# The New “EPA RRP Rule” Takes Effect April 22, 2010 “ALL trades will be affected “



## TGCatKTG

THIS IS FOR EVERY TRADE, NO EXCLUSIONS ACCORDING TO THE EPA. 

I hope all of you keep up with the EPA's New Rules. One that comes into effect, on April 22, 2010 will change the way we handle our projects on all of the older buildings. Anyone who does any work on a building built prior to 1978 will have to be EPA certified for the new lead based paint regulations. The deterrent the EPA is using is very simple, if you are caught working without certification, you pay a $32,500 fine, per occurrence. This means if you are working in two areas of the same building your fine will be double, one for each area. If you are working in three areas, guess what, YES the fine will be triple and so on.

If you are not aware of the new rule and you work in older buildings, I recommend you get your certification. I would not wait until the last minute; some of the classes on line and classes I called are already full. The requirements in the new regulations are very stringent when it comes to renovation. The New Rule covers the most extreme to the most minute work. In some buildings falling under the EPA / HUD guidelines, even the Window Treatment installers will need to be certified. If the window treatment installer needs this certification, all of us will need it the way the rule is written!

The EPA's new rule explanation is located at: http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/rrpfactsheet2008.htm

As a Building Contractor and Roofing Contractor in Florida, we encourage everyone to get the certification. Through the wording in the rule, the EPA is forcing us to acquire proof of certification from every subcontractor we use after April 22, 2010. If we do not make sure the subcontractors are certified we the, General Contractor, end up getting the fine. 

We also encourage everyone to contact the customers you are currently doing business with and explain to him or her where all of this is going in April. The customers need to be educated on this New Rule. We cannot do our work for the same price if the labor increases, especially on projects we undertake when the buildings are pre 1978. Another reason to educate your customer is he or she may also need to be EPA Certified as the owner/operator of rental units dating pre 1978.


Contact us for your training needs at xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
The Certified Renovator course is approved for the purposes of accreditation under TSCA, Section 402


----------



## RCP

TGC,
While I appreciate the message you are sending, (I may have mentioned RRP around here lately) the link in your post is against our advertising rules.

You seem to be a Roofing Contractor advertising Lead RRP training?

If you are a Certified Trainer and wish to answer many of the questions you find here and wish to participate, you may put your site in your signature or profile.

Thanks

PS. None of the links on your site work.


----------



## TGCatKTG

You are correct, I am a Building Contractor and Roofing Contractor. I do training for the EPA's RRP Lead Based Paint, because all of the construction trades need this certification. I did not mean to break any rules, my intentions were only to help educate some of the contractors that may not have known about the rule especially in these hard times.

My eagerness to let everyone know might have me doing this the wrong way, and for that I appologize, but the rule the EPA will enforce as of April 22, 2010 will affect everyone who works on a building. 

I was just trying to help.

I have been on other forums where the same post was graciously accepted, many questions were asked and answered and many contractors were helped. Some of the contractors that were not sure, or did not know which way they should go asked their questions on here and I answered them honestly. This was not a sales tool, the web site was listed to assist some of the readers with material purchases to keep them complient. Materials used for the RRP Rule and it's execution during a renovation project.

If you are using Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox, the links on my web site do not work, sorry.


----------



## BrushJockey

If you want to contribute to the ongoing discussion, please do . You'll find a dozen or so threads. If you want to take the time to participate, that is.


----------



## daArch

I do love the tactics some are using to scare the bejesus out of everyone who may enter any building for compensation.

What I would like explained is the OP and this summary from the EPA site:



> SUMMARY: EPA is issuing a final rule under the authority of section
> 402(c)(3) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to address lead-
> based paint hazards created by renovation, repair, and painting
> activities that disturb lead-based paint in target housing and child-
> occupied facilities.


and this:



> EPA Requirements
> 
> Common renovation activities like sanding, cutting, and demolition can create hazardous lead dust and chips by disturbing lead-based paint, which can be harmful to adults and children.
> 
> To protect against this risk, on April 22, 2008, EPA issued a rule requiring the use of lead-safe practices and other actions aimed at preventing lead poisoning. Under the rule, beginning in April 2010, contractors performing renovation, repair and painting projects that disturb lead-based paint in homes, child care facilities, and schools built before 1978 must be certified and must follow specific work practices to prevent lead contamination.


According to the new rules, if you DO NOT disturb lead paint, if there is NOT a child living or visiting a building, if it is a ZERO bedroom unit - then the new law does NOT apply.


Please tell how that first post was not hype, but 100% accurate information.

I mean, I have heard rumors that CLEANING services will need be certified. Or many other trades and service people who do not disturb six square feet of lead based paints in the target buildings. 

Let's keep this real


----------



## TGCatKTG

daArch said:


> I do love the tactics some are using to scare the bejesus out of everyone who may enter any building for compensation.
> 
> For what it is worth, Stanley Steamer has already trained over 100 of their personnel. The notice at the top of this forum was not intended to scare anyone. I just think the contracting world needs to know what a government agency like the EPA can and will do.
> 
> 
> According to the new rule, no matter what work you are performing on a home that is pre 1978, you have to be a certified renovator to test for the presence or absence of lead. If you are not a certified renovator, you do not qualify no matter what the test shows according to the EPA.
> 
> Then the rule goes on to say, you have to complete the proper forms, followed by a notice to the owner and states that you not only have to keep records of lead homes, but you also keep records of testing and verification of no lead on the non-lead projects.
> 
> 
> If the EPA does an audit and both records are not kept, they made provisions for what they will do and up goes the fine.


----------



## daArch

Stanley Steamer is a business that cleans rugs. The EPA has proved that rugs contain lead dust from past sandings and disturbance of lead paint.

You said:



> According to the new rule, no matter what work you are performing on a home that is pre 1978, you have to be a certified renovator to test for the presence or absence of lead. If you are not a certified renovator, you do not qualify no matter what the test shows according to the EPA.


Could you please link to that exact passage. 

And could you please explain how the exceptions that I noted (children under the age of six not residing nor visiting) square with what you wrote.


----------



## BrushJockey

And talk what you think this implies, because it is very relivent here at Paint Talk. 
A painter walks into a 1938 house. He he washes and primes trim with a high adhesion primer, then finish coats. 
Primes and coats walls and ceilings. 
Receives pay for above work and goes home. 

2sq ft of existing paint was not disturbed.


----------



## DeanV

Some of the objection DaArch mentioned, are the issues the were being challenged in court to toughen the rules so that all residential homes must comply, regardless if a child lives there or visits regularly. The argument being that the next owners may have young children and the house be contaminated by dust for them. The amount of time children visit clause applies to commercial places that children visit (think churches, daycare, doctors offices, etc). Of those, only daycare would clearly apply. The others do not typically have children visit enough hours per week, per visit, and per year.

My thinking concerning the non certified painter, is that since they are not trained in the rule, they cannot make the call (legally) as to whether the rules need be followed or not so all pre-78 homes are off limits to them. Plus they do not have the training for the required record keeping on all pre-78 homes. Without going through the training (or hearing some of what those of us who have been trained have been taught) they have no way of knowing if they are in compliance or not with the rule.


----------



## BrushJockey

If you're second part was about my little story, what if the painter was certified, and assumed by the age of the house that somewhere lead was probably present, but the work did not disturb the previous coatings, particularly ones under several layers. Testing not necessary, assumed it was there somewhere. 
Still need to do the whole 9? Not how it reads to me.

