EPA Certified Firms and Renovators

[ChrWright]

So who else has taken the Certified Renovator course?

I took the class today... a few tid bits:

You can apply to be a Certified Firm before you take the class to become a Certified Renovator (I know, seems odd to me too). If you haven't scheduled yourself for a class, at least apply for your company to be a Certified Firm--this will take up to 90 days for the EPA to get back to you. You're a Certified Renovator as soon as you take the class, pass the test, and receive your credentials (comes from the firm giving the class, not the EPA)--but you still have apply to the EPA to be a Certified Firm.

The EPA claims to have 'studied' the impact of the new requirements and pegged the cost impact at $35 a project. This number is ridiculous. The paperwork requirement alone will require much more than that, just in labor.

Buckle up folks, it's going to be a bumpy ride as this goes into effect.

[Blue]

I hope you are referring to the lead based paint cert? If not I'm in trouble because this is the first I'm hearing of this cert. Do you have a link?

[ChrWright]

Yes, this is related to the rules taking effect April 2010, for renovation of homes and child care facilities built prior to 1978. (Any work which disturbs painted surfaces).

Companies doing the work must be Certified Firms (application and $300 to EPA), and projects must be supervised by a Certified Renovator--an individual who has taken an EPA approved certification class (1-day). The folks actually doing the work (non-certified workers) have to have been trained in lead safe practices by a Certified Renovator.

http://epa.gov/lead/pubs/sbcomplianceguide.pdf

[ChrWright]

Anyone know where I can buy a truck load of visqueen before the price goes up? :rolleyes3:

[Blue]

Thank you Chris for bringing this to light. It may save us in fines. I got the cert about 6 years ago for my government work we do, but I had no idea this would eventually encompass the standard remodeling job until I read your post.

April of 2010. I suggest you all read the pdf Chris posted and how it affects you. I jist read it and it says I have to recertify every 5 years so my current cert is no good. &^%$

[ChrWright]

Painters have it the roughest, IMHO. I can't see how anyone can come close to full compliance when doing outside pressure washing.

[Blue]

Painters have it the roughest, IMHO. I can't see how anyone can come close to full compliance when doing outside pressure washing.

According to my course that would be strictly prohibited.

[ChrWright]

The outside requirements are 10' of plastic... but with pressure washing they showed these wierd damms you're supposed to create with plastic and bracing. No mention of how the hell you're supposed to collect all the water... and all they'd say about disposal is "Check your local regulations".

Dry waste can go straight in the dumpster (after you bag/wrap every last stick of trim and chunk of plaster you remove).

[RCP]

Thanks for the info Chris. This is going to be a huge change for many of us.
I worry about the hacks, but having the certification will certainly help to differentiate your company.
Has any one ordered the materials? There are videos, pamphlets and books you can order for free. I talked about it here (http://www.painttalk.com/f2/lead-paint-laws-5383/).
There is a pamphlet you are required to have signed by HO.

Another issue is the cost of insurance, my agent said it would start at 3,000 a year, on top of my regular insurance.

[Century Man]

My class starts tomorrow morning at 0715.

[ChrWright]

The Renovate Right pamphlet has been out for awhile, and is the paperwork you have to get the owners to sign off on.

NARI sells packs of them--but you can print your own off the EPA site if you want.

http://epa.gov/lead/pubs/renovaterightbrochure.pdf

[ChrWright]

If you work on HUD homes, the restrictions are even worse... with independent testing required at the end of clean-up.

There are lawsuits in progress to require testing at the end of EVERY project covered by the regs.

Also lawsuits to remove the option for an owner to opt-out of the requirements if no children live in the house.

[Eieio]

If you work on HUD homes, the restrictions are even worse... with independent testing required at the end of clean-up.

The 203K's are going this way with the lead and the mold issues..

The last job we did had mold in the basement 600 sf, it cost 18K to remove the mold..

Now add the Lead paint removal on top of that

[ChrWright]

My class starts tomorrow morning at 0715.

You're in the CONNOR class, right?

We started at 715 as well... I was on the road at 4.

Test is 20 questions or so, and a piece of cake if you pay attention. Multiple choice...

[Blue]

If you work on HUD homes, the restrictions are even worse... with independent testing required at the end of clean-up.


You wont pass lab on your first attempt. No way. I always need two to pass.

[ChrWright]

The 203K's are going this way with the lead and the mold issues..

The last job we did had mold in the basement 600 sf, it cost 18K to remove the mold..

Now add the Lead paint removal on top of that

One of the guys in class with me today was trying to put together a project for a 6 story apartment building. The owner was getting financing through a HUD loan (can remember the number). He was pretty certain the new regs would seriously jeopardize his project getting off the ground.

[SLS-Construction]

I just got my personal cert two days ago - I am going to apply the firm cert after the start of the year so I should have it in time...

The opt-out option appears to be disappearing & then they are planning on eliminating the self testing within a year, making you use a third party testing firm for the cleanup

It just keeps getting better & better - pretty soon it will be as bad as asbestos testing & removal

The one issue I have with the third party test is that if lead dust was already in the carpet - there is no removing all the dust without replacing the carpet completely - correct? So how can you pass the test if your doomed from the start?

[Eieio]

How are they going to enforce this rule??? I know they will make examples of a few guys but how will it be enforced??

It is going to cause even more illegal construction activity.. The concept looks good on paper but the reality blows

[ChrWright]

Some of the CONNOR folks helped write the requirements... Our instructor said the same about the exclusions and testing... but the consensus is the third party testing will have a tough time passing given how expensive it is.

[ChrWright]

How are they going to enforce this rule??? I know they will make examples of a few guys but how will it be enforced??

It is going to cause even more illegal construction activity.. The concept looks good on paper but the reality blows

I agree. NARI put out to me on Twitter today that: "According to EPA, enforcement will be when someone in home gets sick from lead or other remodelers reporting to local authority."

[Eieio]

I agree. NARI put out to me on Twitter today that: "According to EPA, enforcement will be when someone in home gets sick from lead or other remodelers reporting to local authority."




So no real enforcement, an increase by my guess of 20-30% in the remodeling cost depending on the project, plus fees to be certified, during a down economy?

Yeah this is a winner for sure. :rolleyes3:

[ChrWright]

On an major renovation--the impact is going to be huge.

Even if I'm just doing a kitchen--not only do I have to contain the room, but I have to wrap all debris in plastic before it leaves that room. All the trim, cabinets, plaster, etc.

I have a trash hauling/demo co I hire for that kind of grunt work. The labor rate for that kind of work will have to go up--those people have to be trained and have to comply with lead safe practices.

No more hauling stuff out in a rolling trash can. No more chucking stuff out the window. Windows have to be shut at all times. Doors sealed. Exit doors with double plastic barrier.

[Eieio]

Talk about lost productivity..

Can you imagine all your workers and subs wearing the moon man suits trying to get the hang of working in the gear??

How do you take a smoke break??

[ChrWright]

It's likely to get dumped in the lap of county level code enforcement. The first thing they'll ask is "where is the money going to come from for this?"

[ChrWright]

Talk about lost productivity..

Can you imagine all your workers and subs wearing the moon man suits trying to get the hang of working in the gear??

How do you take a smoke break??

Worker protection is only recommended by these regs. Suits, gloves, respirators, etc. OSHA rules apply there, and would depend on the size of firm.

[WarnerConstInc.]

On an major renovation--the impact is going to be huge.

No more hauling stuff out in a rolling trash can. No more chucking stuff out the window. Windows have to be shut at all times. Doors sealed. Exit doors with double plastic barrier.

Agggghhhhhh!!!

No more chucking out the window?

I don't want to carry all that nasty crap down someone's nice ass stairs.

[ChrWright]

Agggghhhhhh!!!

No more chucking out the window?

I don't want to carry all that nasty crap down someone's nice ass stairs.

Yes... and on a nice hot day... with the vents covered... :smash::censored:

[WarnerConstInc.]

Yes... and on a nice hot day... with the vents covered... :smash::censored:

Damn you, AC hadn't crossed my mind yet.

How much is a space suit?? Those things are air conditioned, right?

[Splinter]

You guys are making it sound like EVERY project is going to have these hassles... I'm certain we have many houses here on LI that were built before 1978 that dont have any lead paint in them....

How would the new regs affect me if Im working on an older home that's lead free?

[ChrWright]

Better tell your hardwood refinishers too...

Lots of old varnishes, shellacs & stains had lead in them, too.


This stuff is important. Lead has a serious impact on the health of children and I'm not complaining about having to comply to prevent that--but if this isn't handled properly it's going to seriously hurt those of us who play by the rules.

After the fact, "gotcha" style enforcement isn't going to work.

[WarnerConstInc.]

You guys are making it sound like EVERY project is going to have these hassles... I'm certain we have many houses here on LI that were built before 1978 that dont have any lead paint in them....

How would the new regs affect me if Im working on an older home that's lead free?

I believe it wouldn't?

