet the provisions of IRAA will
not enable its achievement. Accordingly, as discussed in further detail below, the
principal limitations to meeting the statutory goal are physical and technological. Thus,
before EPA can begin strategizing about how the regulatory authority offered by Section
310 might be utilized to meet the statutory goal, EPA must address the physical and
technological limitations to achieving the national goal.
Despite this, OAR agrees with the OIG that greater progress is needed and possible to
reduce public-health risk from radon. This conviction underlies our recent actions to
reinvigorate the program through clear Federal leadership and more aggressive and
focused public outreach, involving stronger organization and collaboration with States
and the radon industry. In response to this recommendation, OAR agrees to develop a
strategy as recommended in the context of our available approaches, authorities, and
resources.
See Appendix F
Note 1 for OIG Response
Identify limitations in the authorities authorized by Congress, as well as other
limitations that would preclude achieving the long-term IRAA goal, and report
these limitations to Congress as appropriate.
Response: As stated in section 2-1, OAR believes the long-term IRAA goal is not
achievable. The principal limitations to meeting the national goal are physical and
technological, not statutory. Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive element. Its
levels indoors can rise or fall based on such variables as soil-gas availability, relative
pressure, temperature, ventilation, and humidity. Indoor concentrations can also vary
according to the design and construction of an individual dwelling, as well as the living
habits of its occupants. We do not believe such geological and social limitations are
subject to remedy through legislative enactment. OAR will consider authorities and
limitations with respect to accelerating risk reduction in the context of the strategic
review we will conduct in response to Recommendation 2-1. This review will also

-------
08-P-0174
include the rationale and strategy for achieving any alternative to the long-term goal of
IRAA.
See Appendix F
Note 2 for OIG Response
2-3 Revise the Agency's performance measuring data to include metrics that will better
measure the magnitude of the potential radon problem in relation to the number of
homes at risk.
Response: We agree with OIG that tracking radon risk reduction in relation to total
homes at risk is another useful way to measure progress. We will therefore create an
additional measure calculating total active mitigations, combined with new homes built
with RRNC in Zone 1 areas, as a portion of all homes at risk.
See Appendix F
Note 3 for OIG Response
2-4 Revise how the Agency reports the Indoor Radon Program results in EPA's Annual
Performance and Accountability Report.
Response: EPA is obliged to report its results under requirements laid down by OMB in
its budgetary formulation and through the PART process. For this reason we will
continue to report homes mitigated and built RRNC, the results on which we have direct
influence, as OMB requires. In addition, we will propose to the Office of the Chief
Financial Officer and OMB the inclusion of the new measure described in
Recommendation 2-3 in future reports.
See Appendix F
Note 4 for OIG Response
Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on the draft evaluation report. If you
have questions, please contact Bill Long, Director for the Center of Radon and Air Toxics, at
(202)343-9733.
Attachments
31

-------
08-P-0174
Attachment
Additional Comments on OIG Evaluation Report: More Action Needed to Protect
Public from Indoor Radon Risks
Assignment No. 2007-0000398. February 13. 2008
General Comments
OAR believes that the IRAA long-term goal is not achievable and this belief highly
influences our response to two of the four OIG recommendations.
- EPA believes Federal-level voluntary methods are appropriate to this program and that,
given the many problems of design and implementation that would accompany a
structure of national mandates, Federal regulation is unlikely to provide a workable
solution to a unique, ubiquitous, and exceptionally complex public-health problem.
OAR believes that, when imposed at the appropriate level of government, regulatory
approaches to radon risk reduction may be warranted and often effective. An example is
the enactment of building codes which require radon-resistant techniques in new-home
construction. Historically, the authority to impose such restrictions was been exercised at
the state and local level.
See Appendix F
Note 5 for OIG Response
Specific Comments
"At a glance" section
"EPA's ability to achieve results with a voluntary program is limited."
OAR agrees, since the nature of the radon problem defies even the best efforts of Government to
meet the statutory goal. OAR believes EPA's ability to achieve results within a Federal-level
regulatory regime is also limited. While we have not yet solved the problem of radon exposure
using voluntary approaches, we do not believe these approaches should be abandoned.
See Appendix F
Note 6 for OIG Response
Page 3
"Instead, 4.0 pCi/1 of air is the point at which the cost to the homeowner for fixing the problem
(taking action) is warranted by the risk from the radon."
32

