Yes, absolutely. These professionals should be licensed so the training and testing methods are uniform and reliable. Also, uniform reporting of any test results should be written in such a manner so any lay person could understand what is being presented to them. In addition, when purchasing or selling a property, the property owner should be able to acquire results one can rely on. Unfortunately, the radon industry can appear to operate on a 'trust us' model, where the average homeowner is expected to make potentially costly decisions based on data they cannot see, measure, or independently verify, which can lead one to question whether one is being genuinely informed or simply sold a bill-of-goods. 

Absolutely NO. Yet another regulatory disaster and more expenses for homeowners and taxpayers. 

Gentlemen:
I am a licensed Electrical Contractor-Unlimited in Florida. I have been licensed in several states in the past. I have noted some discrepancies as to the qualifications that vary from state to state in my profession. 
Realizing that the Department of Health is responsible for licensing, under DBPR in Florida Statutes Chapter 404 (Section 404.056),  regarding Radon Inspection, mitigation and remediation these regulations should apply, as long as the standard applies to all doing business in Florida. Should a business entity wish to possess a license in Florida for this service, they must meet all qualifications for a license in Florida. There should be no “grandfathering” of any out-of-state business for Radon work of any kind unless it is proven that the out-of-state standard is either higher or equal to Florida’s qualification statute. This particularly applies to grandfathering. The state that the entity comes from may change their standard of qualifications. All qualifications for licensure must be met to comply with Florida Statute and regulation at the time of application for licensure in Florida and those qualifications must be equal to or greater than the entity coming from out of state. 
What I do not want to see is entities coming to Florida to take business from companies that do have to comply with business operations in Florida. 
Therefore I propose that any company coming into the state wishing to enter into business under a Radon license must operate under a licensed, legitimate business that already does business in Florida. Example: If a company wants to do business in Electrical Contracting Profession in Florida but possess no license to do so, would be able to hire a licensed contractor to be their representative on that particular project as a qualified business agent of the entity wanting to provide services in Florida. The same criteria should apply to out-of-state companies not directly licensed in Florida to provide Radon testing or Radon mitigation and remediation services. If a company wants to do business in Florida under their own business license, they should be required to meet all the obligations other resident businesses have to comply with. They must comply with all regulations to perform business services in Florida; licensure, insurance, etcetera.

I feel this is the only way to treat all businesses that operate in Florida fairly and on a level playing field. 

The Commonwealth already requires(by law) a certified NRSB or NRPP professional to preform Mitigation and Measurement. Having a certified license requires the professional to follow national guidelines ANSI/AARST protocols and standards. Anymore regulatory action is unnecessary and will overall negatively affect the consumer and taxpayer. I say NO.

The National Radon Proficiency Program is already in place providing certification and regulation for devices and measurement professionals. I am certified through this program. My status is:

Certification ID #110406-RMP Expires: 2027-02-28,   ACTIVE

Recognizing the NRPP will save money for DPOR.

At a minimum, make it optional to accept NRPP certifications

As a stakeholder, I see no need to regulate radon professionals beyond the current system.

The current system and Virginia code already REQUIRE all radon professionals to be certified by one of two approved national organizations, each with its own requirements and procedures for demonstrating proficiency, knowledge, QA, equipment calibration/certification of measurement equipment, and regulates all aspects of radon work (measurement technicians, specialists, remediators, and laboratories of all tiers).  The organizations have their own systems for handling complaints, license review, and disciplinary action. 

Implementing state licensure is a redundant layer that provides no additional value and consumes valuable resources with no measurable ROI.

VA requires NRSB or NRPP certification of all radon professionals and much is already required to obtain and maintain that certificate. One thing the proposal left out is that organizations can respond to complaints and take corrective action against their members. The main problem is that there is no inspection or enforcement provision written in the state Code and as a result, VA cannot currently take any effective action against uncertified individuals who illegally offer radon services.

The post-COVID realty market in VA has dramatically changed and vastly reduced the number of Home Inspections and professional radon tests/mitigation jobs that are conducted through realty transactions. Consequently, many radon professionals are currently struggling to stay in business. Imposing significant new state licensing fees & other requirements might possibly drive many of them out of business. 

Like many others have mentioned. NRSB has regulations for our licenses. Class time, testing, continuing education and more. We are regulated and must meet certain requirements to not only obtain but keep our license. What would adding to this benefit the client? It sounds like we would just be paying more fees to another place. 

No, The state doesn't need to collect money and pay someone to do what is already being done. NRSB does a fine job of regulating radon.

No inherent risk to public welfare - no more regulation.  No more restriction of lawful free enterprise. 

I believe this profession needs to adhere to state guidance just like many other professions. 

I also believe that there should be standardized tests regulated by the state. 

Have you seen a code book it's thicker than a dictionary. I remember when it was the size of a paper back. The board should review that colossus and cut regulations. "What if" is no excuse for new rules. Examples; what if a hurricane hits? All houses need to be framed with i beams! What if someone falls down steps? All houses need elevators! What if we have a meteor shower? All roofs need to be made of plate steel! What if you catch your sleeve or loose clothes on a railing? All railings need to be turned into a wall or turned down. The last example is already a ridiculous rule.

I am a Virginia Licensed Home Inspector and an NRPP-certified radon measurement professional. My comments are specifically directed toward short-term radon testing, which is commonly performed during real estate transactions and frequently marketed to homeowners as a means of assessing radon risk. The majority of radon tests I perform are associated with real estate transactions, providing me direct experience with how consumers use and interpret short-term radon testing.

The primary concern with radon is long-term exposure. Radon levels naturally fluctuate from day to day and season to season, often increasing during colder months when homes are closed and stack-effect pressures are greater. A 48-hour test provides only a snapshot of conditions and cannot determine a home's true long-term average radon level.

Ironically, many of the lowest-cost radon testing options available to consumers provide more useful information than the most commonly performed professional test. A long-term monitor costing a fraction of a professionally administered 48-hour test can provide a better picture of a home's actual radon exposure because it captures seasonal and day-to-day fluctuations that short-term testing cannot. The Virginia Department of Health also provides free radon test kits to consumers, further increasing access to testing without the need for additional regulatory burdens.

In my opinion, additional licensing requirements for radon measurement professionals will have minimal, if any, impact on consumer protection. The limitations of short-term testing are inherent to the testing method and cannot be addressed through additional licensure.

At the same time, the economics of professional radon testing are becoming increasingly challenging. I am seeing more requests to subcontract testing from professionals who have chosen not to renew their certifications because the service is difficult to offer profitably after accounting for equipment costs, calibration requirements, continuing education, insurance, certification fees, and administrative overhead. Additional state licensing requirements would further increase costs, likely reducing the number of professionals offering testing services while increasing costs to consumers.

The Commonwealth should also consider that consumers already have access to inexpensive long-term monitoring devices and free test kits through the Virginia Department of Health. Increasing the regulatory burden on professional testing services is unlikely to meaningfully improve consumer protection when lower-cost testing options are already widely available.

In my opinion, the most effective consumer protection measures are education and improved building practices. Radon-resistant construction techniques, including passive radon systems, should be encouraged or required in all new homes, not just those located in areas identified as high-risk on EPA radon maps. Elevated radon levels are routinely found outside those mapped areas, including homes built on the Yorktown Formation and homes constructed with imported fill materials.

If additional oversight is deemed necessary, I encourage the Commonwealth to focus on public education, enforcement of existing requirements, and radon-resistant construction practices rather than creating additional regulatory burdens for professionals who are already certified through nationally recognized programs.