EPA Ends "Opt-Out" in Lead Abatement Rule
On April 23, 2010 EPA is finalized revisions to the Lead Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program (RRP) that went final on April 22, 2008.
Under the revisions EPA eliminates the “opt-out” provision that currently exempts a renovation firm from the training and work practice
requirements if the firm obtains certification from the owner that no child under age 6 or pregnant women resides in the home and the home is not a child-occupied facility.
The second major revisions requires renovation firms to provide a copy of the records demonstrating compliance with the training and work practice requirements of the RRP rule to the owner and, if different, the occupant of the building being renovated or the operator of the child-occupied facility.
The RRP rule establishes requirements for training renovators and dust sampling technicians; for certifying renovators, dust sampling technicians, and renovation firms; for accrediting providers of renovation and dust sampling technician training; for renovation work practices; and for record keeping rule.
Plain aand simple:An unorganized law that was not well thought out to keep the most important industry in this country alive.When housing stops,so does the country.If a law has to be implemented,then at least put some thought into it so it does'nt kill a major sector of employment.we are in trouble,especially with contractors just now having a chance to get back on their feet.Now we just went backwards again.We need someone in the government that undertands and cares in order to make this counrty function.apparentley we do not have that!Shame on you!!!!
I agree that lead particals are harmful. However i only do painting as a partime thing and can not afore $300+ for the classes or the speciale equipment to preform the work properly. What am I to do?
This is a major setback on our business remodeling model!. I think all of us must be well aware to minimize dust related to renovations in old housig. However, the repercussions of this mandate are huge. Containment practices are very cubersome and make any remodeling twice more involved which, unfortunately, must translate into additional costs, of between 20 to 30% in my conservative estimate. The government should provide substantial incentives in the form of grants to the professional firms involved in renovation and home improvement that must comply with these Lead practices. Do they understand the precariousness of our sector during this housing slump?
Are they trying to make money when we struggle to just survive as contractors?
Most of the contractors I talk to around the Luzerne County area of Pennsylvania say that the city and the state officials don’t enforce the RRP rules so who cares what the EPA wants. They tell me they’re not going to shell out thousands of dollars to get certified just to be compliant with this nonsense. Most agree that it’s just a waste of time and hard earned money with todays economy the way it is for both them and the home owner. I have even been told by one contractor that even a local city inspector told him it’s a waste money! So my question to you is; should I even be worried about getting certified if the local and state officials don’t even enforce the RRP rule? And, can the EPA really fine a small business that much money?
Bill- Thanks for your comment.
Its never wise to avoid compliance with the law. In my experience agencies may not be focussed on a particular violation and then they decide to choose that as an enforcement priority. As a priority, the Agency may take a large number of enforcement actions in short order. Its better to be safe and compliant. Maybe its also a way to distinguish yourself from our competitors.