-------
08-P-0174
The action level was a technological/cost decision, not a health risk/cost based decision.
Footnote number 8 on page 9 provides a good, accurate explanation.
See Appendix F
Note 7 for OIG Response
Page 6
The "Noteworthy Achievements" section
OAR believes OIG should acknowledge EPA's substantial achievements in mitigation and
Radon-Resistant New Construction in this section. Viewed apart from the statutory goal, these
results are noteworthy given the ubiquity of the pollutant and the inherent difficulty of the task.
We believe the protection of more than 2 million potentially high-risk U.S. homes with radon
reducing features is significant, as is the avoidance of approximately 6,000 cumulative lung
cancer deaths. Other notable achievements include the establishment of an industry
infrastructure (a key to organizing risk reduction in a voluntary/market driven program). This
includes development of a private proficiency program for measurement and mitigation, the
establishment of a system of state programs (through SIRG) and the institution of training
capability (through the Regional Radon Training Centers) to support the radon community at
large.
EPA has also helped broker broad-scale scientific consensus on radon risk, garnered
millions of dollars of donated media time for the Agency's radon media campaigns, and
generated generally high levels of awareness among the public identifying radon as a health
hazard. More recently, EPA's partners have responded to EPA's call to reinvigorate action on
the radon issue. This effort is already yielding important results, including a substantial increase
in reported state and local public-outreach events occurring during National Radon Action
Month.
See Appendix F
Note 8 for OIG Response
Page 9
"Further, EPA has not exercised all the authorities granted to it by the 1988 IRAA. Due to
insufficient progress, each year EPA falls further behind in achieving the IRAA long-term goal
that indoor radon levels be no higher than outdoor levels."
We believe the report makes an incorrect inference that EPA's limited historical reliance on
Section 310 of IRAA is causally linked to a growing action gap. Also, it assumes achieving the
long-term IRAA goal is technically feasible.
See Appendix F
Note 9 for OIG Response
33

-------
08-P-0174
Page 9
. . below the 4.0 pCi/lL level, which is EPA's assessment that the cost to fix the problem is not
warranted by the risk from the radon."
As stated above, this is not how the 4.0 pCi/lL was set. Footnote number 8 on page 9 provides a
good, accurate explanation.
See Appendix F
Note 10 for OIG Response
Page 10
"A 1992 review by EPA's Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation concluded that the radon
program had made some progress in increasing radon awareness and testing. However, that
office also found that public information alone would not be sufficient to achieve significant
long-term risk reduction. Stronger actions, such as requiring radon testing in real estate
transactions and building radon-resistant new homes, were encouraged and seen as cost
effective"
OAR has reviewed the findings of this 16 year-old report. The study does recommend
consideration of strategies beyond public information to accelerate radon risk-reduction, some of
which EPA has adopted. While it does comment on the use of alternative regulatory approaches,
specifically in the areas of code amendment and real estate transfers, it places these
responsibilities within the province of state and local government.
See Appendix F
Note 11 for OIG Response
Page 11
"Adoption of Radon Codes and Regulations Inconsistent"
The report asserts that State and local adoption of codes has been "inconsistent". We believe this
characterization incorrectly implies a "one best way" approach to adoption of building codes.
The reality is that all States have different processes, and many do not have any statewide
building codes.
See Appendix F
Note 12 for OIG Response
34

-------
08-P-0174
Page 16
Congress authorized the EPA Administrator in Section 310 "to issue such regulations as may
be necessary to carry out" the provisions of the IRAA. To date, 19 years after the IRAA was
enacted, EPA has not proposed any indoor radon regulations."
In 1995 EPA cited Section 310 authority to promulgate a 'user-fee rule' as required by Sec.
305(e) of IRAA in order to defray the operating costs of EPA's then National Radon Proficiency
Program (NRPP). That program, initially authorized by IRAA for three years, is now managed
by private non-profit organizations, and the fee rule is no longer in effect. In addition, EPA used
authority under IRAA to promulgate two Federal grant programs (the State Indoor Radon Grants
and Performance Partnership Grants programs)
See Appendix F
Note 13 for OIG Response
35