Most houses around here remain realitivley un-touched for at least the last 30 years+. I have 2 little girls living in an old house that I am working on. That is why I bought a couple green tools almost 2 years ago.

[ChrWright]

You guys are making it sound like EVERY project is going to have these hassles... I'm certain we have many houses here on LI that were built before 1978 that dont have any lead paint in them....

How would the new regs affect me if Im working on an older home that's lead free?

You have to get the owner's permission and perform a test.

Some owners won't allow you to test because if lead is found, it must legally become part of the disclosure at re-sale. If they don't want a test--you must assume lead is present and comply with lead safe practices.

There are three ways to test, only one of which is relatively cheap... and that test isn't accurate on plaster or drywall. So unless you spring for the expensive test--you have to assume it has lead if you're in a pre 1978 house.

[ChrWright]

To even perform the test, you have to be a Certified Renovator (the basic stick test). Bottom line, if you work on a pre-1978 house or child care facility, lead free or not, you have to comply with certification, notification, testing, and record keeping.

If someone gets sick, they're going to come to you and ask where your paperwork is. You'll have to be able to show them that you tested, where you tested, and that you notified the owner of the results.

[neolitic]

My guess is that some of the enforcement
will get tied up in court for a while, and
eventually it will settle back to a more
manageable level, like the asbestos abatement
has.
Of course I may not still be around by then....http://i634.photobucket.com/albums/uu61/neoliticman/smilieshifty.gif

[Century Man]

OMGI just got home from the class and my head is still spinning. This is the real deal so don't try to figure a way around it. I'm glad I took the class early so I have time to devolop a plan of action.

[orson]

I see a serious potential for smaller companies who comply going flat broke losing work to the significant number of other small companies that don't comply.

[ChrWright]

Ridiculous:

"It is difficult to determine with any amount of certainty whether this final rule will have unintended consequences. However, EPA agrees that it is important to minimize disincentives for using certified renovation firms who follow the work practices required by this rule. EPA also agrees that practicality is an important consideration. Given the relatively low estimated overall average per-job cost of this final rule, which is $35, and the relatively easy-to-use work practices required by this final rule, EPA does not expect the incremental costs associated with this rule to be a determinative factor for consumers. However, that relatively low cost has resulted in part from EPA's efforts to contain the costs of this rule in order to avoid creating disincentives for using certified renovation firms, and EPA has viewed the comments received with those considerations in mind."

From page 21702 of the Federal Register, Vol. 73, No. 78, Tuesday April 22, 2008. 40 CFR Part 745
Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program; Lead Hazard Information Pamphlet; Notice of Availability; Final rule


For the average, tiny, handyman project--$35 might come close. But for most remodeling activities that number is a gross under estimation of what compliance will cost.

If you look at the results of the studies these rules were based on (page 21697), you'll notice something major missing. They didn't study the exposure from projects that were thoroughly cleaned (HEPA vacs and wet cleaning) without all of the elaborate containment protocols.

With dry vacuuming and sweeping alone, post-renovation lead levels were reduced by 95%-98%. If you simply improved clean-up, how much more benefit are you getting by having to wrap everything up and carry it through the house?

It makes no sense to me that under these rules, if I'm doing a kitchen for example, I don't have the option to remove debris through a window--but must instead carry it through the house.

I'm not disputing that for minor projects, the impact won't be significant. But for a major renovation to an old house--bath update, kitchen, etc.--the cost will be significant.

[framer55]

Chris, if for example, I was replacing the windows in a house with the vinyl replacement windows, how would you contain?

Would you have to "contain" each window?
It dounds like it could be very hard to comply.

[SLS-Construction]

Tape the plastic over the window opening on the inside - work only from the exterior & vacumn, or build a 6' x 6' area around each window if working from the inside.

[Century Man]

Exterior Containment:
1. lay protective plastic sheeting on the ground below the work area to at least 10 feet from the house. ........
2.
3. Remove toys and other items from the work area and cover all play areas, including sand boxes. Protect items that cannot be moved with plastic protective sheeting.
4. staple or tape the protective plastic sheeting to the wall of the building, or use a 2x4 wrapped in protective plastic sheeting to hold the material next to the wall.

Daily cleaning. and on and on and on

[Eieio]

The more I read about this stuff.. I think Painters and window installers are going to get reamed on this new rule..

[RCP]

I was going to apply for just Lead Assessor so I could do the testing required by banks and realtors, maybe offer to HOs. After learning more, I think not, the investment just won't pay off. In my area, not a lot of older homes any way. I think this is going to be a huge PITA for many!

[Dusty]

These new standards are absolutly infuriating. We all know that this issue with lead has been blown out of proportion. I will not deny that lead can be problematic, however there are already sandards in place.

How the heck can the EPA tell you that this will only cost an additional $35 per job? the cost of certification, testing, insurance, additional labor, materials, disposal.
It will have a big impact on the remodeling and housing industry.
And you wonder why so many choose to do business beneath the govt's radar. The constant implementation of absurd laws turn honest people into criminals.

In the mean while Chinese toys clutter dollar store shelves and scumball renters tear the hell out of low income rental properties. Poisoning their own children with the holes they punch in the walls.

[dan-o]

The more I read about this stuff.. I think Painters and window installers are going to get reamed on this new rule..

Yep.

My biggest issue with these regulations is that all responsibility to follow procedure falls on contractors. If the HO faced the huge fines for using a non-cert firm the playing field would be more level. As it stands, the HO will take a chance on the non-cert contractor based on price and, even if the guy gets busted, the HO faces no penalty.

As for cost, miles of plastic aside, I imagine following the regs will add $350+ per day in labor to the job price. Basically, I'll need one guy constantly cleaning/setting up throughout the day on an exterior.

[framer55]

Exterior Containment:
1. lay protective plastic sheeting on the ground below the work area to at least 10 feet from the house. ........
2.
3. Remove toys and other items from the work area and cover all play areas, including sand boxes. Protect items that cannot be moved with plastic protective sheeting.
4. staple or tape the protective plastic sheeting to the wall of the building, or use a 2x4 wrapped in protective plastic sheeting to hold the material next to the wall.

Daily cleaning. and on and on and on



May I ask how you are supposed to put up a ladder with plastic under the legs?
Sounds like an OSHA violation to me.

[dan-o]

May I ask how you are supposed to put up a ladder with plastic under the legs?
Sounds like an OSHA violation to me.

My instructor said to put a sheet of plywood over the plastic. :laugh3:
After discussing the realities, he said we could slit the plastic to allow direct ground contact as long as the ladder leg openings were sealed with duct tape both while ladder was in place and after each ladder move.

[framer55]

My instructor said to put a sheet of plywood over the plastic. :laugh3:
After discussing the realities, he said we could slit the plastic to allow direct ground contact as long as the ladder leg openings were sealed with duct tape both while ladder was in place and after each ladder move.

So everytime you move a ladder you have to reslit the plastic and cut new slits, and tape the ladder to it?

Wow, I can see this is well thought out on the EPA's part.
How can they possibly say it will only cost $35?

[dan-o]

Yeah, slit/seal with every move. By the end of the day my plastic (which must be thrown out every day despite continual cleaning) will be rigid silver mats. I'll spend over $35 just on tape.

[ChrWright]

For anyone interested in the efforts to modify the opt-out and clearance requirements of the RRP Rule:

http://www.sierraclub.org/communities/lead/2009-08-24-epa-rrp-settlement.pdf

http://www.nchh.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=4%2bwfY%2fDX6P0%3d&tabid=204

http://www.nchh.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=dXBvk4ydrjE=&tabid=204

http://www.nchh.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=BpQsF0plKP4=&tabid=204


Some really interesting comments on the estimated costs:
http://www.nchh.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=y/0i7DicAWM=&tabid=204

[ChrWright]

The SBA's comments on the opt-out settlement:

A lot to agree with here:

http://www.sba.gov/advo/laws/comments/epa09_1127.html

As we pointed out in our earlier comments on the proposed LRRP,(13) Advocacy believes that while some renovation activities can generate significant amounts of lead dust that could pose a human health hazard, there is not sufficient evidence that renovation activities by private contractors or building owner personnel, as opposed to homeowners, contribute to an increased risk of elevated blood levels (EBL) in children. EPA's final rule relies on both the Phase III study(14) and two New York State Department of Health studies(15) to show a relationship between renovation activities and children's health. The Phase III study was addressed in the SBREFA panel report. While these studies provide some evidence that renovation by homeowners (or sloppy work by contractors) can result in EBL, they do not provide evidence that the proposed procedures will enhance public health. Advocacy believes that the evidence in fact shows that private contractors (i.e., professional renovators) subject to reasonable cleanup standards, including the "no visible dust or debris" standard, do not create additional health hazards. Since the evidence was so weak for young children, it is much weaker for older children and adults who do not ingest lead dust from the floor, windowsills or soil.