"The rule does not apply to:
Minor repair and maintenance activities that disrupt six square feet or less of painted surface per room for interior projects, and twenty square feet or less of painted surface for exterior projects"


----------



## TGCatKTG

*Copied from the EPA rule*

*§ 745.86 Recordkeeping and reporting requirements.*

*(a) Firms performing renovations must retain and, if requested, make available to EPA all records necessary to demonstrate compliance with this subpart for a period of 3 years following completion of the renovation. This 3–year retention requirement does not supersede longer obligations required by other provisions for retaining the same documentation, including any applicable State or Tribal laws or regulations. *

*(1) Reports certifying that a determination had been made by an inspector (certified pursuant to either Federal regulations at §745.226 or an EPA-authorized State or Tribal certification program) that lead-based paint is not present on the components affected by the renovation, as described in §745.82(b)(1). *

*745.226 Certification of individuals and firms engaged in lead-based paint activities: *

*(a) Certification of individuals. (1) Individuals seeking certification by EPA to engage in lead-based paint activities*

The rule states that only certified personnel can perform the test that show the presence or absence of lead 745.86 (1) Reports certifying that a determination had been made by an inspector (certified pursuant to either Federal regulations at §745.226 . Section 745.226 covers the individual renovation certification and all of the requirements for said certification.

You can read the entire rule right on line, why would I tell you something that would so easily be proven wrong if I wasn't sure? Like I told you before, I am only trying to assist in keeping my fellow contractors out of trouble. 

I am a GC hiring painters, plumbers, electricians, HVAC, etc. Who will do the work on all of the old homes we are renovating these days? RENOVATORS!

This rule forces me as a GC to require proof of Certification before I can hire a subcontractor of any kind, unless I want to take the responsibility for doing all the cleaning and testing after these projects are complete.

My request to all that read this is, "don't kill the messenger, he is only trying to help". 

TGC


----------



## RCP

Thanks for the info TGC.:thumbsup:


----------



## daArch

First of all, it behooves all who disturb lead to be certified. 
Painters, remodelers, renovators, etc. will disturb lead if they work in the target buildings. This is an issue near and dear to me. I think the law will do a lot of long term good. But as with every new law that encompasses so much and affects so many, there needs to be great care taken that rumors and exaggerations are not passed on as fact. 

To that, in the OP it said :



> THIS IS FOR EVERY TRADE, NO EXCLUSIONS ACCORDING TO THE EPA.


I need an EPA quote the includes *EVERY TRADE*

I will NOT shoot the messenger if the messenger is passing on the correct message.


----------



## BrushJockey

daArch said:


> First of all, it behooves all who disturb lead to be certified.


I Know Bill and I are chasing different things in the same thread- but the "grey area" that I would like to have clarification on is the definition of "disturb".
Is applying a coating -disturbing? ( Well, depends on the color..)

How about hanging paper?

A little touchier- how about sanding the spackle you just applied? What if you skim a wall to make it smooth ( say an old plaster wall) and what you are sanding is the mud you applied?


----------



## painttofish

daArch said:


> First of all, it behooves all who disturb lead to be certified. :thumbsup:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I need an EPA quote the includes *EVERY TRADE*


Landscapers are exempt. myth busted!!


----------



## RCP

From the EPA site

_The rule applies to all persons who are paid to perform renovation, repair, and painting projects in pre-1978 housing, child care facilities and schools with lead-based paint. This includes home improvement contractors, maintenance workers, painters and other specialty trades. The rule does not apply to minor maintenance or repair activities affecting less than six square feet of lead-based paint in a room or less than 20 square feet of lead-based paint on the exterior. Window replacement is not minor maintenance or repair. _

If you are only *working on* less than 6 square feet, you are ok. How many jobs do you do that are less than that?

Any pre 1978 house is considered target housing.


----------



## RCP

painttofish said:


> Landscapers are exempt. myth busted!!


:no::no:
Most Common Sources of Lead Poisoning:
Deteriorating lead-based paint
Lead contaminated dust
Lead contaminated residential soil


----------



## painttofish

So do landscapers have to test the soil before they plant a hydrangea? 

I don't think so. I understand that soil can be contaminated but I'm pretty sure you don't have to test the dirt to plant a tree......


----------



## daArch

Yes, what I am specifically trying to clarify (not arguing, trying to CLARIFY) is whether pasting wallpaper to a wall is considered "disturbing"

I won't pick nicks by saying I never hang on top of lead based paint, because I am sure an occasion could arise where there has been lead paint applied to a wall at some point. 

My practice is to apply a wallpaper prep coat and hang paper. I do not sand the walls. I may "blade" some nubbins and other grit (far less than six square feet is "disturbed") . So I am looking for official clarification.
Does paperhanging on it's own fall under the rule.

I will be taking the certification course when I can schedule it, but I also will do my best not to add a few hundred dollars to jobs where under three layers of wall paint there was some lead. 

Simply put, my trade by itself, does not disturb the surface. 

Obviously if I needed to patch and sand, then I would need to follow the guidelines.


----------



## RCP

Nah, I doubt it would include landscapers either, but until it is final on April 22, anything could change, the EPA site is constantly changing, and look at all the different things guys from classes are reporting from the trainings.


----------



## DeanV

Landscapers are not disturbing the substrate, so they are fine.

Do the rules apply to those who work on more than 6 sq. ft. of lead surface, or those who disturb more than 6 sq. ft. of lead? The answer is the procedures from the class must be followed by a EPA cert. renovator if 6 or more sq. ft. of lead paint is disturbed. However, I think that even if less than 6 ft^2 is disturbed, you still need the certification to work on these homes.

I would not dare sand a skim coated wall that was over lead paint without following the rules.


----------



## painttofish

GOVERNMENT COMPLIANCE OR ELSE!!!!

BIG SCARE small enforcement. Sounds familiar........


----------



## clammer

daArch said:


> Stanley Steamer is a business that cleans rugs. The EPA has proved that rugs contain lead dust from past sandings and disturbance of lead paint.
> 
> Even if there is some lead dust in the rug. How does steam or wet cleaning a rug fall under disturbing 6 sq feet of interior paint?


----------



## painttofish

Not that I don't comply.....


----------



## painttofish

clammer said:


> daArch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stanley Steamer is a business that cleans rugs. The EPA has proved that rugs contain lead dust from past sandings and disturbance of lead paint.
> 
> Even if there is some lead dust in the rug. How does steam or wet cleaning a rug fall under disturbing 6 sq feet of interior paint?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It doesn't.
Click to expand...


----------



## daArch

clammer said:


> daArch said:
> 
> 
> 
> Stanley Steamer is a business that cleans rugs. The EPA has proved that rugs contain lead dust from past sandings and disturbance of lead paint.
> 
> 
> 
> Even if there is some lead dust in the rug. How does steam or wet cleaning a rug fall under disturbing 6 sq feet of interior paint?
Click to expand...

I would hope the reasoning behind that is knowledge of proper disposal. 

That said, I can't speak to the ability to reason on behalf of any gov't agency. 

I wonder if pressure washing is affected ? and what if you pressure wash a deck built in 2000 on a house built in 1960 ?

