Are these changes needed? The 5 years that I was a Member of the School and Large Building Standard and chaired the Multifamily Mitigation Standard, the committees debated most of these issues. When we were finished, the Standards then went into public review cycle. I was proud to be asked by CARST to join Dr. Bill Angell and Jack Bartholomew (May he rest in peace) to teach in Canada. This was when some of the new Canadian Guidance was in development. In doing so was glad to get to know many top notch Radon Mitigators (Some on this thread).
“Reducing Radon Levels in Existing Homes: A Canadian Guide for Professional Contractors”, is a fine Publication / Standard but not a perfect set of instructions. Neither are the AARST-ANSI Standards. Problem is that structures vary. Soil, aggregates, foundations, climates, geologies air issues etc. etc. etc., create their own unique problems. Products, instruments, tools and methods are evolving. There’s no silver bullet for success, instead an accumulation of experiences and observations that hopefully will move us towards best designs and installations.
Not sure how change is addressed in the Canadian Guides, but Dallas (in this thread) has shown the way to address changes in the AARST-ANSI Standards. For those who are passionate, you will be considered and replied to in the review cycles. The AARST-ANSI Standards are fluid and designed to change as necessary.
John Mallon