Finally, EPA cited two additional references in the LRRP final rule to demonstrate that EBL is associated with renovation. However, the first study by the New York State Department of Health, found that 6.9 percent of the children had EBL, and this was associated with renovation. Unfortunately, this study is not reliable since it did not compare the 6.9 percent EBL with a control group of New York households that had not undergone renovation within the two year period.(16) Given the large magnitude of residences studied that undergo renovation each year, Advocacy does not believe that this figure reveals a relationship with renovation activities. The follow-up study by New York State remedied the first error, and did include a control group.(17) While this study did find EBL associated with renovation, the increase disappeared when the study excluded the test samples that did not follow the study protocol: clean the floor until there is no visible dust. EPA’s attempt to dismiss the study in the final rule by stating that the “study did not measure dust lead levels” does not address the fact that there was no effect shown when there was no visible dust.(18) This is consistent with our contention that a “no visible dust” standard is all that is needed here. Under the current LRRP and any modification to the opt-out provision, there is no need for an additional cleaning verification step, if there is no visible dust, and the firm follows lead-safe practices (whether under EPA rules or lead-safe guidance). The lack of visible dust can be easily handled using an EPA-specified checklist, without the need for comprehensive panoply of EPA paperwork, cleaning verification and training requirements.

Powerful stuff there.

[ChrWright]

The NAR estimates on the cost of the rule:

http://tinyurl.com/yhuug22

In summary, EPA estimated the total cost impacts from the proposed rule to be approximately $531 million per year. Exponent’s estimate, as summarized above, included significant secondary impacts to the real estate, property management, and public housing authorities, and is at least $1.5 billion, approximately three times EPA’s estimate...

[RCP]

It just keeps getting better!:rolleyes3:

Thanks ChrisW for keeping this going.:2thumbsup:
You have posted some great info here and CT and Linkedin and Twitter and.....
More good info than I seen in the past few months!

[ChrWright]

You'll love reading this:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv29n2/v29n2-mercreport.pdf

The epa’s motives for pushing new
regulations onto the nation’s r&r
workers are undoubtedly pure. But
this policy is likely to do much more
harm than good. The proposed rules
are chasing a problem that does not
exist and will hurt both workers and
consumers, while doing little for
America’s children. There is a time
and a place for regulations, but they
should be employed when they are
needed, where they are effective, and
only if their costs are low and their
benefits high. Despite good intentions,
the epa’s proposed rules for renovation
and remodeling work meet none
of these criteria.

[ChrWright]

I wanted to bump this up, in case anyone missed the links I posted last night.

[ChrWright]

Most significant to me is the SBA's response... link posted on previous page: #50.

[Eieio]

I told Paul today that I think this rule will be repealed by the end of next year..

[framer55]

I told Paul today that I think this rule will be repealed by the end of next year..

You might be right as they gave tnemselves a new target today.

Look for CO2 regs by the end of next year. Maybe we will have to have a catalitic converter on our mouths so we don't pollut:thumbsdown:

[ChrWright]

New link: http://www.afhh.org/aboutus/pubs/presentations_RepairingRRP_MacRoy.pdf

[ChrWright]

http://oswaldadventures.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/festivus.jpg


http://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/pdf/FourthReport.pdf

[ChrWright]

http://www.fwbusiness.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5784&Itemid=6

In Indiana, 70 percent of the housing stock, or about 1.5 million homes, were built before 1978, Robinson said. He estimates there is lead-based paint in about 700,000 Indiana homes.

Just setting up and tearing down enough plastic to protect an area such as a bathroom or kitchen where work will be done can add $300 to a job, and the time required for cleanup can double that cost, he said.

On window replacements, “we look for it to add at least $100 per window,” Robinson said. “Depending on the house, it could double the cost of painting a house.” Robinson estimates the number of Indiana contractors in need of training and certification is in the tens of thousands, but only a few hundred have people who have undergone the training.

[kevjob]

Took and passed class yesterday. We all f&cked, a typical piant job that takes 8 hours will now be more like 12-16 for extra bs. material i see as at least 2-300 for tests, masks, plastic, tape, tyvek type suits, booties, hepa vaccum. Lots of BS and extra time and money for us legimate contractors.

[neolitic]

All I'm saying, is get ready,
but don't give yourself an ulcer yet.
The odds against this going ahead
as-is get longer every day.
This deal is just beginning to show up
on national radar.

[SLS-Construction]

Neo - this is going ahead whether we like it or not

The rules are in place, the dates are set & not one politician or bureaucrat wants to be known for hurting kids, the environment, etc...

I just finished off a weatherization class & just like this - they don't care about reality, just the preconceived result or notion that exists

[dan-o]

I'm not seeing the cost of painting double, at least not exteriors. The RRP laws only effect prep days and I plan on gang-raping the prep (long days, lots of manpower) to minimize plastic consumption and set-up/breakdown costs. It will make me reconsider mobilizing on iffy weather days, however, as getting set-up just to be rained out is a sure fire way to erode profits with the new regs.

[Eieio]

LEAD, the EPA, and You – a quick primer for Home Owners, Rental Owners, and Contractor’s regarding Renovation’s of pre-1978 houses

By: SLS Construction Blog

As I mentioned in a prior article, the EPA has released new regulations concerning LEAD in houses built before 1978. Unfortunately, there is still a lot of confusion out there on the subject and many contractors still don’t know this is coming. One quick example involves an ADECA class on weatherization projects for the Department of Energy that I attended this week. I ended up correcting quite a bit of the information stated or in some cases informing them of other items that were completely left out by the instructors.

As a quick FYI – this primer is being limited to residential single-family dwellings and the EPA guidelines on the training and certification part only. I plan on additional articles on many of the procedures and some known problems associated with this program shortly. Please also be aware that additional Safety and Health guidelines may apply to workers working with lead per OSHA while certain other government programs run via HUD, DOE, USDA, etc… may require requirements that are more stringent.


Link to full article: http://blog.sls-construction.com/?p=429&cpage=1#comment-750

[neolitic]

Neo - this is going ahead whether we like it or not

The rules are in place, the dates are set & not one politician or bureaucrat wants to be known for hurting kids, the environment, etc...

I just finished off a weatherization class & just like this - they don't care about reality, just the preconceived result or notion that exists

We shall see.

[Eieio]

I'm not seeing the cost of painting double, at least not exteriors. The RRP laws only effect prep days and I plan on gang-raping the prep (long days, lots of manpower) to minimize plastic consumption and set-up/breakdown costs. It will make me reconsider mobilizing on iffy weather days, however, as getting set-up just to be rained out is a sure fire way to erode profits with the new regs.

It will if you have to pay overtime and factor all the additional cost that go along with it

[bconley]

How is it that most of the contractors I mention this subject to, have no clue to what is going on?
Not all contractors are as active (or proactive) in knowing the latest industry trends or regulations, as we are.
I guess what I'm asking is how and when is the EPA going to tell contractors what the law is?

[SLS-Construction]

I guess what I'm asking is how and when is the EPA going to tell contractors what the law is?

You will love this - government agencies are not really allowed to "advertise" - this is one reason that it is hard to find information on grants, etc... This is also one reason why there was an uproar on the amount of money spent on "informing" everyone on how & where the ARRA money is & was being spent.

This is one reason that the release date falls on Earth Day - to help getting news organizations and Special Interest groups to help broadcast the information.

On one hand ignorance of the law is no excuse, while on the other hand it is hard to find out what laws might actually apply

[Tommy]

How is it that most of the contractors I mention this subject to, have no clue to what is going on?
Not all contractors are as active (or proactive) in knowing the latest industry trends or regulations, as we are.
I guess what I'm asking is how and when is the EPA going to tell contractors what the law is?

The local builder's association here is trying to spread the word. They sent out some flyers and ran ads in the paper. They have a few classes set up, but the first one got canceled because there weren't enough people signed up.

[ChrWright]

We filled two days of classes for the training we sponsored here in Indy.

We are planning to bring the same company back in a month or so for the same thing. I'm sure as more contractors finally wake up to this, the demand for training will far outstrip the available classes.

[bconley]

Sure the local MBA has the classes and knows about what is coming, but the contractors who don't participate in these associations don't know about it.
My painter and siders for example.

[neolitic]

Sure the local MBA has the classes and knows about what is coming, but the contractors who don't participate in these associations don't know about it.
My painter and siders for example.

If the painter doesn't know
he's just been sleep walking.
The first I knew was from pamphlets
at SW and MAB I picked up over
a year and a half or two years ago
while waiting on the paint shaker.

[bconley]

If the painter doesn't know
he's just been sleep walking.
The first I knew was from pamphlets
at SW and MAB I picked up over
a year and a half or two years ago
while waiting on the paint shaker.

More than likely:)... good painter though

[kevjob]

The current law states you have to give the Renovate Right pamphlet when you believe the house was started before 12-31-1977 that law has been in affect for 1 year now.

[neolitic]

The current law states you have to give the Renovate Right pamphlet when you believe the house was started before 12-31-1977 that law has been in affect for 1 year now.