Oh yah, this is gonna be fun :no:


----------



## BrushJockey

One thing that really bugs me, is there is no one, not even the ones teaching the course ( ie, the messenger) who we can actually ask for official clarification from. Opinions are like , well you know, everyone's got one. 
My "teachers" said a straight paint job no repair would not fall into the "zone" , even on target housing. But dig into that wall - put up the containment. 

If you put a barrier coat like gardz up before resurfacing- sanding the mud will not go below the gardz coat. Common experience cannot be applied, even if it is in fact safer. This is really not about safety.


----------



## DeanV

My instructor said that if the lead is not disturbed, you do not need to follow the rules. But, how do you ensure that? The EPA does not recognize the test sticks as valid on drywall or plaster. Would they accept a test of the surface layer only (so the test sticks are not contaminated with drywall or plaster dust) and if that is not lead and no other layer is disturbed, you are fine to not follow the rules? 

More importantly, what are the lawyers going to say?


----------



## RCP

BrushJockey said:


> One thing that really bugs me, is there is no one, not even the ones teaching the course ( ie, the messenger) who we can actually ask for official clarification from. Opinions are like , well you know, everyone's got one.
> My "teachers" said a straight paint job no repair would not fall into the "zone" , even on target housing. But dig into that wall - put up the containment.
> 
> If you put a barrier coat like gardz up before resurfacing- sanding the mud will not go below the gardz coat. Common experience cannot be applied, even if it is in fact safer. This is really not about safety.


Yep, lots of questions and no answers!


----------



## daArch

DeanV said:


> More importantly, what are the lawyers going to say?



"I'd like the weekend Lamborghini in red", is what they'll be saying


----------



## BrushJockey

DeanV said:


> My instructor said that if the lead is not *disturbed*, you do not need to follow the rules. But, how do you ensure that? The EPA does not recognize the test sticks as valid on drywall or plaster. Would they accept a test of the surface layer only (so the test sticks are not contaminated with drywall or plaster dust) and if that is not lead and no other layer is disturbed, you are fine to not follow the rules?
> 
> More importantly, what are the lawyers going to say?



Aye, there's the rub. What does that mean?


----------



## Dean CRCNA

daArch said:


> First of all, it behooves all who disturb lead to be certified.
> Painters, remodelers, renovators, etc. will disturb lead if they work in the target buildings. This is an issue near and dear to me. I think the law will do a lot of long term good. But as with every new law that encompasses so much and affects so many, there needs to be great care taken that rumors and exaggerations are not passed on as fact.
> 
> To that, in the OP it said :
> 
> 
> 
> I need an EPA quote the includes *EVERY TRADE*
> 
> I will NOT shoot the messenger if the messenger is passing on the correct message.


The following may help you. It is from the rule itself ...

The rule states "_On or after April 22, 2010, no firm may perform, offer, or claim to perform renovations without certification from EPA under §745.89 in target housing or child-occupied facilities, unless the renovation qualifies for one of the exceptions identified in §745.82(a) or (c)_".

(a) Is where a lead inspector or risk assessor says there is no lead or where a certified renovator says there is no lead on the components being worked on.

(c) Is the opt out rule, which will probably disappear

My understanding, is that a non-certified firm can not even advertise or give an estimate. If they do, they would be going against the law.

Hope this helps


----------



## RCP

Thanks Dean!


----------



## RCP

I think this is the right link to the training materials provided by EPA to the trainers to teach the course. I'll look further tonite, have to go, have a great day all!


----------



## BrushJockey

To get more clarification on what "disturb" means, I e'd the instructor I had and got back the following reply- 
Used with his permission:
Me:

I took your class and need a clarification on what the definition of "Disturbed" means to a painted surface. 

For instance, as a cert. painter I go into a house to paint a bedroom, it is a target age and I assume lead is probably present, most likely under several coats of paint on the woodwork. I do no repair, wipe the ww with TSP substitute for prep, and prime and paint all surfaces. Have I disturbed lead paint? 
Would I have to set up the containment?

Another example- same room had uneven walls that I wanted to smooth out. I skim walls completely 3 times, and sand the top layer of mud that I applied- same question- have I disturbed lead paint? 

Last one- 
I do some wall repair on this room by screwing cracks in the plaster etc, I set up the containment. After I finish repair and perhaps prime, could the containment come down and be finished cleaned before finish coats of paint? 

I am having pretty heated discussions with other painters on these points, and there is much confusion to this rule.
Any help would be appreciated. 

Him:
The question is will the use of the TSP which is an abrasive cleanser break down the existing paint which may release underlying coatings, then containment of the work area, which I would assume you would want to do as public relation in any case would be at least some floor covering and furniture covering regardless if it is lead paint or not. Your deglossing is going to use water with the TSP so you are already engineering some of the dust that may be generated by the detergent wash, that will also need a rinse. You have to decide if the the coating is abraded sufficiently to justify more measures, but I would still do the notification to the homeowner, I would still keep them out of the work area and a to cover a ventilation unit is minor. The fine is too high that I would not want the risk, regardless, but that is your choice. If you feel the surface tension of the existing coating is not compromised by the deglossing, *then it is just painting and the rule would not apply.* (my emphasis) 

Case two, skim coating, Can you feel comfortable that you will not sand down the painted surface? I do not know how uneven the surfaces are. Here again, you are going to be using some type of containment any way, so I am not sure why it would make that much difference to follow the requirements.

Last one. I would treat it all as one project. Are you going to disturb more using a brush, roller or spray application, probably not, but I assume you still want to protect the work are from the new paint application. Public relation is your best sales tool.

Hope this helps.


Very interesting. One of the main q's - is straight up painting an issue, and this makes it sound like no. I suspect this would apply to wallcovering as well (Bill!) .


----------



## daArch

BJ,

I can't make hide nor hair if his answer pertains to paperhanging. 

However, I have found the paragraph I did NOT want to find. 

The EPA considers paperhanging to be a trade that will be included in the law. In this document:
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-TOX/2008/April/Day-22/t8141.pdf

they list the "specialty trades" which are being included. The paragraph reads:



> • Specialty trade contractors (NAICS code 238), e.g., plumbing, heating, and air-conditioning contractors, painting and wall covering contractors, electrical contractors, finish carpentry contractors, drywall and insulation contractors, siding contractors, tile and terrazzo contractors, glass and glazing contractors.


I am in absolute disagreement that we disturb lead paint. Perhaps 3% of my paperhanging jobs in my lifetime have disturbed lead paint. 

But because we are named, I have set in motion the process to offer training to the members of the NGPP Boston Chapter. Hopefully this will give us the "legal authorization" to make a determination that there will or will not be lead disturbed. And quite frankly, if I determine that lead containment will be necessary, I will pass on the job. 

I may need to take a test kit to estimates at the target homes and charge for testing. After I take the course and see what is involved, I will determine THAT option.


----------



## BrushJockey

Bill- Because he's a trainer and a lead abatement guy, he answered carefully.
But if straight painting is not "disturbing" the lead, and so if a cert painter makes that call ( and needs to be able to stand behind it) and paints using normal precautions, I would think the same would apply to hangers. 
If you had to do wall repair, then you might have to contain the area of repair, clean to specs, and then hang.
This approch sounds more like protecting the homeowner than knee jerking about the rule. 
I hope this is the direction things are really going to go.


