# Lead Test kits



## RCP

So the new ones did not make the cut, looks like LeadChecks will still be the one.

_“Based on the preliminary ETV results, no new kits meet both the false negative and false positive criteria,” the agency said in a statement. “Therefore, pursuant to the RRP regulation, EPA will continue to recognize the LeadCheck test kit and the State of Massachusetts lead test kit. “_


Related article


----------



## johnpaint

I think that is the one they gave us in the class, but I make a mess breaking dem.


----------



## Roamer

Jeeze, I didn't even know there was a debate about whether Lead Check would still be viable. I use them just about every day. I've got about 25 ziplock baggies with each little lead stick. I would have been screwed if they had decided that Lead Check weren't good enough.


----------



## aaron61

Any of you guys having problems with dried up testers??

I've had about 1/3 of all kits come up dry!! Crack em ! shake em! Nothin!


----------



## Dean CRCNA

Very rarely use test swabs, but I've found none of them dried up.

You guys who do a lot of testing ...

1. Do you get the homeowners permission or just start testing.
2. Any homeowners say NO to testing? Percent?


----------



## aaron61

Dean,why don't you test. Do you just assume lead?
Am I wrong for testing all pre 78's?
I just figure if it's negative then I'm going to be able to pressure wash!
I don't ask I just do it.None have refused.


----------



## Dean CRCNA

aaron61 said:


> Dean,why don't you test. Do you just assume lead?
> Am I wrong for testing all pre 78's?
> I just figure if it's negative then I'm going to be able to pressure wash!
> I don't ask I just do it.None have refused.


Down here in Texas, it makes a difference to the homeowner not knowing you have lead based paint. That is because at the sale of the home, you don't have to disclose anything.

Disclose you have lead and the value drops on the home. (I'm told by Realtors).

When you use test swabs, you have to give the homeowner a copy of your test report. If you happened to find lead, that report would show it. Homeowner would then need to tell new homeowner that they have lead (which as mentioned above ... they don't want to do).

Because of this, I always get the homeowners permission and rarely get permission.


----------



## aaron61

Dean CRCNA said:


> Down here in Texas, it makes a difference to the homeowner not knowing you have lead based paint. That is because at the sale of the home, you don't have to disclose anything.
> 
> Disclose you have lead and the value drops on the home. (I'm told by Realtors).
> 
> When you use test swabs, you have to give the homeowner a copy of your test report. If you happened to find lead, that report would show it. Homeowner would then need to tell new homeowner that they have lead (which as mentioned above ... they don't want to do).
> 
> Because of this, I always get the homeowners permission and rarely get permission.


So then do you just assume lead is present on the project and work restricted by RRP?


----------



## Roamer

I haven't experienced the dried out swab, yet.

If the book I got from the certification class is worth its salt then it is definitely worth testing any house built between 1940-1978.

According to the book:

86% of homes built before 1940 have lead

66% of homes built between 1940 and 1959

25% of homes built between 1960 and 1977

Currently, when you get a bid from us, as I've said before, in addition you get a Lead Precaution Sheet which details exactly what steps we'll be taking to comply with the rules and any associated cost with that compliance.

Typical bid can range from $3800-6500 and the associated lead precautions can range anywhere from as low as $150-$1200 on those same jobs. Now if the house was built in 1963, I'll tell the homeowner that if I test and can determine that there is no lead then they don't have to pay the additional amount. Most HO's go for testing to save themselves the money or at the very least confirm that they have the lead and need the precautions.

Most of the lead tests that I've done have come back positive for lead.


----------



## RCP

Dean has a good point about getting customers permission. The customer will now have to disclose the known presence of Lead to anyone else, that can be an issue if they are selling. And unless you have an XRF inspection, by a Lead Inspector, the home cannot be declared Lead free. 

I don't think even if you swabbed all components, as a CR, that it could be "officially" declared Lead Free. (Dean, correct me if I am wrong?)

If the scope of work and extra cost is minimal, assuming lead may be a better option for the customer. I don't think I would force a customer to do a swab, or do one without permission.


----------



## Dean CRCNA

aaron61 said:


> So then do you just assume lead is present on the project and work restricted by RRP?


Yep.

I have heard of a couple of sneaky CRs that quietly do test. If it comes up positive, they simply do the RRP and don't give out the test report. If it comes up negative, they get the homeowner to OK a test ... give them the report and then don't have to worry about doing RRP.


----------



## Dean CRCNA

RCP said:


> I don't think even if you swabbed all components, as a CR, that it could be "officially" declared Lead Free. (Dean, correct me if I am wrong?)


You're right.

By the way ... never say the home is lead free. It can get you in trouble. Just complete the test report (showing negative) and give it to them. 

I always get a "signed" permission to do a test.

Also would like to reiterate that you can't test drywall/plaster. So with much of the interior painting work, testing doesn't do much good (unless you're not painting walls or ceilings).


----------



## RCP

Thanks Dean, but an Inspector, such as yourself, could do the XRF and declare it Lead Free? Or do you just say no lead detected?