I'm pretty sure that was
the first thing I saw at the
paint stores.
Even then there were references
to the 2010 rules.

[Eieio]

I thought about this and think the EPA should give us a cut on the fine..

You rat some one out and they give you 10% of the money..


10 rat outs a month times 3200 bucks. 32k a month in snitch fee's


I would be the EPA's TOP SNITCH... You guys would not stand a chance

[framer55]

I thought about this and think the EPA should give us a cut on the fine..

You rat some one out and they give you 10% of the money..


10 rat outs a month times 3200 bucks. 32k a month in snitch fee's


I would be the EPA's TOP SNITCH... You guys would not stand a chance



One problem though, you only get the cut after the gov collects the full amount!

Snitch away, you DC rat!!!!!!!!!!!;)

[neolitic]

One problem though, you only get the cut after the gov collects the full amount!

Snitch away, you DC rat!!!!!!!!!!!;)

You have to forgive the way he thinks,
it's where he lives.....

[dan-o]

I spoke with my paint vendor after my certification to ensure he'll be stocking everything I'll need for compliance. He's now arranging RRP training classes in order to make sure his customer base is certified, as nearly all local jobs involve lead paint.

After talking, we decided that he should also invite the local health departments. We want them to know what the proper procedures are and which companies are certified. I've already stocked up my cell minutes and loaded the speed dial.

[ChrWright]

Someone tell these goobers their letter is wrong:

http://www.awdi.com/epa.html

[ChrWright]

Second to last paragraph:

http://www.afhh.org/res/res_pubs/RRP_Fixes_Letter_EPA_Response.pdf

[ChrWright]

A note on enforcement:

Full adherence to recordkeeping requirements is important. The majority of EPA (and HUD) LBP
“inspections” are record reviews – and most enforcement actions are based upon non-compliance as
indicated by absent or defective records.411 Moreover, EPA has announced that for the RRP Rule “EPA
has determined that a review of the records maintained by renovation firms will be an effective method of
determining whether a particular firm is generally complying with the regulations or not.”412
Notwithstanding EPA’s potential focus on record review inspections, it may conduct on-site inspections,
particularly where an ongoing hazard is alleged.

http://www.healthyhomestraining.org/LSWP/NCHH_Federal_LBP_Benchbook_1-23-09.pdf
Page 57

[Silvertree]

What will happen is enforcement will be by record unless you get a complaint. So a homeowner can get angry and call the EPA, or a neighbor ect.

That's a 90 page document Chris, its gonna help if your a fast reader.

[ChrWright]

What will happen is enforcement will be by record unless you get a complaint. So a homeowner can get angry and call the EPA, or a neighbor ect.

That's a 90 page document Chris, its gonna help if your a fast reader.

It would seem that's becoming more and more clear to be the 1st year approach.

I'd predict sometime in the Fall, they'll make an example out of someone.

[ChrWright]

What will happen is enforcement will be by record unless you get a complaint. So a homeowner can get angry and call the EPA, or a neighbor ect.

That's a 90 page document Chris, its gonna help if your a fast reader.

That's what the "FIND" feature is for. :2thumbsup:

I was hunting for 'enforcement' info and that's how I found it.

[ChrWright]

Makes a lot of sense:

http://mercatus.org/publication/environmental-protection-agency-s-proposed-rule-renovation-repair-and-painting-workers

[naptownCr]

given those statistics why is the EPA now coming out with new rules?
I just read the goober letter that Chris mentioned about replacement windows.
That is the most ridiculous thin I think I have ever heard.
So pulling the stops and replacing is worse than scraping and preping a lead painted wall or trim for paint.

I've done many many replacement windows and for the most part there is very litle paint residue from the process. And what little there is is usually larger chips that are easily cleaned up.

This whole thing is a cluster foxtrot imho.

[Century Man]

Received this today.
Ned – Tom reviewed the info you provided regarding your certification. He said you have to set up a written procedure, from the time you discover the lead paint, to the time the lead contractor completes the removal and you can complete your job. All should be documented to comply with the EPA RRP Rule. I did forward the info to my underwriter, but have not had a response as yet. We do not believe this will affect your or change your coverage. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! Linda

[Silvertree]

Your a writer now, everytime you start an EPA compliant job.

Get some pens, you'll need them.

[SLS-Construction]

http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/samplechecklist.pdf - sample documentation required on all jobs - don't forget to file this with the HO's signature that they received the brochure

No paperwork or if its not all done properly - you obviously didn't do the job right & your fined

[ChrWright]

RRP... The Lawyers weigh in:

http://www.wilsonelser.com/files/repository/EnvTox_New_EPA_leadlaw_requirements-Abatemarco-AlertDec09.pdf

First paragraph, last sentence.

[ChrWright]

From the horse's mouth:

http://www.remodeling.hw.net/lead-safe-practices/an-epa-qa-on-lead-safety.aspx

[Eieio]

NAHB Research Center: 2010 IBS offers courses in lead-safe work practices:


Training Courses to Meet EPA Lead Paint Rule Offered at IBS

Two courses that will help remodelers and contractors meet their requirements to be trained and certified in lead-safe work practices under the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s new Lead: Renovation, Repair and Painting rule are being offered at the 2010 International Builders’ Show in Las Vegas next month.

The Renovation, Repair and Painting rule — which goes into effect in four months — requires anyone working in homes built before 1978 and inhabited by small children or pregnant women to complete eight hours of training, use lead-safe practices and keep copious records of the work done.

The two courses — classroom and hands-on sessions — cover the rule’s requirements for dust containment, work site cleaning, record keeping, consumer education and more:

* “Part One: Lead Safety for Renovation, Repair and Painting”

Room S1, South Hall
Sunday, Jan. 17
9:00 a.m.- 2:30 p.m.

This course provides classroom training to help remodelers and contractors meet EPA requirements to identify lead-based paint (LBP) and the health problems associated with disturbing it; detail the requirements of EPA’s rule requiring lead-safe work practices; conduct LBP disturbance safely and in compliance with the EPA rule; conduct training for workers so they follow the rules, clean up lead-based dust and properly dispose of waste; and properly document compliance with the rule.

This course must be completed, or proof of completion must be submitted, before taking “Part Two: Hands-On Training for Renovation, Repair and Painting.”

* “Part Two: Hands-On Training for Renovation, Repair and Painting”

Room S1, South Hall
Sunday, Jan. 17
9:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.; 1:30.-4:30 p.m.; or 6:30-9:30 p.m.
Monday, Jan. 18
9:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m.; or 1:30-4:30 p.m.

This course provides complementary hands-on training to the classroom session offered at IBS.


To register for the lead paint training courses, visit www.buildersshow.com/leadpaint.

For more information about the lead paint rule, visit www.nahb.org/leadpaint.


Link: http://www.nbnnews.com/NBN/issues/2009-12-21/Remodelers/index.html

[ChrWright]

I'm not sure the source for the info in this document, but it sheds some more light on the upcoming changes to the RRP Rule:

http://www.dellgroup.com/pdf/Lead%20Newsletter%202009.pdf

Among the provisions EPA intends to change is the method with which renovation
workers operating in lead paint contaminated buildings must use to verify their work area
is sufficiently cleaned of lead dust after a job is completed, an issue that was fiercely
debated during the rule making process.

The current rule requires only a visual inspection of the work area -- a so-called "white
glove" test -- while activists argued laboratory "clearance" tests similar to those required
by HUD and Ohio Department of Health are needed to ensure lead dust levels are safe.
Industry groups, on the other hand, argued renovation workers should not be responsible
for verifying the buildings they work in are clean, since they were not responsible for
putting the lead paint in there in the first place.

As a compromise with activists, the USEPA will propose in April 2010 to require
clearance testing in certain circumstances that disturb the largest quantities of lead paint,
such as power sanding, grinding or abrasive blasting, as well as jobs that involve the
demolition or removal of more than six square feet of plaster.

Under the proposal, EPA will also require renovation workers to have dust sampling
performed when a heat gun is used at temperatures below 1100 degrees, where a window
or door frame is removed and also those that involve scraping an area larger than 60
square feet or removing more than 40 square feet of trim or molding.
However, under the proposal, even if test results reveal dangerous levels of lead dust,
EPA will not require renovation workers to address the problem. Instead, workers will
conduct the testing and provide documentation to the owners and occupants of the
building in question, leaving it to the owner whether or not to do additional cleanup
work.

To enforce the new verification procedure, EPA plans to propose a rule to require
contractors to provide the building's owners and occupants with documentation of the
testing results and the work practices used. EPA submitted the proposed rule to the White
House Office of Management & Budget. The settlement requires the agency to propose
the rule in October and finalize it in April 2010.

The rule EPA will propose in October will also eliminate the so-called "opt-out"
exemption of the current rule, under which renovation firms may avoid complying with
its safe work practice requirements if a homeowner verifies there are no children or
pregnant women living on the premises. Activists argued the exemption was illegal
because the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires the rule to protect children,
and there is no way of knowing whether children or pregnant woman will move into a
building after a renovation is complete.

