Back To Blog

Exploring the Radon Issue

Earlier this week one of the principal real estate brokers of the largest firm in Burlington suggested that my company's Radon Addendum "incorrectly states that 2 pCi/L is the US EPA recommended acceptable level for radon. The actual level recommended by the US EPA is 4.0 pCi/L."

I would understand if a junior agent made such a comment but for a principal of the largest local firm to make such a statement stunned me. Here is language directly from the EPA's website: "EPA recommends that Americans consider fixing their homes when the radon level is between 2 pCi/L and 4 pCi/L."

Clearly the EPA does not think that 4pCi/L is an acceptable radon level and our Radon Addendum correctly states the EPA's position.

I urge all real estate professionals to educate themselves so that they know of what they speak. To learn more about EPA's radon regulations, click here.

 

If you still have questions about radon or any other housing regulations, contact us here.

Add Comment

Comments are moderated. Please be patient if your comment does not appear immediately. Thank you.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Comments

  1. Concerned on

    From the EPA Radon Site: EPA Recommends Test your home for radon — it's easy and inexpensive. Fix your home if your radon level is 4 picocuries per liter, or pCi/L, or higher. Radon levels less than 4 pCi/L still pose a risk, and in many cases may be reduced.

    • Jacqueline on

      Hi my name is Jacqueline and I just wanted to drop you a quick note here instead of calling you. I discovered your Exploring the Vermont Radon Issue | Flat Fee Real Estate - Rob Foley page and noticed you could have a lot more visitors. I have found that the key to running a successful website is making sure the visitors you are getting are interested in your subject matter. There is a company that you can get targeted traffic from and they let you try the service for free for 7 days. I managed to get over 300 targeted visitors to day to my website. Visit them here: http://t8k.me/wl Jacqueline http://txsc.us/t4ut

      • John on

        Is smoking that bad for you? Is there a "science-settled" link beewten smoking and cancer?I have been a smoker for about 25 years. No cancer. My pulse and BP are the same as they were when I was a teenager and have never varied in my life.My grandfather was a heavy smoker all of his life. He died after his 90th birthday ... not cancer.I'm not saying that smoking doesn't cause cancer. I'm just not convinced that it does either. Seriously - when did any government agency present anything other than their declaration that they have determined an industry (a big one) was bad for you and should be heavily taxed and regulated?