----------



## daArch

BrushJockey said:


> Bill- Because he's a trainer and a lead abatement guy, he answered carefully.
> But if straight painting is not "disturbing" the lead, and so if a cert painter makes that call ( and needs to be able to stand behind it) and paints using normal precautions, I would think the same would apply to hangers.
> If you had to do wall repair, then you might have to contain the area of repair, clean to specs, and then hang.
> This approch sounds more like protecting the homeowner than knee jerking about the rule.
> I hope this is the direction things are really going to go.


Yup. I agree. Well put. 

This is why I will be taking the course. And I think I will leave the repairs to others. I have been trying to explain to some of the more resistant chapter members (yah, some are even MORE resistant than I  ) that we need to be trained to make the right call.


----------



## Dean CRCNA

Brush,

From the rule ...

_Renovation means the modification of any existing structure, or portion thereof, that results in the disturbance of painted surfaces, unless that activity is performed as part of an abatement as defined by this part (40 CFR 745.223). The term renovation includes (but is not limited to): The removal, modification or repair of painted surfaces or painted components (e.g., modification of painted doors, surface restoration, window repair, surface preparation activity (such as sanding, scraping, or other such activities that may generate paint dust)); the removal of building components (e.g., walls, ceilings, plumbing, windows); weatherization projects (e.g., cutting holes in painted surfaces to install blown-in insulation or to gain access to attics, planing thresholds to install weather-stripping), and interim controls that disturb painted surfaces. A renovation performed for the purpose of converting a building, or part of a building, into target housing or a child-occupied facility is a renovation under this subpart. The term renovation does not include minor repair and maintenance activities._

Not sure if this helps.

If I was forced to answer ...

1. Not disturbing painted surface and no need for containment. To be honest, I'm not real clear on the TSP make-up though.

2. Not disturbing as long as you don't hit painted surfaces with sand paper.

3. Containment could come down.


----------



## BrushJockey

Dean- here's one for you, because I think if we talk in terms of real life situations we get a better feel , rather than / just waving our hands in the air and saying we're all gonna die. /(humorous sarcasm mode off)

I want to apply a patch to a wall, or a chip in some woodwork etc. 
I know that if I hit the area with a primer like Gardz or a tinted one I can tell if I sand past it or not, and if sanding is just on new mud it takes some effort to bust through a tough prime. Which means I can feel confident myself that I'm not grinding into earlier layers, particularly if they're already under several coats. 
I would call this a responsible and reasonable approach to keeping my client safe . 
BTW I have almost perfected dustless sanding with my own modifications on a hand sander to vac system, so when I do sand the dust is immediatly caught into the vac. For times that only a sponge will get into a spot is the weak part of my system, but even then I have the vac end right there. 
I can almost sand a skimmed wall without getting much on the drop at all. 
Can I make this call that full containment is not needed and that if I take pictures of my process this will be sufficient for the EPA? 

I know lawyers are a different matter, but if in a case like this I know if lead was present, it wasn't caused by this process.


----------



## clammer

BrushJockey said:


> Dean- here's one for you, because I think if we talk in terms of real life situations we get a better feel , rather than / just waving our hands in the air and saying we're all gonna die. /(humorous sarcasm mode off)
> 
> I want to apply a patch to a wall, or a chip in some woodwork etc.
> I know that if I hit the area with a primer like Gardz or a tinted one I can tell if I sand past it or not, and if sanding is just on new mud it takes some effort to bust through a tough prime. Which means I can feel confident myself that I'm not grinding into earlier layers, particularly if they're already under several coats.
> I would call this a responsible and reasonable approach to keeping my client safe .
> BTW I have almost perfected dustless sanding with my own modifications on a hand sander to vac system, so when I do sand the dust is immediatly caught into the vac. For times that only a sponge will get into a spot is the weak part of my system, but even then I have the vac end right there.
> I can almost sand a skimmed wall without getting much on the drop at all.
> Can I make this call that full containment is not needed and that if I take pictures of my process this will be sufficient for the EPA?
> 
> I know lawyers are a different matter, but if in a case like this I know if lead was present, it wasn't caused by this process.


 
When an inspector from the EPA comes Knocking on the door he will not buy the i'm only removing the new layer of paint or mud.You should plan on doing the containment.Is this a power sander?


----------



## BrushJockey

No it's a hand sander ( fibra tape model)with mods. 

I know I could say what you did. I'm just wondering if experience and practicality have any play here. And if I documented with pics, which is way simpler than telling my clients they cant use their hallway for 2 days while I wipe it down with baby wipes.


----------



## Slingah

this whole thing is bullsh!t....
lead dust.....paaaaleeeeez 
that's all I have to say about it......


----------



## aaron61

Received firm certification Today...


----------



## clammer

BrushJockey said:


> No it's a hand sander ( fibra tape model)with mods.
> 
> I know I could say what you did. I'm just wondering if experience and practicality have any play here. And if I documented with pics, which is way simpler than telling my clients they cant use their hallway for 2 days while I wipe it down with baby wipes.


What will the pics be of ? I think if you give home owner the rrp book and sign the rrp form and then do not use lead safe work practices you could set yourself or your business up for problems.What if they took pics of the area and called to report you?Any work a home owner has done is an invasion of there privacy.If the hall is shut down for 2 days thats just part of the job


----------



## BrushJockey

Everyones' work is a little different. Many of my clients are repeat or are by a close recommendation. 
I have always had the least disruption to a client as a selling point. If I have to close down a hallway or other primary area it is huge. If I can do my work during the day and give them back their space at night, it is also huge. 
Many times a repair is very localized. Can this be made simple, yet safe and to code? 
These are the real questions of the real world.


----------



## Dean CRCNA

BrushJockey said:


> Dean- here's one for you, because I think if we talk in terms of real life situations we get a better feel , rather than / just waving our hands in the air and saying we're all gonna die. /(humorous sarcasm mode off)
> 
> I want to apply a patch to a wall, or a chip in some woodwork etc.
> I know that if I hit the area with a primer like Gardz or a tinted one I can tell if I sand past it or not, and if sanding is just on new mud it takes some effort to bust through a tough prime. Which means I can feel confident myself that I'm not grinding into earlier layers, particularly if they're already under several coats.
> I would call this a responsible and reasonable approach to keeping my client safe .
> BTW I have almost perfected dustless sanding with my own modifications on a hand sander to vac system, so when I do sand the dust is immediatly caught into the vac. For times that only a sponge will get into a spot is the weak part of my system, but even then I have the vac end right there.
> I can almost sand a skimmed wall without getting much on the drop at all.
> Can I make this call that full containment is not needed and that if I take pictures of my process this will be sufficient for the EPA?
> 
> I know lawyers are a different matter, but if in a case like this I know if lead was present, it wasn't caused by this process.


Brush,

1. I can't tell if lead paint is the top layer or 2nd layer or 3rd ... etc. So if you don't know, assume lead paint is the top layer.

2. Now for your question. A patch or a chip (even several of them) could possibly fall under the Maintenance & Repair area. This allows you to do 6 sq ft or less ... per room, without doing compliance. 

3. Containment in many areas will be based upon experience. Example: HVAC off (or cover vents). Just put a plastic sheet 6 foot out from where you are doing repairs. That's it. You don't necessarily need to build a dustless room with a staging room.


----------



## Dean CRCNA

aaron61 said:


> Received firm certification Today...


Glad for you. It is a good thing when it finally arrives.