The third and fourth EPA proposals will deal with non-residential buildings. The third, to
be proposed in December 2011 and finalized in July 2013 will seek to establish work
practice standards for work on the exterior of lead paint contaminated buildings, whereas
the current rule only deals with residential buildings and other child-occupied facilities
such as schools and day care facilities.

The fourth proposal will be issued in 2011 after EPA consults with its Science Advisory
Board in and seek public comment on whether such standards are also needed for the
interior of non-residential buildings.

All four proposals are the result of a lawsuit activist groups, including the Sierra Club
and the Center for Environmental Health, filed shortly after the previous administration
finalized the rule in April 2008. The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), an
industry group, also filed a lawsuit opposing the rule as too strict.
EPA will also pursue a lead tire weights ban in response to a separate lawsuit filed by
activist groups including the Ecology Center and the Sierra Club. The weights are used
predominately to balance replacement tires for autos and light trucks, resulting in soil and
water pollution.

The agency estimates that "2,000 tons of lead from tire weights are lost from vehicles and
ultimately end up in the environment each year," according to a recent statement. "Tire
weights without lead are already being used and can be effectively substituted," EPA
says.

EPA will pursue a ban on the manufacture and distribution of lead tire weights in
response to a 2009 petition from the Ecology Center, the Sierra Club and other NGOs
requesting that the agency establish regulations prohibiting their use. Lead weights are
used predominately in the tire replacement market to balance tires of autos and light
trucks in the United States. They can fall off wheels, break down and contaminate soil,
wash into sewers, transported to municipal landfills or incinerators. Tire weights without
lead are already being used and can be effectively substituted.

[RCP]

ChrisW, appreciate all your updates.:2thumbsup:
I may have missed it, but has anyone heard from their insurance agent yet?
I sent another email to my agent trying to clarify, (RRP vs Abatement) he says it will still increase, can't say how much until we do a "full submission".
I get the impression he really does not know what is going on.

[Century Man]

ChrisW, appreciate all your updates.:2thumbsup:
I may have missed it, but has anyone heard from their insurance agent yet?
I sent another email to my agent trying to clarify, (RRP vs Abatement) he says it will still increase, can't say how much until we do a "full submission".
I get the impression he really does not know what is going on.

My post on page 9 is from my agent and yes I concur, the ins people are clueless.

[ChrWright]

What's worse is many are just guessing, and saying "Oh, I don't think there will be a change since you're not doing any different work."

It's one thing to say you don't know, quite another to shrug it off when you don't have a clue.

Here's my agent's response:

Chris,

This is new enough that the impact is not really known. Apparently the state of Illinois had a similar requirement a while back, it was going to force all contractors to comply, but they have since done away with the requirement. This may rekindle the issue. The key will be if the EPA forces states to monitor the requirement and how severe the penalties are for non-compliance. I believe you have a valid concern regarding some contractors ignoring the rules especially the very small one or two man shops. It remains to be seen how the EPA and/or states can or will enforce the requirement. It has not yet impacted the insurance industry that we have seen; I suspect the insurance carriers will add a question to the application/underwriting asking if the contract works on pre-1978 facilities and if the contractor is in compliance.

Will continue to monitor our carriers and if anything significant occurs will let you know and would appreciate if you learn anything new that you keep us updated.

[ChrWright]

Look for info from your state environmental agency. The RRP Rule was meant to be a guide for states to develop their own lead programs. These folks know that enforcement has to come locally.

Here's something I found from my own state's recent review of their lead program, as it relates to the RRP Rule:

The following are recommendations that have been approved by the Indiana Lead-Safe
Housing Advisory Council:

1. The State of Indiana should review and clearly define the exact type of
insurance needed for Indiana licensed abatement contractors and certified
renovators. This review should clarify if abatement contractors,
certified renovators, and certified firms do or do not need hazardous materials
coverage. Note: the need for an additional rider and increased insurance
costs are perceived as a barrier to individuals becoming lead abatement contractors,
certified renovators or firms. Once these issues are clarified, education must be
disseminated throughout the industry. If a rider is needed, then one should be
developed specific to the kinds of work done by certified renovators.

2. The State of Indiana should ensure that state and local agencies
administering funds or operating historic preservation programs are
appropriately trained in lead-related issues. The Indiana State Department
of Health should work with those agencies to develop outreach programs for
neighborhood associations, contractors and others operating in these areas.

3. The State of Indiana should continue and enhance its efforts to increase
public awareness of the prevalence of lead hazards and the importance of
using appropriately trained and certified/licensed personnel.

4. The State of Indiana should partner with institutions of higher education to
incorporate lead related topics into existing building trades curriculum.

5. The State of Indiana should partner with institutions of higher education to
incorporate lead related topics into early childhood development curriculum.

6. The State of Indiana should identify funds to fully or partially subsidize
required training for individuals who require licenses or certifications for
lead-related disciplines. This training could be funded through:
i. The Indiana Lead Trust Fund
ii. A proposed surcharge (i.e. $0.10) on each gallon of paint sold in
Indiana. Monies collected should be deposited in the Indiana Lead
Trust Fund.

7. The State of Indiana should pursue Governor Daniels’ intent to seek
legislative authorization for Indiana to administer the RRP rule in Indiana as
EPA’s agent. Please see attached letter dated 11/26/2008. Failure to secure
an EPA authorized program will result in a loss of revenue to the State of
Indiana and impose an undue burden on individuals working in the
renovation, remodeling and/or painting field. The legislation should
grandfather all certifications already granted through the EPA program...



http://www.in.gov/legislative/igareports/agency/reports/ISDOH44.pdf

[Allrounder]

My agent admitted that he hadn't heard about the rules and is looking into it. He said that the part that he's most concerned about is the fact that we have to leave a signed certification that there is no lead present in the home.

[dan-o]

He said that the part that he's most concerned about is the fact that we have to leave a signed certification that there is no lead present in the home.

I need to review my class materials again but I don't remember that being part of the RRP process. Renovating a kitchen or painting an exterior will not remove lead in other areas let alone within the work zone. The RRP is simply a compliance re: minimizing and cleaning up your own mess, not certifying that the home is now lead free.

[Allrounder]

I need to review my class materials again but I don't remember that being part of the RRP process. Renovating a kitchen or painting an exterior will not remove lead in other areas let alone within the work zone. The RRP is simply a compliance re: minimizing and cleaning up your own mess, not certifying that the home is now lead free.

You are correct, I wrote that incorrectly. :dunce2:

[Leo G]

RRP... The Lawyers weigh in:

http://www.wilsonelser.com/files/repository/EnvTox_New_EPA_leadlaw_requirements-Abatemarco-AlertDec09.pdf

First paragraph, last sentence.

1st page down near the bottom with a #1. It says 2 sq ft, it is suppose to be 6 sq ft.

[Leo G]

Does this look like $35 worth of work to you?


Future Sample Renovation Recordkeeping Checklist
(effective April 2010)
Name of Firm: Date and Location of Renovation:
Brief Description of Renovation: Name of Assigned Renovator: Name(s) of Trained Worker(s), if used:
Name of Dust Sampling Technician, Inspector, or Risk Assessor, if used: ___ Copies of renovator and dust sampling technician qualifications (training certificates, certifications) on file. ___ Certified renovator provided training to workers on (check all that apply):
___ Posting warning signs ___ Setting up plastic containment barriers
___ Maintaining containment ___ Avoiding spread of dust to adjacent areas
___ Waste handling ___ Post-renovation cleaning

___Test kits used by certified renovator to determine whether lead was present on components affected by renovation (identify kits used and describe sampling locations and results):
___ Warning signs posted at entrance to work area.
___ Work area contained to prevent spread of dust and debris
___All objects in the work area removed or covered (interiors)
___HVAC ducts in the work area closed and covered (interiors)
___Windows in the work area closed (interiors)
___Windows in and within 20 feet of the work area closed (exteriors)
___Doors in the work area closed and sealed (interiors)
___Doors in and within 20 feet of the work area closed and sealed (exteriors)
___Doors that must be used in the work area covered to allow passage but prevent spread of dust
___Floors in the work area covered with taped-down plastic (interiors)
___Ground covered by plastic extending 10 feet from work area—plastic anchored to building and
weighed down by heavy objects (exteriors)
___If necessary, vertical containment installed to prevent migration of dust and debris to adjacent
property (exteriors) ___ Waste contained on-site and while being transported off-site. ___ Work site properly cleaned after renovation
___All chips and debris picked up, protective sheeting misted, folded dirty side inward, and taped
for removal
___Work area surfaces and objects cleaned using HEPA vacuum and/or wet cloths or mops (interiors)
___ Certified renovator performed post-renovation cleaning verification (describe results, including the number of wet and dry cloths used):
___If dust clearance testing was performed instead, attach a copy of report ___ I certify under penalty of law that the above information is true and complete.
Name and title Date

[WarnerConstInc.]

more like 3500.00.

