# Any updates on NAHB v. EPA?



## PatsPainting (Mar 4, 2010)

Just was wondering if anybody knows of any updates of this case about the opt out rule? I looked and could not find much. The court docs are listed below in the link. Interesting read.

http://www.nahb.org/generic.aspx?genericContentID=99044&fromGSA=1

Pat


----------



## Dean CRCNA (Feb 4, 2010)

The NAHB asked for it to be put on hold.


----------



## PatsPainting (Mar 4, 2010)

Dean CRCNA said:


> The NAHB asked for it to be put on hold.


By chance would you know a reason for this? or have a link.

Thanks

Pat


----------



## Dean CRCNA (Feb 4, 2010)

PatsPainting said:


> By chance would you know a reason for this? or have a link.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Pat


http://www.nahb.org/fileUpload_details.aspx?contentID=145090


----------



## PatsPainting (Mar 4, 2010)

Thanks, I did read that already, I guess I just did not understand it. What is this Clearance Proposal they keep talking about. I see this mentioned all over the place in that doc.

Thanks again 

Pat


----------



## Dean CRCNA (Feb 4, 2010)

PatsPainting said:


> Thanks, I did read that already, I guess I just did not understand it. What is this Clearance Proposal they keep talking about. I see this mentioned all over the place in that doc.
> 
> Thanks again
> 
> Pat


http://www.painttalk.com/f27/2011-rrp-changes-11981/


----------



## PatsPainting (Mar 4, 2010)

Well I guess we are waiting for the courts decision. Or maybe there has been an update I dunno.



> NAHB filed its opening brief on March 30, 2011, and EPA's response brief was filed June 8, 2011. NAHB filed its reply brief on July 6, 2011. Oral arguments were heard *Nov. 1, 2011*, and we are now awaiting a decision from the court.


Pat


----------



## Dean CRCNA (Feb 4, 2010)

This is part of an email I got ...

_Federal appellate court judges appeared skeptical at oral arguments over
industry's claim that the Obama EPA lacked authority to reverse a
Bush-era policy allowing home renovators to "opt-out" of complying with
EPA's rule to reduce lead paint exposure without providing new
information to justify the change, with the judges suggesting that the
agency has the discretion to protect human health however it sees fit so
long as it does not violate federal law.
_

Jackson's (NAHB lawyer) didn't seem to be convincing the judges with NAHB arguments.


----------



## PatsPainting (Mar 4, 2010)

Thanks Dean for the info. So no real ruling yet? 

This part seems kinda scary to me


> _judges suggesting that the
> agency has the discretion to protect human health however it sees fit so
> long as it does not violate federal law._


I wonder what is next on their agenda..

Pat


----------



## chrisn (Jul 15, 2007)

PatsPainting said:


> Thanks Dean for the info. So no real ruling yet?
> 
> This part seems kinda scary to me
> 
> ...


----------



## Dean CRCNA (Feb 4, 2010)

PatsPainting said:


> Thanks Dean for the info. So no real ruling yet?


No ruling yet and no telling when it will come.

I'm hearing NAHB just really didn't present a logical (law) case. I think they knew it was a shot in the dark.


----------



## PatsPainting (Mar 4, 2010)

Thanks again Dean, I gotta give NHAB props for at least trying on this one. I personally think the no opt out rule crosses the line when dealing with older customers with no children. It really makes no sense on so many levels. It encourages the HO to attempt to do the RRP work instead of the contractor.

Anyway I appreciate your thoughts and help.

Pat


----------