Read the note on the letter about advertising the firm.

Happy for you.


----------



## clammer

BrushJockey said:


> Everyones' work is a little different. Many of my clients are repeat or are by a close recommendation.
> I have always had the least disruption to a client as a selling point. If I have to close down a hallway or other primary area it is huge. If I can do my work during the day and give them back their space at night, it is also huge.
> Many times a repair is very localized. Can this be made simple, yet safe and to code?
> These are the real questions of the real world.


If you want to give them back the hall at night just plan on clean up time every day and clean the area.If the repair is localized and under the 6sq feet requirement your all set.


----------



## Slingah

Dean CRCNA said:


> Glad for you. It is a good thing when it finally arrives.
> 
> Read the note on the letter about advertising the firm.
> 
> Happy for you.



wtf? got kool-aid???


----------



## BrushJockey

Dean- thanks. That does give me a bit more clarification on how to work. and I can tell if I'm working on a lead paint. I know what it looks like, I know what it feels like and I know what it tastes like. I think. I just can't remember....

Dudes- this is do-able. Don't get overly freaked out. It will mean new ways and some new equipment- but we can do this. 

I'm a one guy shop, and I probably have spent $1200-1500 to get the cert and to buy a vac and other stuff. Might be a while to totally recoup, but I'm not going out of biz, and my main market is mostly pre '78.


----------



## RCP

BrushJockey said:


> Dean- thanks. That does give me a bit more clarification on how to work. and I can tell if I'm working on a lead paint. I know what it looks like, I know what it feels like and I know what it tastes like. I think. I just can't remember....
> 
> Dudes- this is do-able. Don't get overly freaked out. It will mean new ways and some new equipment- but we can do this.
> 
> I'm a one guy shop, and I probably have spent $1200-1500 to get the cert and to buy a vac and other stuff. Might be a while to totally recoup, but I'm not going out of biz, and my main market is mostly pre '78.


That is a good attitude! Like it or not, it is a rule that should be followed by any professional, if you choose not to get certified, fine. Don't work on pre 78.


----------



## BrushJockey

Dean CRCNA said:


> Brush,
> 
> 3. Containment in many areas will be based upon experience. Example: HVAC off (or cover vents). Just put a plastic sheet 6 foot out from where you are doing repairs. That's it. You don't necessarily need to build a dustless room with a staging room.


What if the hall is only 4' wide? LOL And radiator heat. This is my world!


----------



## parodi

daArch said:


> First of all, it behooves all who disturb lead to be certified.
> Painters, remodelers, renovators, etc. will disturb lead if they work in the target buildings. This is an issue near and dear to me. I think the law will do a lot of long term good. But as with every new law that encompasses so much and affects so many, there needs to be great care taken that rumors and exaggerations are not passed on as fact.
> 
> To that, in the OP it said :
> 
> 
> 
> I need an EPA quote the includes *EVERY TRADE*
> 
> I will NOT shoot the messenger if the messenger is passing on the correct message.


Mr. Arch, I am getting serious about this subject because of all the misinformation floating around out there. I was convinced that according to the EPA document (http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-TOX/2008/April/Day-22/t8141.pdf) concerning the April 22 RRP rule that it does not apply to paperhangers. But here is the confusion source. In that document


EPA document said:


> Specialty trade contractors (NAICS code 238), e.g., plumbing, heating, and air-conditioning contractors, *painting and wall covering contractors*, electrical contractors, finish carpentry contractors, drywall and insulation contractors, siding contractors, tile and terrazzo contractors, glass and glazing contractors.


They seem to spell out that wall covering contractors must be certified...but that is only for those who do "renovations" ....... and what are "renovations?" 



same EPA doc said:


> Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program ‘‘Renovation’’ means the modification of any existing structure, or portion thereof, that results in the disturbance of painted surfaces, unless that activity is performed as part of an abatement as defined by this part (40 CFR 745.223). The term renovation includes (but is not limited to): The removal, modification or repair of painted surfaces or painted components (e.g., modification of painted doors, surface restoration, window repair, surface preparation activity (*such as sanding, scraping, or other such activities that may generate paint dust*)); the removal of building components (e.g., walls, ceilings, plumbing, windows); weatherization projects (e.g., cutting holes in painted surfaces to install blown-in insulation or to gain access to attics, planing thresholds to install weather-stripping), and interim controls that disturb painted surfaces. A renovation performed for the purpose of converting a building, or part of a building, into target housing or a child-occupied facility is a renovation under this subpart. *The term renovation does not include minor repair and maintenance activities.*



It looks like a paperhanger can easily avoid ALL of those activities and be exempt from the rule.

There is one problem I can foresee (for a paperhanger) and that concerns cleaning of the site. After a renovation has been done it must be verified that lead safe practices during cleanup were overseen by a lead certified contractor. It could be a big problem (IMO) for someone to enter a lead site in progress without final cleanup verification. You could track dust outside the area. IMO it would be prudent to ask for that final clean-up verification before beginning any paperhanging work.


Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program 
Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program


----------



## DeanV

parodi said:


> Mr. Arch, I am getting serious about this subject because of all the misinformation floating around out there. I was convinced that according to the EPA document (http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-TOX/2008/April/Day-22/t8141.pdf) concerning the April 22 RRP rule that it does not apply to paperhangers. But here is the confusion source. In that document
> 
> They seem to spell out that wall covering contractors must be certified...but that is only for those who do "renovations" ....... and what are "renovations?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It looks like a paperhanger can easily avoid ALL of those activities and be exempt from the rule.
> 
> There is one problem I can foresee (for a paperhanger) and that concerns cleaning of the site. After a renovation has been done it must be verified that lead safe practices during cleanup were overseen by a lead certified contractor. It could be a big problem (IMO) for someone to enter a lead site in progress without final cleanup verification. You could track dust outside the area. IMO it would be prudent to ask for that final clean-up verification before beginning any paperhanging work.
> 
> 
> Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program
> Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program




If you remove wallpaper and it removed layers of paint (more than 6 sq. ft.), you would need to follow the rule. Then also repairing those areas would be under the rule.


----------



## BrushJockey

Thing that I think we need to keep in perspective- what does that compliance mean? If you need to do minor repairs, put out a 6' sheet of plastic and clean up good. That's the heart of it. 
at this paranoiac stage, take a couple of pics of a swiffer after your done. 
Hang yer stuff. Collect check.


----------



## DeanV

BrushJockey said:


> Thing that I think we need to keep in perspective- what does that compliance mean? If you need to do minor repairs, put out a 6' sheet of plastic and clean up good. That's the heart of it.
> at this paranoiac stage, take a couple of pics of a swiffer after your done.
> Hang yer stuff. Collect check.


It is vertical and horizontal containment followed by the specified multi-step clean up. For painters, it would be rare to have smaller than one room size containment area, so the clean up would involve a lot sq. ft. and a lot of swiffers for verification. Imagine a whole house repaint and how much protection and multi-step clean up you would have to do.


----------



## BrushJockey

I've done one, you? Added about 4 hrs total on a single room with lots of wall repair. 

As a hanger I would seldom have to do this much. But as a painter I have always done major repair on plaster walls. 

And I also seldom do a whole house- at least at once.


----------



## parodi

DeanV said:


> If you remove wallpaper and it removed layers of paint (more than 6 sq. ft.), you would need to follow the rule. Then also repairing those areas would be under the rule.