[ChrWright]

1st page down near the bottom with a #1. It says 2 sq ft, it is suppose to be 6 sq ft.

That's nothing. Get a load of this guy:

http://dailyreporter.com/blog/2009/12/31/new-epa-rules-affect-contractors/#comment-12061

Tons of things wrong with that one.

[Silvertree]

EPA application

Its in the downloads area as a zip file.

[rselectric1]

Just filled mine out and mailed in the dough.

It was actually pretty simple for a gub form.

However, just watch, I'll get it returned for something really stupid.

(other than the lack of stamp:laugh3:)

[Leo G]

Where is the link to the form please

[rselectric1]

http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/firmapp.pdf

Leo, this is where I went. If you can't link, I'll tell you at least how I found it.

[Leo G]

Thanks Ron.




The elusive words....

have been spoken.

[ChrWright]

Thanks.




The elusive words....

have been spoken.

Doesn't count until you click the little button... :grin:

[Leo G]

Not gonna happen. I told you I don't need no stink'n button to say my words.

[rselectric1]

Doesn't count until you click the little button... :grin:

More inside jokes. I hope the little button will make me detonate with only a medium amount of pain.

PS-no prob Leo.


Ron

[Leo G]

Look at my thanks: You will understand grasshopper

[rselectric1]

Look at my thanks: You will understand grasshopper

Grasshopper understand now. Grasshopper thought that CW and LG make fun of RS who push button many time on CT to weed out HO and TF answers.

:laugh3:

[RCP]

Check this out!
MSNBC (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/25687293#25687293)

[Leo G]

Just kill us off now. Who needs renovators or painters anyway.

[dan-o]

I want to know when carpet installers are going to be targeted. Our instructor said carpeting, and its removal, was a major source of lead dust in a home.

[ChrWright]

This is such a quagmire... How long had those kids lived in the house? In what state was the interior paint? Were they exposed to lead before the renovation took place or did they get all of it from the exterior renovation?

Difficult questions.

[Silvertree]

Its coming.
We will have all kinds of reactions to this, fear, confusion, alarmist reactions when there is lead or if their is not.

I think we just need to be prepared.

[WarnerConstInc.]

I fear no one will want any sort of work done on their house or you will see a lot of older houses for sale.

[ChrWright]

I fear no one will want any sort of work done on their house or you will see a lot of older houses for sale.

I've said this from the beginning--this is going to have a significant impact on old house property values.

[Silvertree]

Lead is a real danger, but its everywhere. So if we contain and remove during remodeling there would be concerns also about where else its coming from.

For a fact it comes from soil, water, air, dishes, cups, toys and more.

House values dropping, initially yes, its a concern.

Bottom line is we don't know but it will make some journalists happy and the public will react accordingly. Some will panic and others will think its just another fake orgasm by the government.

[WarnerConstInc.]

I've said this from the beginning--this is going to have a significant impact on old house property values.

I would rather live in an old house with lead, than a newer slap it up as fast as possible tract house.

Screw it, I am going to build furniture.

[Allrounder]

Got this today from my insurance agent:

I got the information you were looking for.

There is no coverage for lawsuits involving lead poisoning. There is a pollutants exclusion on our liability coverage which does include lead. It is a very common exclusion on most general liability policies. However, I should be able to find a policy where there is no such exclusion but it would cost a decent amount more than what you're paying right now.


This is what I was afraid of--another cost that we have to pass on to the consumer, and another way for the hacks to undercut us.

[ChrWright]

Lots of pages, but interesting reading:

http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/3_8_99.pdf

This is a transcript from meeting to discuss the proposed rule back in 1999. At the beginning of the document is a list of those present--including representatives from the construction industry.

[ChrWright]

Lots of pages, but interesting reading:

http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/3_8_99.pdf

This is a transcript from meeting to discuss the proposed rule back in 1999. At the beginning of the document is a list of those present--including representatives from the construction industry.

[Silvertree]

Great find Chris.

I read a lot of it and some very good questions were asked and the answers were vague for the most part.

They concur the rules won't be followed by all and that confusion is certain.

Interesting was the wallpaper example, you go to remove wall paper and the wall hasn't been sized and you end up pulling chips of paint off, to the degree you now need someone trained in abatement, which we are not.

No answers, just more questions.

Things were amended after this meeting and I think they relaxed the removal issues a bit. Interesting is what the painters thought of the 10' plastic rule, which in the city will be impossible to follow.

All in all it confirms the studies done were at best hopeful generalizations.
A NARI director told me they were in on this, I did not see NARI mentioned in the participants list? Maybe I read past it.

[Silvertree]

Just checked my status on my EPA certification.

They cashed the check a couple of weeks ago and I am now expecting the paperwork to arrive in May sometime.

I heard one guy got his last week, he sent it in a while back before October I believe.

No one I know got the EPA notification and some have been waiting about 80 days.

I can't imagine the wait for the people who send it in February or March.

[Allrounder]

How did you check your status Paul? They cashed my check within a week of me sending it in, but can't see paperwork status anywhere

[SLS-Construction]

Call the NLIC number - 1-800-424-LEAD (5323)

[Washashore]

Just Completed the Certified Lead Renovator training today...

Some takeaways-

I still support the intent and reasons behind the law. What I found out about lead dust was a kick in the gut as I personally renovated my 1939 home 8 years ago while my wife was pregnant with our daughter. (Who is lead free Thank God!)

The methods I learned today about dust containment per say, are doable. Yet the part that will be an absolute nightmare, will be where we have to bag n wrap all of the demo, then try to take it out though a double flapped plastic door, with a slit in the middle layer of plastic. While wearing a full body suit and respirator.

Yet, the truth is, I would triple bag all the debris and take it though the tunnel of hell if the EPA leveled the playing field by doing the following:

Set up EPA, enforcement teams across the country ready to roll on April 22nd.
Started a massive media blitz on TV, Newspapers and Internet about the RRP (The trainers told us today that The EPA had told them that this would be underway by now.)
Throw the book at those that do not comply especially the hacks and finally, the most important item here...

Revise the law to include financial penalties assessed against homeowners who hire companies or individuals who are not certified.

If Americans want to forge ahead, We have to take responsibility for our choices and actions. That is what is missing in the RRP Law-No responsibility is placed upon the homeowner to make the right choices about who they hire to work on their homes.

We should not have to be educating homeowners about this new law. The homeowners should be demanding that we prove we're certified and following the procedures required by the EPA.

Now, I'm off shopping for a HEPA Vac and bodysuits..:rolleyes3:

[Silvertree]

We will see about EPA doing a public awareness, the rule is 3 months away and I haven't seen anything yet.

High lead levels in tested children have dropped from 6% nationally to about 1.23% nationally over the last 10 years.
Most EBLL in children are in inner city areas.
Minnesota has an EBLL of .74% for all children tested, I am guessing it will rise slightly after the rule goes into effect.

Make no bones about it, this rule is begging to be ignored, in Minnesota the Dept of Health will enforce the rule starting later this year. There are 5 inspectors for the entire state. The health dept is expecting homeowners and contractors to report non compliant job sites. Good luck with that.

[orson]

Trying to fill out the Firm Certification online.

It says:

EPA run jurisdictions:

alaska
arizona
blah
blah
blah



My state isn't on their but the form insists I make a selection, am I supposed to choose the "All EPA adimistered States and blah blah blah" option?

Edit: Never mind, I think I filled out the wrong form, apparently an older type of Firm Certification. I was informed by someone from the epa that you cannot apply for Renovation Firm Certification through the CDX site, or online at all.

[Leo G]

Then how did everyone else do it?

[SLS-Construction]

I apologize if that is correct - I simply mailed mine in & someone else mentioned using the CDX system - to late mine was mailed. I did create an account & confirmed that it was available, but stopped right there. It appears based on the info above - that is only available for the 11 states that they manage the Inspection & abatements for.

[Bodger]

We will see about EPA doing a public awareness, the rule is 3 months away and I haven't seen anything yet.

High lead levels in tested children have dropped from 6% nationally to about 1.23% nationally over the last 10 years.
Most EBLL in children are in inner city areas.
Minnesota has an EBLL of .74% for all children tested, I am guessing it will rise slightly after the rule goes into effect.

Make no bones about it, this rule is begging to be ignored, in Minnesota the Dept of Health will enforce the rule starting later this year. There are 5 inspectors for the entire state. The health dept is expecting homeowners and contractors to report non compliant job sites. Good luck with that.


The problem though, as I see it, all it takes is one project, one homeowner, one lawyer and lawsuit, and we're screwed. So it's an expensive game of CYA. I just got plans to look at for a two story addition on a house built in the mid 1960's. Start date would be late May. I'll have to address this lead issue or risk a ton of liability.

[Century Man]

Received our certification today.

[JasonW]

Received our certification today.

