Kyle, thanks for moderating the Standards Webinar yesterday. Lots of Great information, especially the update on which standards are new, how they are used by others (HUD, EPA, CRCPD), which are in the pipeline, and what the harmonization process is all about.

Let me add a relevant experience.
I have several thousands of multiple branch active radon mitigation systems installed.
There were two documented failures by me of activated systems of passive systems that had originally been installed in the USA by others, where discharge of radon vent pipes were under soffits that also have (soffit) vents. The ultimate proof that this was the cause for high indoor radon levels was that after several other modifications that did not work and a pressure field that was complete from the beginning by moving the discharge to above the upper roof in one case and in the other case more than 10 feet away from the soffit vents solved the problem. I gave a talk about this at the San Diego AARST Symposium with an article that can be found on the AARST website.
Soffit vents at regular distance along all soffits are very common in the area of the USA where I live and work due to potential Summer attic overheating issues. It is my understanding that soffit vents are not common in Canada because due to its northern climate this overheating issue does not appear to be much of a problem, (although they have their function also in moisture removal, if entered). Conversely, I have been told the danger of these vents in the climate North from where I live allows snow blowing into attics via these vents. This latter argument was used to me by a builder in Wyoming for not having installed roof vents on his house (where that Summer the attic overheated and the 150 W fan died. An IR-temp meter registered 155 degree F in that attic (Yes fans stop running at 140 F having a themal protection, but this fan really was fried) when I replaced the fan, which is why I urged the owner to talk to his builder).
Unless a rim-joist discharge study includes Homes with soffit vents that are directly above the rim joist exhaust it does not reflect the stock of houses built in our area, and I have documented the potential of a negative effect of radon reentrainment on discharges under soffit vents.
Leo Moorman
Radon Home Measurement and Mitigation, Inc.
Fort Collins CO, USA

I agree with Tammy, It depends on what is known. When I read your post first time for some reason I was assuming you were the testing company that had done the first phase testing as a pre-purchase testing for that same client, thus that you had generated all the reports and did 100%/10%/10% already. In that case I discuss with client that the ANSI/AARST protocol only requires those that were high to be tested in Phase 2. If I do not have that report, or the report shows the first test was not following ANSI/AARST protocol, I propose to follow that protocol.with 100%/10%/10%, letting them know that 100% testing of all rooms on upper floors is not required by the protocol. However if they insist they do want 100% of all units per building I would give them an estimate with each Option A and Option B and let them sign which Option they choose.
Furthermore, it is important and I make a point that a single test per building in a pre-purchase test (not compliant with ANSI/AARST) showing a low radon test result does not exclude other units in that same building to be high and that a new Phase I test following the ANSI/AARST protocol could resolve that in the other buildings that were low (adding an Option C).

Thanks Chad

(I am in an unregulated state)
I try to balance this question the following ways.
I do a test (I am NRPP Certified for testing) I send the report and when the test is high I let the client know they can request a mitigation estimate from my company ( I am NRPP certified for Mitigation as well) but the client will have to initiate that with a request, and they have the right to ask others of course, so I do not "lock them in for the mitigation" with my test.
There is one exception to the above: If I get a call from someone who specifically asks up front in the first phone conversation if I can provide both services for them because they just want to deal with a single company (and this happens regularly). In that case I feel I can obey their wishes. As I have quoted several times on the Old Listserve the exact language of the EPA document, this approach is not against the old EPA mitigation standards.

Leo Moorman
Radon Home Measurement and Mitigaiton, Inc.
Fort Collins, CO

Tony,
thanks for highlighting my form. Let me not just address your question here but the larger issue what I advise anybody to do if they have this question (anywhere in the world who is on this forum or reads this later in an archived form). It seems to me that there is no universal way to approach your question. Several years ago when I made this form the prevalent idea on websites (of other trades) was to be short and only ask for name and email address. Of course I wanted to try something new. Website consultants consistently advised me against my approach when they saw it. The first thing you need to ask (I asked) is (1) how people use computers (or in general "access" your form) in your target area, which is not static as it may evolve and has evolved over the years. The next is (2) who your target audience is and gear the approach and number of questions towards them. Next (3) there is a certain stock of jobs in your service area and the questions have to be relevant to what you know which jobs are out there within the region you service. Finally (4) there is competition and not everyone in your area should apply the same method to appeal to the same customer. As you can see I am very much against advising anyone to decide the question you ask by a pole as you do above, because in my opinion everyone needs to answer those 4 questions for themselves before jumping into formulating a list of detailed questions. That is why I vote "other", even though I made this form specific to my situation only. It does not mean I am not happy with my form. I just want to caution others that this approach just may not work for everyone.

Ok, did the same as discussed, I found the star at bottom of the list.
I also wanted to mention I have been automatically de-listed a few days ago from the original Listserve when adding a second answer to one of the posts, which seems to be the same problem we have had for years after a certain number of posts because the AOL platform I use assumes the Iowa listserve emails sent to me are Spam. I tried to work on my side with them but they were adement it is not their fault and it needed to be resolved onteh Iowa side.
This time the Iowa Listserve auto answer said they had received 4 spam notification return mails from my AOL account since May. The folks in Iowa eventually got around it in the past in some ingeneous way, but I am not bothering Bill with another request at this time because it is towards the end of the Iowa Listserve.
Just mentioning it that (I expect) the same may happen with this list's response system and not only with me but anyone with an AOL account, and if so an appropriate solution needs to be found.
FYI This is my first attempt at a post on this new Listserve and we will see how that works out.