True. But I can't remember the last time I ever removed anything close to six square feet of paint during a removal. The good thing is that the older houses I work in ...lead palaces from the Teens through the 1950's...don't have that problem. When you start pulling wall off in this area of the NE it is the house built in the 80's or later with no priming.

The second part of your comment is interesting. Are you saying that spackling over brown drywall paper is part of the rule? I haven't seen that. (sorry I'm late to this thread.)


----------



## DeanV

When you sand the spackle, you could be sanding lead paint as well.


----------



## BrushJockey

I think that could easily fall under the 6 ' poly and clean up part. I hope we are all way over thinking this. 
I also hope this isn't "they are all out to get us" thing. From what I gathered so far- if you are making a real effort to try and be compliant the EPA will work with you. Here in Mn it's the building inspectors that have the job, and they think it sucks too. 
Be practical- and engineer your work so lead is contained. This is do able. 
Also much easier on the inside.Hate to try and be a power washer with this thing.


----------



## parodi

DeanV said:


> When you sand the spackle, you could be sanding lead paint as well.


OK, I got it. So you are talking about removing a layer of paint from another layer of paint and then you don't know if the underlying paint contains lead. That is an interesting situation but I can tell you that in 32 years of doing this it has never happened to me. When I have had wall damage it is always shreds of contractor flat painted divots of drywall that come off exposing the brown paper. I also have to say that wall damage itself during removal is pretty rare with me since I test the hell out the paper for its removability

But if the hypothetical you are proposing were ever to happen to me, thanks to the RRP rule there is a legal way out. You are allowed to call in a certified lead inspector to assess if the exposed paint is indeed lead paint. So if you do that and you adhere to the 6 ft per room rule of the RRP you are still compliant. 

Andy Warhol predicted that in the future everyone would be famous for 15 minutes. Jim Parodi predicts that in the future everyone will leave their house with a lawyer


----------



## daArch

Jim,

First, welcome. Damn, now that you're here I can't speak ill about you anymore 

Second, I have not time to answer in length - I have a f**cking committee chair report due, you wanna do it ?? 

Third, you know I am just as sick and tired of all this as you and just don't believe it applies to us.

Fourth, you paint still don't you? If so, it's a moot argument for you.

But to get back to why, it would be PRUDENT, and ONLY prudent for us paperhangers to get certified.

We will be in a better position to to make a "valid" call whether there is lead or not.

The EPA has included us in their lists. I don't have the time or the money for lawyers to argue.

It's worth the $500 not to be looking over our shoulders worrying about some one we pissed off blowing the whistle. I know, I know, neither of us have EVER pissed anyone off. :whistling2:

I've been up and down this issue and from one end to the other. If we do not get certified the chance of it costing us more than $500 and a day wasted even while being innocent is too great for me.

See you at March Madness I hope.


----------



## RCP

I think that is a good attitude Bill.
Remember, this is directed at "target housing" and not "well, I don't disturb more than 6 square". If you are working in a pre 78 house (that has not been cleared), you had better be covered.


Is that the same Jim you are always complaining about?
Be nice to hear his side of those stories!:laughing:






just kidding, welcome Jim!


----------



## daArch

RCP said:


> Is that the same Jim you are always complaining about?
> Be nice to hear his side of those stories!:laughing:
> 
> just kidding, welcome Jim!


Don't believe a word she says, Jim. :no:


----------



## Workaholic

Well I know it is not a welcome thread but welcome Jim, i enjoy your articles in PWC. :thumbsup:


----------



## parodi

Workaholic said:


> Well I know it is not a welcome thread but welcome Jim, i enjoy your articles in PWC. :thumbsup:


Thanks for the kind words, everyone. In answer to Bill, I have done almost no painting ever since the economy tanked in Sept 08. Believe it or not, I have actually been busy with wallpapering here in the suburbs of NYC.

On the subject of this law let me say that I am NOT for noncompliance. But I am saying that there are large loopholes in this law (and the law is telling you flat out what they are.) You just have to be sure to know the law and restructure your business accordingly. The law tells you explicitly what is excluded and you CAN be on the exclusion side. You don't have to freak out and "just do it" setting your entire business up for federal surveillance. (And make no mistake, once you are on that federal roster IMO other things are going to happen.) 

A guy who installs curtain rods and drapes.... Are you telling me he must be lead certified? He drills through a total of 6 square inches to put in the mollies. Yet a guy who does house cleaning, a "specialty trade" not mentioned in the RRP had better watch out if he does "post construction clean-up." But my advice to the house cleaner is : Be aware and DON"T DO POST CONSTRUCTION CLEAN UP. 

A paperhanger goes to an estimate where there are 2 bedrooms to be papered and 3 rooms to be painted with peeling ceiling paint in an old house. If the paperhanger is ME I'm going to call one of the 14 painters I know who are lead certified, get them to do the prep and then walk in there after reviewing the lead cleanup verification without even a scrap of sandpaper in my truck. Shoot, I already don't work for lawyers and haven't for years just......because.

On a side note: First, I believe that this law will be selectively enforced. Second I believe that this law will be overturned by the supreme court if anyone tests it because IMO it is in flagrant violation of the eight amendment. Just in case your copy of the constitution is not handy:

Amendment VII ....Excessive bail shall not be required, _nor excessive fines imposed_, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. 

Laws of this type have been nixed by the supreme court before. A $32,500 fine is both excessive and punitive. Please tell me where I'm wrong and be brutal. I'm thinking of doing a _parodi on paperhanging_ on this very big and important subject.


----------



## daArch

Definitely do an article on it. Get the ball moving (and the lawyers salivating)

I too, when faced with peeling paint, plaster damage, or lead painted walls needing extensive sanding (unlike your friend, Murphy , I do not sand EVERY wall prior to hanging) in a target house, I will call a certified remodeler/renovator to take care of it. 

However, what authority will I have to make that call without training ? How can I test and give the HO a valid reading without gov't sanctioned certification? You know that with out proper training, we can not make legal determinations. 

I have two jobs coming up in target housing that will require reparation of wall surfaces. I need to be able to tell the HO's succinctly what their options are. I need to back up what I tell with that little gov't issued certification. 

Jim, I have thought long and hard about this - as I am sure you are aware by reading this forum, our BB, and APN. I am not "freaking out" and just doing it. It is a well considered business decision. And I will use that certifcation as a marketing tool. 

I would say 1/3 our chapter is not getting certified, even Barry B. isn't. I can't waste my breath trying to convince anyone to follow either course of action. It's a personal business decision. I've made mine. Perhaps when I was in my 40's, I'd be leading the charge to have this ridiculous law repealed, but those windmills do not seem so ominous to me any more.


----------



## BrushJockey

Arch- The thing I came away from the class with- don't even think about testing the lead. It's expensive, takes time and then everyone knows conclusively. Better to work "assuming lead" . That said, minor repairs can be made fairly easily following the guideline. Not everything needs a complete bag off. 
And unfortunately, passing the class isn't enough. We have to have the company certified for the add'l 300 bucks, even if it is a one guy shop.


----------



## daArch

So this whole thing is to work under an ASSUMPTION ???

People have been talking about wipes and testing. About sanding and testing.
There is inaccurate? There is no training to identify the presence of lead? 