How long was the wait?

[Century Man]

How long was the wait?

60 days......

[orson]

I apologize if that is correct - I simply mailed mine in & someone else mentioned using the CDX system - to late mine was mailed. I did create an account & confirmed that it was available, but stopped right there. It appears based on the info above - that is only available for the 11 states that they manage the Inspection & abatements for.

Sean,

I went the whole way through the CDX registration process before realizing that I was not registering for the correct thing.

It was very confusing and appeared to be the right thing but through calling the EPA and cross referncing the form identification numbers it appears to be a different type of lead activities registration that has been in effect for several years.

Also all the info links on the online registration form are broken which doesn't help much solving the mystery.

Leo- not sure, maybe they all registered for the wrong thing? :surrender:

[Eieio]

we just returned from the RRP Certification course. The fine has been raised to 37500 per violation and will be enforced by the EPA for now but probably by your state's CLPPP program.

Here in Massachusetts, we cannot use the lead test kit so we will have to either hire a qualified lead risk assessor, or just tent the job anyway.

Also be aware that if you have more than 220 lbs of contaminated materials, it is considered hazardous,mut be stored in a hazmat container on the job site until disposal and then disposed of at a hazardous waste facility.

Expect the "opt out" provision to disappear this Spring so ALL homes pre-78 will be affected.

If you use subcontractors, they cannot be trained by a Certified Renovator, they must take the 1 day course and become a Certified Firm themselves.

One final thought...You should put into your contracts that the lead work performed is for "renovation only, it is not a contract for lead abatement".

------------------------------

This was posted on Linkedin The bold type is very important. Also I sat down today and calculated the cost to meet the RRP rule on a whole house remodel and came up with a cost of an additional 20-30K

[RCP]

ve just returned from the RRP Certification course. The fine has been raised to 37500 per violation and will be enforced by the EPA for now but probably by your state's CLPPP program.

Here in Massachusetts, we cannot use the lead test kit so we will have to either hire a qualified lead risk assessor, or just tent the job anyway.

Also be aware that if you have more than 220 lbs of contaminated materials, it is considered hazardous,mut be stored in a hazmat container on the job site until disposal and then disposed of at a hazardous waste facility.

Expect the "opt out" provision to disappear this Spring so ALL homes pre-78 will be affected.

If you use subcontractors, they cannot be trained by a Certified Renovator, they must take the 1 day course and become a Certified Firm themselves.

One final thought...You should put into your contracts that the lead work performed is for "renovation only, it is not a contract for lead abatement".

------------------------------

This was posted on Linkedin The bold type is very important. Also I sat down today and calculated the cost to meet the RRP rule on a whole house remodel and came up with a cost of an additional 20-30K

Thanks, that is one of the questions I had!

[orson]

I'm not even worrying or planning for this rule until it stops changing every other day.

If I get fined 37k playing catch up later I'll just fold up shop and go do something else.

All I can say is...don't worry...be happy. :2thumbsup:

[dan-o]

I was certified back in early Nov but will be attending the class again tomorrow.
One of my vendors is hosting the class and invited me to sit in at no charge.
The class will be filled with top level companies, the kind of competition you want, so I'm hoping for some good dialogue.
It's also a different training company so I'm interested to compare presentations and details.

[SLS-Construction]

ve just returned from the RRP Certification course. The fine has been raised to 37500 per violation and will be enforced by the EPA for now but probably by your state's CLPPP program.

Here in Massachusetts, we cannot use the lead test kit so we will have to either hire a qualified lead risk assessor, or just tent the job anyway.

Also be aware that if you have more than 220 lbs of contaminated materials, it is considered hazardous,mut be stored in a hazmat container on the job site until disposal and then disposed of at a hazardous waste facility.

Expect the "opt out" provision to disappear this Spring so ALL homes pre-78 will be affected.

If you use subcontractors, they cannot be trained by a Certified Renovator, they must take the 1 day course and become a Certified Firm themselves.

One final thought...You should put into your contracts that the lead work performed is for "renovation only, it is not a contract for lead abatement".

------------------------------

This was posted on Linkedin The bold type is very important. Also I sat down today and calculated the cost to meet the RRP rule on a whole house remodel and came up with a cost of an additional 20-30K

The first one - that sounds like the commercial standard, and each state has there own regulations. The RRP simply states that it is household refuse with no weight limits.

The second one - fully believe in

The third one is still debatable on the CLR portion - as nothing in the Firm Cert Form, or the regulation mandates it. All is states if that you will use a CLR as required (form) and the reg talks about only one CLR being assigned to the project. Besides the way the individual words it leaves one questioning if he even heard it correctly. (i.e. you don't take the course to become a certified firm) Now personally, I think that every sub should have someone take the CLR course, but I am not mandating it for mine.

[dan-o]

the way the individual words it leaves one questioning if he even heard it correctly. (i.e. you don't take the course to become a certified firm)

I read it as saying that subs must take the 1 day CLR training and also become certified firms.

[dan-o]

Despite being certified already at a PDCA event in VT, I audited a local class yesterday to hear the MA-specific rules and round-table with some local competition. Some interesting points:

1) In MA, CLRs are not allowed to use the stick-tests. Only certified inspectors are allowed to test for lead. CLRs are to assume lead is present in all target housing.

2) Power washing, even a perfectly sound finish to remove mildew, requires water containment. Lead can be contained in the chalking, or so the reasoning goes.

3) The MA CLPPP (child lead poisoning protection program) website will list all certified firms. It also allows me to look up specific addresses to see if lead has been tested/abated at a property.

4) The opt out provision is gone effective immediately.

5) If you use subs they must be certified firms and CLRs.

6) The 220# waste limits don't apply to residential housing but trash must be disposed of as commercial waste (ie dump) versus household waste (curbside pickup).

My town was Est in 1649 and nearly all my work is in target housing. FML.

[Bodger]

I'm not even worrying or planning for this rule until it stops changing every other day.

If I get fined 37k playing catch up later I'll just fold up shop and go do something else.

All I can say is...don't worry...be happy. :2thumbsup:



My thoughts as well. But I live in a state that loves to target licensed contractors when there is easy money to be had for any type of violation.

CA tends to leave the unlicensed types alone because they are too hard to catch and also they invariable come up against the illegal immigrant labor issue and that's too hot a potato for them.
It's not politically correct out here to mess with illegals and the CSLB doesn't want to be accused of profiling. Makes for bad press.

But taking an old white guy's money and fining him for endangering children's lives by mishandling lead contaminants? Sheeeit. Stand by for the perp walk and the handcuffs.

I could be overly pessimistic about all of this, but I trust that Rory's numbers are correct, and this is going to add substantial cost to remodels. I can barely sell my services as it is due to underfunded HOs.

[Bodger]

Just Completed the Certified Lead Renovator training today...

Some takeaways-

I still support the intent and reasons behind the law. What I found out about lead dust was a kick in the gut as I personally renovated my 1939 home 8 years ago while my wife was pregnant with our daughter. (Who is lead free Thank God!)

The methods I learned today about dust containment per say, are doable. Yet the part that will be an absolute nightmare, will be where we have to bag n wrap all of the demo, then try to take it out though a double flapped plastic door, with a slit in the middle layer of plastic. While wearing a full body suit and respirator.

Yet, the truth is, I would triple bag all the debris and take it though the tunnel of hell if the EPA leveled the playing field by doing the following:

Set up EPA, enforcement teams across the country ready to roll on April 22nd.
Started a massive media blitz on TV, Newspapers and Internet about the RRP (The trainers told us today that The EPA had told them that this would be underway by now.)
Throw the book at those that do not comply especially the hacks and finally, the most important item here...

Revise the law to include financial penalties assessed against homeowners who hire companies or individuals who are not certified.

If Americans want to forge ahead, We have to take responsibility for our choices and actions. That is what is missing in the RRP Law-No responsibility is placed upon the homeowner to make the right choices about who they hire to work on their homes.

We should not have to be educating homeowners about this new law. The homeowners should be demanding that we prove we're certified and following the procedures required by the EPA.

Now, I'm off shopping for a HEPA Vac and bodysuits..:rolleyes3:

Good points, makes sense.
I have also wondered about the following circumstance: Many times in the course of a remodel, the HOs will decide to hire a handyman or their gardener, or whomever, to do small jobs within the project as it is being completed. I try to discourage this and always make sure it's understood (and in my contracts) that I assume no liability for these jakelegs.
As the Contractor of Record, I'm still liable if one of these idiots comes onto the project and creates lead dust and doesn't know or follow any abatement guidelines.
I suppose a paper trail might keep me covered, but probably not.

[Allrounder]

Good points, makes sense.
I have also wondered about the following circumstance: Many times in the course of a remodel, the HOs will decide to hire a handyman or their gardener, or whomever, to do small jobs within the project as it is being completed. I try to discourage this and always make sure it's understood (and in my contracts) that I assume no liability for these jakelegs.
As the Contractor of Record, I'm still liable if one of these idiots comes onto the project and creates lead dust and doesn't know or follow any abatement guidelines.
I suppose a paper trail might keep me covered, but probably not.