-------
08-P-0174
Appendix F
OIG Evaluation of Agency Response
We acknowledge that addressing indoor radon is not an easy task. Radon is an odorless,
tasteless, and invisible gas. In our draft report, we acknowledged that there are numerous
impediments impacting EPA's progress, including inconsistencies in radon-related requirements
among State and local governments, and a lack of incentives for many key stakeholders. It is
clear that the Agency has made some progress; however, after nearly two decades of effort by
EPA, potential exposure to indoor radon continues to grow each year. EPA did not dispute the
data in this report, and has agreed to develop a strategy to further reduce public-health risk from
radon. EPA agreed that it has the authority to issue regulations for this program; however, it said
that before EPA can begin strategizing about how the regulatory authority offered by Section 310
might be utilized to meet the statutory goal, EPA must address the physical and technological
limitations to achieving the national goal. The Agency believes that the long-term goal of the
IRAA is not attainable, but acknowledges that greater progress toward the statutory goal is
needed and possible.
We continue to believe that more action is needed than "reinvigorating" the current program.
EPA should reassess its radon program strategy and structure, and inform Congress what level is
attainable considering technology and other factors, and what the Agency plans to do to achieve
this level.
Note 1- EPA acknowledges that the health risks from radon exposure remain high and has
agreed to develop a strategy as recommended by the OIG in the context of its
available approaches, authorities, and resources. We agree with EPA's planned
actions to develop a strategy.
Note 2- If the Agency believes that the long-term goal of the IRAA is not achievable, it
should report this to Congress as a program limitation. The Agency should also
inform Congress as to what level is attainable considering technology and other
factors, as well as what the Agency plans to do to achieve this level. We
acknowledge that there may be technical and policy limitations to attaining levels
of 0.4 pCi/L for indoor air at an affordable cost. We note that in 1992 EPA
determined that a level of 2.0 pCi/L for indoor air was achievable 70 percent of
the time. EPA also said that it plans to conduct a strategic review of its radon
program to include the rationale and strategy for achieving any alternative to the
long-term goal of IRAA. In our view EPA needs to seek Congress' approval of
any alternate long-term goals. We did not make changes to Recommendation 2-2.
Note 3- We agree with the Agency's planned actions to address Recommendation 2-3.
Note 4- We agree with the Agency's commitment to propose the measure to OMB. If
OMB does not approve the measure for inclusion in the Agency's Annual
Performance and Accountability Report, the Agency should consider other places
36

-------
08-P-0174
where the measure could be published, such as prominently displaying this on the
Agency's Indoor Radon Website.
Note 5- The OIG identified EPA's concerns with whether the IRAA long-term goal is
achievable. For example, in Chapter 2 our draft report stated "According to EPA,
there may be technical and policy limitations on the ability to attain levels of 0.4
pCi/L for indoor air (the average level for outdoor air) at an affordable cost."
After more than 19 years, we believe EPA needs to disclose to Congress and the
public that its Radon program will never achieve the goals Congress set for it.
Not reporting EPA's lack of capability and progress impedes Congress from
making informed decisions about Radon and the nation's health.
Note 6- We do not state in the report that the Agency's voluntary approach to the radon
program should be abandoned. We suggested developing alternatives for
reaching the goal of the IRAA. In the 19 years since Congress passed the IRAA
the number of homeowners potentially exposed to excessive radon has increased
each year. We recommended EPA reassess its radon program strategy and
structure for meeting the goal of the Indoor Radon Abatement Act. If the IRAA
long-term goal is the problem, then the Agency should inform Congress as to
what level is attainable considering technology and other factors, and what the
Agency plans to do to achieve this level.
Note 7- We revised the report based on this comment. We deleted "the point at which the
cost to the homeowner for fixing the problem (taking action) is warranted by the
risk" and added "was a decision based on EPA's assessment of technology and
cost".
Note 8- We did not make changes to the Noteworthy Achievements section. The report
already contained information in Chapters 1 and 2 and in the Appendices related
to the estimated homes with radon reducing features and the number of lives
saved. We believe that the information in the Noteworthy Achievements section
is descriptive of the Agency's accomplishments.
Note 9- The radon problem gets worse each year. We believe that the Agency should
reassess how to achieve desired results. As discussed in Chapter 2, multiple
factors have contributed to limit the progress made in the voluntary radon
program. There are disincentives for real estate agents, home inspectors, and
home sellers to conduct radon tests during real estate transactions. We also stated
in Chapter 2 that given the Agency's limited progress from its voluntary approach
for the past 19 years, it is time for the Agency to consider other means to achieve
the 1988 IRAA goal. As discussed in Note 2 above, if the Agency believes that
the long-term goal of the IRAA is not attainable, it should report this to Congress
as a limitation of the program. If this is the case, then the Agency should also
inform Congress as to what level is attainable considering technology and other
factors, and what the Agency plans to do to achieve this level.
37

-------
08-P-0174
Note 10- See our response in Note 7 above.
Note 11- We deleted the information related to the 1992 report from the Final Report.
Note 12- We do not believe there is a "one best way" to adopt radon codes; however, we do
point out that the current way is not producing the desired results. In this section
we point out the inconsistencies of the participants in the radon program and how
those inconsistencies limit EPA's ability to achieve greater results. As noted in
Chapter 2, some States and localities have not adopted radon building codes, and
in some areas where radon tests are performed the disclosure of results is
voluntary.
Note 13- No change necessary. This information is not pertinent to the issues addressed in
Chapter 2 of the report.
38

-------
08-P-0174
Appendix G
Distribution
Office of the Administrator
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation
Director, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air
Agency Follow-up Official (the CFO)
Agency Follow-up Coordinator
Audit Follow-up Coordinator, Office of Air and Radiation
Office of General Counsel
Associate Administrator for Congressional and Intergovernmental Relations
Associate Administrator for Public Affairs
Deputy Inspector General
39

-------