Well, if that is the case, then I may change my mind about getting this certification to be what? A know nothing? I do not plan contain lead if it is present. Why should I get certified if I am nit trained to identify its presence?

I've been mis-informed?

Is this true? All you have taken the test. No one has been trained how to identify the presence of lead?


----------



## parodi

daArch said:


> Definitely do an article on it. Get the ball moving (and the lawyers salivating)
> 
> I too, when faced with peeling paint, plaster damage, or lead painted walls needing extensive sanding (unlike your friend, Murphy , I do not sand EVERY wall prior to hanging) in a target house, I will call a certified remodeler/renovator to take care of it.
> 
> However, what authority will I have to make that call without training ? How can I test and give the HO a valid reading without gov't sanctioned certification? You know that with out proper training, we can not make legal determinations.
> 
> I have two jobs coming up in target housing that will require reparation of wall surfaces. I need to be able to tell the HO's succinctly what their options are. I need to back up what I tell with that little gov't issued certification.
> 
> Jim, I have thought long and hard about this - as I am sure you are aware by reading this forum, our BB, and APN. I am not "freaking out" and just doing it. It is a well considered business decision. And I will use that certifcation as a marketing tool.
> 
> I would say 1/3 our chapter is not getting certified, even Barry B. isn't. I can't waste my breath trying to convince anyone to follow either course of action. It's a personal business decision. I've made mine. Perhaps when I was in my 40's, I'd be leading the charge to have this ridiculous law repealed, but those windmills do not seem so ominous to me any more.


No Bill, I wasn't saying it was a knee jerk on your part. I was just parsing the 79 page document and found many instances where clearly not EVERYBODY must become lead certified as our OP seemed to be saying. If I was painting I would clearly have to get this. But I say if you can restructure your present way of doing business you can stay within the law and not be a federally registered, certified lead contractor. And no, you don't have to spend the $175 to $350 to take the course. All the course information is available for free from the government.

Do you want anecdotal stuff about why you should read the government course material and not trust a course instructor? At a recent Bergen County Mastercraftsman meeting three painters had just taken the course from the PDCA or other independent course contractors. In the state of NJ (and in every state I think) the courses are farmed out for private companies to run....in NJ there are 4 different ones. Tim said that in his class he was told that he had to lay out plastic sheeting OVER the shrubs and on the lawn. Ken said that he was told that he had to cut slits in the plastic around the stumps of the shrubs. Everyone at the meeting said," How are you supposed to put ladders on the plastic? That's against OSHA." Nobody could answer. (Don't worry I want to ask that of any EPA rep who will talk to me for an article.) Then someone pointed out that if you put plastic over some types of shrubs on a hot August day you can kill thousand of dollars of shrubbery. Perhaps the course companies are more organized in MA?

IMO The whole thing is a clusterhump. I pity the exterior painters who must put up with this crap while the unlicensed, uninsured, uncertified, unkempt bandits will surely undercut the pros even more than they are now. It think the only way this will pay off for any painter is if they immediately start marketing to the schools, malls, and hi-rises, and offices because they MUST have the required paperwork to start the job ( in addition to insurance and local mechanical licensing) so they will be bidding against other painters who are bearing the same overhead.


----------



## daArch

OK, this has gotten REAL stupid.

I just called a colleague who got certified a little while ago. He said that the EPA DOES teach how to test for lead BUT the wonderful and all knowing Commonwealth of Massachusetts will NOT ALLOW a contractor to test for lead. The homeowner can, but not a contractor. Only a state certified lead tester can do that.

*WTF ???*

Now I am seriously wondering what worth this has for me. As a paperhanger, I can NOT get into the costs and hassles of containment, protecting, cleaning, and disposal of a few grams of lead dust. For 3% of my jobs, it obviously can not be worth it. This is getting stupider and stupider.


----------



## RCP

Bill, from what I have read, the CLR's are allowed to use the EPA Approved Test kit to test for lead, although not on drywall and plaster, according to EPA.

Some states require you to turn it over to a Certified Lead Abatement Contractor if tested for positive.
Otherwise, if you test for lead and it is positive, the owner is now required to disclose that fact on any real estate transaction.
If you do not test, you must assume there is lead and practice LSWP.


----------



## vermontpainter

Bill

If I were you, I would skip it, not shell out one dollar for it.


----------



## parodi

vermontpainter said:


> Bill
> 
> If I were you, I would skip it, not shell out one dollar for it.


I sympathize with your position. Here is a story from this week's Weekly Standard about a man who, I bet, wishes he never contacted the EPA about a simple oil tank removal. 

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/tanks-lot


----------



## daArch

Jim,

the guy I just talked to said that NO ONE in the class will follow the proceedures. The "students" brought up the fact that working on plastic sheeting with booties was a safety hazard. The instructor acknowledged this.

He also doesn't see how a hanger will disturb. But without being ALLOWED to test, how can we know?

I agree, they have taken a valid concern of lead poisoning and have gone out of their way to 100% phuck it up. And this state took it a step further.

Well, I got a month to decide. I've submitted my course registration and do not have to pay until the day of the course.

where is that document you were reading?

You wanna speak about this on Saturday? I'm sure Roger will find fifteen minutes that he can squeeze you in


----------



## daArch

RCP said:


> Bill, from what I have read, the CLR's are allowed to use the EPA Approved Test kit to test for lead, although not on drywall and plaster, according to EPA.
> 
> Some states require you to turn it over to a Certified Lead Abatement Contractor if tested for positive.
> Otherwise, if you test for lead and it is positive, the owner is now required to disclose that fact on any real estate transaction.
> If you do not test, you must assume there is lead and practice LSWP.


I guess Mass is one of those states that will not allow testing by a mere mortal. And guess where the lead tests kits are made? Natick, Mass.


----------



## RCP

parodi said:


> No Bill, I wasn't saying it was a knee jerk on your part. I was just parsing the 79 page document and found many instances where clearly not EVERYBODY must become lead certified as our OP seemed to be saying. If I was painting I would clearly have to get this. But I say if you can restructure your present way of doing business you can stay within the law and not be a federally registered, certified lead contractor. And no, you don't have to spend the $175 to $350 to take the course. All the course information is available for free from the government.
> 
> Do you want anecdotal stuff about why you should read the government course material and not trust a course instructor? At a recent Bergen County Mastercraftsman meeting three painters had just taken the course from the PDCA or other independent course contractors. In the state of NJ (and in every state I think) the courses are farmed out for private companies to run....in NJ there are 4 different ones. Tim said that in his class he was told that he had to lay out plastic sheeting OVER the shrubs and on the lawn. Ken said that he was told that he had to cut slits in the plastic around the stumps of the shrubs. Everyone at the meeting said," How are you supposed to put ladders on the plastic? That's against OSHA." Nobody could answer. (Don't worry I want to ask that of any EPA rep who will talk to me for an article.) Then someone pointed out that if you put plastic over some types of shrubs on a hot August day you can kill thousand of dollars of shrubbery. Perhaps the course companies are more organized in MA?
> 
> IMO The whole thing is a clusterhump. I pity the exterior painters who must put up with this crap while the unlicensed, uninsured, uncertified, unkempt bandits will surely undercut the pros even more than they are now. It think the only way this will pay off for any painter is if they immediately start marketing to the schools, malls, and hi-rises, and offices because they MUST have the required paperwork to start the job ( in addition to insurance and local mechanical licensing) so they will be bidding against other painters who are bearing the same overhead.