From now on you need to change from discouraging it to forbidding it. It's the only way to cover yourself.

[orson]

That's an excellent point, I have a bath remodel lined up for the spring where the HO will be the painter...that will not fly for RRP.

I also have another job in the works for the summer where we will be working in an 18th century farmhouse but the area where we'll be working was completely and extensively redone in the last 10 years, OSB subfloor, all new framing, drywall finishes, etc. We won't be touching anything that predates 1978. How do you handle that one?

[Bodger]

From now on you need to change from discouraging it to forbidding it. It's the only way to cover yourself.


I try to put it across that way, but I've had HOs insist, or worse, I show up in the morning and there's some dude they've hired going about his business. Landscape and drainage is one area where this seems to happen a lot.

I've been in situations where the only choice I had was to stop work, or tactfully remind the client that my contract specifically states that any work being done by subs or others that I have not hired is solely their responsibility and proceed on.

The problem obviously is, once these guys are there, I'm liable as the Contractor of Record. At least that's what I've been told.

[Bodger]

That's an excellent point, I have a bath remodel lined up for the spring where the HO will be the painter...that will not fly for RRP.

I also have another job in the works for the summer where we will be working in an 18th century farmhouse but the area where we'll be working was completely and extensively redone in the last 10 years, OSB subfloor, all new framing, drywall finishes, etc. We won't be touching anything that predates 1978. How do you handle that one?


Just another situation that will probably not be clear until case law from litigation sets a precedent. Hopefully, someone else's lawsuit.

[Century Man]

we just returned from the RRP Certification course. The fine has been raised to 37500 per violation and will be enforced by the EPA for now but probably by your state's CLPPP program.

Here in Massachusetts, we cannot use the lead test kit so we will have to either hire a qualified lead risk assessor, or just tent the job anyway.

Also be aware that if you have more than 220 lbs of contaminated materials, it is considered hazardous,mut be stored in a hazmat container on the job site until disposal and then disposed of at a hazardous waste facility.

Expect the "opt out" provision to disappear this Spring so ALL homes pre-78 will be affected.

If you use subcontractors, they cannot be trained by a Certified Renovator, they must take the 1 day course and become a Certified Firm themselves.

One final thought...You should put into your contracts that the lead work performed is for "renovation only, it is not a contract for lead abatement".

------------------------------

This was posted on Linkedin The bold type is very important. Also I sat down today and calculated the cost to meet the RRP rule on a whole house remodel and came up with a cost of an additional 20-30K


The linkedIn conversation has posted a correction to some of the data quoted in the post above.
" Residential remodel waste in whatever condition is not considered hazardous waste and is disposed of as normal house waste. There is no weight restriction and you still have to protect the soil and the interior of the house during the work.
I contacted our local waste management and DEQ and they confirmed the above. They explained that it would be impossible for them handle remodel waste as hazardous waste."

" My mistake, the 220# rule applies to all non-residential child-occupying facilities. Thanks for the correction."

[Tommy]

So I had my class today. Got a lot of information that is inconsistent with what I've read here.:confused: Sure makes it tougher to implement when there is so much different information out there.

[Dean CRCNA]

Tommy,

Yeah! Been talking with some guys that already took class.

One guy said needed full face respirator.

Second guy said his class said 1/2 face.

Third guy said his class ok'd disposable mask.

My class, they didn't go over it at all (said something about an OSHA reg).

[SLS-Construction]

Tommy, make a list & post it - we can go from there (Now how this will work when MN. takes over it - well all bets are off then)

[Silvertree]

So I had my class today. Got a lot of information that is inconsistent with what I've read here.:confused: Sure makes it tougher to implement when there is so much different information out there.

So test us, what were you told that's different?

[Tommy]

So test us, what were you told that's different?

We were told that there is still an opt-out, but that it might disappear when MN takes over (They are aiming for July.)

Demolition only has to be wrapped if you are removing it through the house. If you remove a window from outside, you can just toss it in the dumpster.

We have to send a copy of our Certified Renovator certificate to the EPA along with the Firm Application.

He was recommending a $70 Craftsman shop-vac with a Hepa filter.

He also talked quite a bit about OSHA requirements. Should that go here or in a different thread?

[Silvertree]

No opt out is not a rule yet in Minnesota. You can still opt out here.

You do send a copy (I did) of the cert to the EPA.

Must be approved Hepa vac, although its the clean up that counts in the end.

The problem is too much different info.

Tommy, it sounds like your good to go, fill out the app and it will ask for a copy of your cert.
An approved vac can be had for under $500.
I did not hear the dumpster story, but I guess if you can safely move from the home to the dumpster there is no law against it.

[Tommy]

Also, some MN specific things:

Heat guns over 700 degrees are prohibited.

Outdoor containment: You must cease operations and clean up your poly if it starts to rain or the wind is over 20mph. All poly must be cleaned up at the end of each day.

[SLS-Construction]

The Opt-out is still in the reg, however it is be taken out per the Court Settlement on 4.22, thus it basically is not there

745.85 (4) Waste from renovations —(i) Waste from renovation activities must be contained to prevent releases of dust and debris before the waste is removed from the work area for storage or disposal. If a chute is used to remove waste from the work area, it must be covered.

Wrong - read the form (they only want documentation for abatement contractors, etc.. in the 11 states they manage)

Under definitions:

HEPA vacuum means a vacuum cleaner which has been designed with a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter as the last filtration stage. A HEPA filter is a filter that is capable of capturing particles of 0.3 microns with 99.97% efficiency. The vacuum cleaner must be designed so that all the air drawn into the machine is expelled through the HEPA filter with none of the air leaking past it.


If he screwed the easy stuff up I would hate to hear what he think OSHA requires - maybe leaving uncovered drinks in there?

[Silvertree]

You mean Rory and I have to cover our drinks, that'll slow down our imbibing.

A mans got to imbibe if he's doing Gov Regs.

[SLS-Construction]

You mean Rory and I have to cover our drinks, that'll slow down our imbibing.

A mans got to imbibe if he's doing Gov Regs.

http://www.camelbak.com/~/media/Products/Current/GMI%20Hydration%20Packs/Hi-Viz/Large%20Images/gmi-packs-hi-viz-international-orange-07-large-72.ashx?bc=White&as=0&dmc=0&h=340&thn=0&w=270

[Tommy]

You can apply to be a Certified Firm before you take the class to become a Certified Renovator (I know, seems odd to me too). If you haven't scheduled yourself for a class, at least apply for your company to be a Certified Firm--this will take up to 90 days for the EPA to get back to you.


My instructor said we have to send a copy of the Certified Renovator certificate. Has anyone that applied for the firm certification before they took the class gotten their certificate?




Also lawsuits to remove the option for an owner to opt-out of the requirements if no children live in the house.




The opt-out option appears to be disappearing & then they are planning on eliminating the self testing within a year, making you use a third party testing firm for the cleanup







Expect the "opt out" provision to disappear this Spring so ALL homes pre-78 will be affected.


[/B]

He hadn't heard of this, except as a possibility when MN takes over.

[SLS-Construction]

I just got my firm cert & never listed the class - I mean nothing is wrong with doing so, but the firm certs actually came out before the classes did...

The Firm cert basically says - hey I understand this junk & will use a CLR as required

Can you imagine them requiring a CEO of a multi million firm having to go to a class to get there firm certified? Not going to happen

What happens if you can't get to class until April? You should wait knowing it could take them 90 days to process it? While a lot of what the government does not make sense - they know better when it comes to items like this

[Tommy]

If he screwed the easy stuff up I would hate to hear what he think OSHA requires - maybe leaving uncovered drinks in there?

If you deal with lead based paint:

Blood lead level tests are required for each new employee, and every two months for six months, and every six months after that.

Respirators are required unless/until your air sampling proves that your safe work practices are keeping lead dust under the limits.

"Medical Removal Level" Blood lead level of 50ug/dl the employee can not work around any lead for the next 18 months. You, the employee, and a doctor will create a plan to reduce their blood lead level. You cannot terminate the employee during that 18 months.

He said that it wouldn't be a bad idea to have a blood lead level test done on any potential employees just to cya.

[SLS-Construction]

Got to love all that OSHA crap that is designed for repainting bridges

Just because the EPA says we have to assume Lead is present doesn't mean it is - I will require that respirators will be worn during demo. Period (any job site) Why - they have limits on regular dust, etc... Moon suits are available if they wish to use them

We don't generate enough dust to qualify, except for during plaster demo & those jobs are far and few down here.

[DaVinci]

If he screwed the easy stuff up I would hate to hear what he think OSHA requires - maybe leaving uncovered drinks in there?

So you're saying this won't fly anymore?

[SLS-Construction]

So you're saying this won't fly anymore?

No, the ladder is not properly locked in place :smash: