# Taking EPA Lead Class Tomorrow.....



## Greg Mrakich

Who has taken this already.?
The regulations are whacked. But $35,000 fine for not being in compliance is more whacked. People who live in pre 1978 houses are screwed.:thumbsup:


----------



## Boden Painting

took it last week through SW. Lunch was good


----------



## nEighter

Taking it on monday. Should be interesting.


----------



## Greg Mrakich

The new regulations are crazy. My favorite is that all water used power washing must be captured, collected in 5 gallon containers and treated as hazardous waste.


----------



## nEighter

:shakeshead: did they say exactly HOW one was supposed to do this? And what about the lead in the soil from rain run-off?


----------



## straight_lines

Greg Mrakich said:


> The new regulations are crazy. My favorite is that all water used power washing must be captured, collected in 5 gallon containers and treated as hazardous waste.


 Guess we are supposed to use magic to do that one. :whistling2:


----------



## daArch

took it one week ago. Best $172 I've spent in a long time. At least now when I decide how I am going to deal with this, I will be making a decision based on facts.


----------



## DeanV

Just wait a bit longer. The facts become fuzzier as it sinks in. What seemed clear in the class becomes fuzzy as real life applications arise.

We were told that the collected power washing water can be dumped down a toilet if the sewer is a city sewer system. If it is septic, then it has to be disposed of as hazardous waste.


----------



## oldpaintdoc

Dean you better check your regs for the area you are working.
In the Kalamazoo area you cannot dump it anywhere.


----------



## Greg Mrakich

DeanV said:


> Just wait a bit longer. The facts become fuzzier as it sinks in. What seemed clear in the class becomes fuzzy as real life applications arise.
> 
> We were told that the collected power washing water can be dumped down a toilet if the sewer is a city sewer system. If it is septic, then it has to be disposed of as hazardous waste.



We were told that mop water used to meet the 40 250 400 standard could, for now, be flushed. But it will soon need hazmat treatment as well. Our instructor told us of a company in NJ that had to replace the first two feet of soil all the way around a house due to non collection of power wash water....shoot me now.....


----------



## straight_lines

Can't wait to see some vids or pics of your set ups to collect all that water.


----------



## chrisn

daArch said:


> took it one week ago. Best $172 I've spent in a long time. At least now when I decide how I am going to deal with this, I will be making a decision based on facts.


 
I wish I had ANY formal statement that delt with just the FACTS.:blink:


----------



## RCP

chrisn said:


> I wish I had ANY formal statement that delt with just the FACTS.:blink:


Just the facts.

Water/waste disposal falls under OHSA and DEQ, varies by state, that has not changed.


----------



## Paintuh4Life

At this point, I'm thinking I'll stay away from the homes that are peeling badly, and the exterior projects I do take on, I'll use the chemical injector on my pressure washer to apply a cleaner (sparingly) and get up there and manually wash the house with a long handle scrub brush, then rinse lightly. I'll of course have plastic laid out to collect the run off. This should greatly reduce the amount of water required to clean before painting. Of course this is a real pain, but I'm not sure what the alternative is. Standard pressure washing puts out 4 gallons per minute, how are you going to effectively capture all that water? Questions? Comments?:blink:


----------



## aaron61

Paintuh4Life said:


> At this point, I'm thinking I'll stay away from the homes that are peeling badly, and the exterior projects I do take on, I'll use the chemical injector on my pressure washer to apply a cleaner (sparingly) and get up there and manually wash the house with a long handle scrub brush, then rinse lightly. I'll of course have plastic laid out to collect the run off. This should greatly reduce the amount of water required to clean before painting. Of course this is a real pain, but I'm not sure what the alternative is. Standard pressure washing puts out 4 gallons per minute, how are you going to effectively capture all that water? Questions? Comments?:blink:


Not economically feasible to any homeowner unless they have some pretty deep pockets.


----------



## akrause

If a contractor TRULY, TRULY adheres to the EPA regs, especially for exterior work, the price of the paint job would probably be a deal killer for 90% of homeowners. I think the EPA is doing the old "shoot for the stars and you may hit the moon" philosophy. There is little chance any contractor is going to get Lead Safe jobs 100% right. My instructor couldn't even answer some of my questions.


----------



## akrause

Greg Mrakich said:


> Who has taken this already.?
> The regulations are whacked. But $35,000 fine for not being in compliance is more whacked. People who live in pre 1978 houses are screwed.:thumbsup:


 
Pre- 1978 owners can always "opt-out" as I understand it.


----------



## RCP

akrause said:


> Pre- 1978 owners can always "opt-out" as I understand it.


That option will be gone in July.


----------



## jeffsko

San Francisco has had similar ordinance on its books for well over 5 years. Pre ordinance you would see paint chips and dust 100s of feet around most paint jobs. This was no longer the case few short years of its passing.

Don’t get me wrong, this new EPA law , I don’t like it! I think it is poorly written and it is too cumbersome. But, it is the law! And anyway, what is the alternative? Revolution? Quit the business? Don’t take on jobs with pealing paint? 

I think maybe better to start with doing your best and, at the very least, do not leave any visible evidence of chips, dust, etc.


----------



## TJ Paint

I did a ext house earlier this year for a Lowe's executive and we talked about the epa's new scam. We both concluded that the govt. decided they needed more money and this will help them, and also they wanted to help kill the small business sector.

On a positive note, now I won't have to work on any pita projects with more than 20 sq-ft of scraping. No more scraping projects, just the nice and easy projects.


----------



## TJ Paint

I actually think this new regulation will hurt alot of people, contractors and homeowners. I think this will probably cause the prices of pre 78 homes to drop. And, once a few contractors get fined 37k for pre-existing lead in the soil that _they become liable for just for taking on a project_, nobody will want to touch these homes. Or after doing a project inside, what about if they decide to test their kids for lead and they come up positive, even if your project didn't cause it and they already had exposure, how are you gonna do when you're sued?

And the majority of all the lead debris plastic gets incinerated or put in the ground. How can this be any better?

This regulation isn't about safety. Its about the govt disguising a tax and a means for them to control what we do with our properties. 

What I find interesting is that this new regulation is not being communicated directly to contractors. I haven't recieved any official notification in writing from the Secretary of States Office, the issuer of my contractors license. Is this a good way for them to catch contractors not complying so they can slap huge fines on them?

Great job on the governments part. They should expect great revenues this year.


----------



## RPS

As far as catching the water, I just have a couple of guys with wet vacs holding the wands in the air.


----------



## TJ Paint

Oh, and another thing. When it comes time for a house or building to be demolished/demo'd, what are they going to do? Build a superdome over the entire structure? Nope. They will apply for a permit and that will be all. This is such a bogus law, a complete scam, and written by bureaucrats who obviously don't have a clue as to the trade, or economics. Or worse and more probable, they don't care.

Beyond this, the fines could be $1,000 and would work just as well as a deterrent for enforcement, so why the 37K? Smaller contracting companies can't afford being fined this much. Its just a way to make a bunch of money without it being a legitimate tax.


----------



## Paintuh4Life

Here in Oregon, the state has taken over this whole mess. But the fine is only $5,000.00 (Only!) 

Good point about demolishing a whole house, BTW.


----------