Well put Jim! You have to refer to the rule on the EPA site, even that changes constantly. Wait until April 22 to have the final version and look to that for guidance, there is a "script" on the EPA site for the trainers, it was an interesting read! 
I agree, it will be hard for certified residential guys to compete with the hacks on redo's, but for the playing field for the commercial, being certified may be the ticket!


----------



## parodi

daArch said:


> Jim,
> 
> 
> He also doesn't see how a hanger will disturb. But without being ALLOWED to test, how can we know?
> 
> 
> You wanna speak about this on Saturday? I'm sure Roger will find fifteen minutes that he can squeeze you in


My painter friend Tim who took the course said that the EPA approved test kit is only accurate on light colored paint not dark colored. There can also be a discrepancy if you rub it on plaster and other surfaces. This is anecdotal and I don't know any more....maybe someone here knows for sure. So even a certified lead inspector can not be 100% sure.

BTW the 79 page doc is this
http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-TOX/2008/April/Day-22/t8141.pdf

Bill, RE:Saturday? Hello? I'm working on video content for the site, remember? Why don't I just stick a roller extender up my...too and paint the ceiling.


----------



## gamby

*lead test*



daArch said:


> I guess Mass is one of those states that will not allow testing by a mere mortal. And guess where the lead tests kits are made? Natick, Mass.


You gotta love the irony of this. I took the class in Mass. in Dec and pointed out that the kits were made in Natick. Not legal in Mass tho!!!


----------



## BrushJockey

I've heard the test swab kits (85% accurate ) will be worthless everywhere when the EPA requires 95% accuracy. 

There are some pretty good reasons to not positively ID the lead, but assume. Gives you some outs, avoids costly testing or bringing in a lead dude to ray gun it. Put's the HO in a bind by knowing positively that their house contains lead. 
But then you would always have to follow the rules for pre 78.


----------



## clammer

daArch said:


> Jim,
> 
> the guy I just talked to said that NO ONE in the class will follow the proceedures. The "students" brought up the fact that working on plastic sheeting with booties was a safety hazard. The instructor acknowledged this.
> 
> stick some duct tape on bottom of the booties for added traction


----------



## BrushJockey

Once again I have to say- 
For most painting related repairs, the whole 9.5 isn't needed. Moon suits and booties are for tear outs and huge dust storms. 
Get a vac sander- The fibratape ones aren't bad - and your well on your way. Control the friggin dust. Engineer the problem away.


----------



## vermontpainter

This topic, in its multiple threads, has left the safe harbor of informative and is approaching the choppy open waters of government and politics. 

Has any government, local, state or federal ever executed any program anywhere that was administered and enforced well?

I think alot of people are taking a fundamentalist interpretation to something that is more universalist/unitarian.


----------



## BrushJockey

..uh, I think I agree. Where does Sufism fit in? I'm a spinner , man.


----------



## daArch

OK,

I'm dropping back fifteen and punting ..... or maybe I'll take a mulligan and tee it up again.

Getting married and having offspring was more predictable than this law.

I just had a thought that one reason the gov't did not publicize this as well as a special senate seat election, health care reform, or the newest bailout was because they didn't want the public to have too much time to study the facts. I'm thinking all they wanted was contractors to hear "$32,000 fine", "all housing prior to 1978", and a few other catch phrases, plus "you have three months to comply" and then watch the mindless scramble to get certified by poorly trained teachers.

As I said, I got another month to become better educated. But this is starting to smell like a bait shop.


----------



## daArch

vermontpainter said:


> This topic, in its multiple threads, has left the safe harbor of informative and is approaching the choppy open waters of government and politics.
> 
> Has any government, local, state or federal ever executed any program anywhere that was administered and enforced well?
> 
> I think alot of people are taking a fundamentalist interpretation to something that is more universalist/unitarian.


Scott, could you put that in concise non interpretable words?

I get the mid section, that's a given in this country. But the two bookends are open to various meanings. Give it some teeth.


----------



## vermontpainter

The reality is, lead is no more or less dangerous than it ever has been. There have been no high profile documented cases of lead poisoning that caused MALP (mothers against lead poisoning) to force legislation. It might just as well be enforcing restaurants with fear of salmonella. The absurdity is that there are much bigger fish to fry in the trades. Pardon the mixed metaphors, por favor.


----------



## vermontpainter

daArch said:


> Scott, could you put that in concise non interpretable words?
> 
> I get the mid section, that's a given in this country. But the two bookends are open to various meanings. Give it some teeth.


If I were to install teeth in the post, your words would be the incisors: "the mindless scramble to get certified by poorly trained teachers."

You are a new englander, Bill, so I think you will understand what I mean when I say that it reminds me of how people mob grocery stores when there is a big storm coming. 

Or another angle, its not them bomb that makes the bomb an effective weapon, its the fear of the bomb ($32,000). 

The rep who turned me onto the "deal" for the course must have said 5-6 times: "there arent many paint contractors around who will be able to absorb that kind of fine." Fear.


----------



## daArch

Can't argue with that.


----------



## johnthepainter

the govt wont even stop the lead coated baby toys from entering our ports and making their way to the stores.

but this epa crap is for the children,,,lol.

what a bunch of crooks.


----------



## johnthepainter

parodi said:


> Mr. Arch, I am getting serious about this subject because of all the misinformation floating around out there. I was convinced that according to the EPA document (http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-TOX/2008/April/Day-22/t8141.pdf) concerning the April 22 RRP rule that it does not apply to paperhangers. But here is the confusion source. In that document
> 
> They seem to spell out that wall covering contractors must be certified...but that is only for those who do "renovations" ....... and what are "renovations?"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It looks like a paperhanger can easily avoid ALL of those activities and be exempt from the rule.
> 
> There is one problem I can foresee (for a paperhanger) and that concerns cleaning of the site. After a renovation has been done it must be verified that lead safe practices during cleanup were overseen by a lead certified contractor. It could be a big problem (IMO) for someone to enter a lead site in progress without final cleanup verification. You could track dust outside the area. IMO it would be prudent to ask for that final clean-up verification before beginning any paperhanging work.
> 
> 
> Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program
> Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program


 
james, nice to see you, :thumbup:


----------



## rmasula

*renovate right booklets*

I have printed up a bunch of the renovate right booklets with a perforate back page for the signiture tear off portion for our files.


----------



## aaron61

you can print them free from there website or buy the nice ones for 2 bucks. why would i want to buy them from you.


----------



## vermontpainter

Hey wow, cool. Someone else wants to take painters money over rrp.


----------



## Workaholic

*rmasula*

Two posts in and you are wanting to sell us stuff? Read over the advertising rules and feel free to post an introduction here http://www.painttalk.com/f3/ so that we can get to know you a better. Thanks.


----------



## gamby

rmasula said:


> I have printed up a bunch of the renovate right booklets with a perforate back page for the signiture tear off portion for our files.


I called the local epa office and requested the booklets. They sent me 50 ...no charge!!


----------



## RGordon

gamby said:


> I called the local epa office and requested the booklets. They sent me 50 ...no charge!!


No Charge? what do you think the fees for the training and tax revenue and all that stuff goes to?


----------



## gamby

Oh yeah , duh, of course i've already big time expense for my 50 booklets!! my comment was for all those who are wondering where to buy and the cost of said booklets.


----------