----------



## aaron61

First off.I'm talking exterior.
I'm not sure how what the HO does after I paint concerns me??
In order to get my proposal right I need to know if I need to do containment.


----------



## Dean CRCNA

RCP said:


> Thanks Dean, but an Inspector, such as yourself, could do the XRF and declare it Lead Free? Or do you just say no lead detected?


I say something like this ...

_All components listed in this report, showed no surfaces contained lead-based paint on the federal standard used for the inspection. Lead-based paint means paint or other surface coatings that contain lead equal to or in excess of 1.0 milligram per square centimeter or 0.5 percent by weight._

In actuality, I can get a .9 reading and say it shows no lead-based paint (per the definition) ... even though there is lead based paint.


----------



## Dean CRCNA

*Testing Each Component*

Just making sure you guys know that for an exterior paint job (if you test), you would need to check each component.

That would mean hundreds of dollars in test swab and labor cost.

Just didn't want you to get into trouble.


----------



## aaron61

Dean CRCNA said:


> Just making sure you guys know that for an exterior paint job (if you test), you would need to check each component.
> 
> That would mean hundreds of dollars in test swab and labor cost.
> 
> Just didn't want you to get into trouble.


I'm not sure I agree.The way I read it, siding would be 1 component,Trim would be another.
I can assume all siding the same.I can assume all trim is the same.

If I find lead I don't need to do any further testing.


----------



## Dean CRCNA

aaron61 said:


> I'm not sure I agree.The way I read it, siding would be 1 component,Trim would be another.
> I can assume all siding the same.I can assume all trim is the same.
> 
> If I find lead I don't need to do any further testing.


From the rule, under component definition ...

windows and trim (including sashes, window heads, jambs, sills or stools and troughs).

So, just for a window, you would have 6 components. 

Per http://toxics.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/...XJjaF90ZXh0PWNvbXBvbmVudA!!&p_li=&p_topview=1

A CR has to check each window component of *each window*

On another example, each wall is a component. On a home, it has at minimum 4 walls. On each of those walls you may have soffits, fascia, rake board, corner boards, siding, drip edge flashing, vents, trim, gutters ... etc. Each of those is a component.

And don't forget the chimney


----------



## 6126

Thanks for the posts Dean. Test every component on the house? Wow! The more I read about this the more I will only do post 78 homes. Im staying busy for now and dont want any part of the RRP jobs. Turned down two jobs this week. One was 1969 and the other 1945. Maybe down the road I might start taking them on? But for now? I think I will pass.


----------



## nEighter

watch out for swiffers.. here they make you crazy..


----------



## aaron61

Dean CRCNA said:


> From the rule, under component definition ...
> 
> windows and trim (including sashes, window heads, jambs, sills or stools and troughs).
> 
> So, just for a window, you would have 6 components.
> 
> Per http://toxics.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/...XJjaF90ZXh0PWNvbXBvbmVudA!!&p_li=&p_topview=1
> 
> A CR has to check each window component of *each window*
> 
> On another example, each wall is a component. On a home, it has at minimum 4 walls. On each of those walls you may have soffits, fascia, rake board, corner boards, siding, drip edge flashing, vents, trim, gutters ... etc. Each of those is a component.
> 
> And don't forget the chimney


I'm still not sure I agree....I see siding as a component/Trim as a component/Windows as a component. etc...
I think your looking at a component of a component.


----------



## Dean CRCNA

As a lead inspector, I was trained in sampling protocols (as referenced in http://toxics.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/...XJjaF90ZXh0PWNvbXBvbmVudA!!&p_li=&p_topview=1) and even I have to check certain components of a window or door.

Plus, I have to check each wall and certain components on that wall.

I can use testing combinations and rely on painting history, but as the link shows ... a CR can't.

I guess my thinking is that a CR would at least have to check the same components as I would and that with the referenced link ... they would even have to check "more or every".

But I've been wrong before 

_This discussion has to do with negative readings (that you would need to test more). If you found a positive reading on 1 item or a couple of items ... lead safe work practices would have to be done anyway._


----------



## aaron61

Dean CRCNA said:


> As a lead inspector, I was trained in sampling protocols (as referenced in http://toxics.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/...XJjaF90ZXh0PWNvbXBvbmVudA!!&p_li=&p_topview=1) and even I have to check certain components of a window or door.
> 
> Plus, I have to check each wall and certain components on that wall.
> 
> I can use testing combinations and rely on painting history, but as the link shows ... a CR can't.
> 
> I guess my thinking is that a CR would at least have to check the same components as I would and that with the referenced link ... they would even have to check "more or every".
> 
> But I've been wrong before
> 
> _This discussion has to do with negative readings (that you would need to test more). If you found a positive reading on 1 item or a couple of items ... lead safe work practices would have to be done anyway._


Correct on the posative.
But it just seems like so much over kill(imagine that!!) to not view siding as a whole component,window as 1,trim as 1,door as 1,etc....


----------



## Dean CRCNA

aaron61 said:


> Correct on the posative.
> But it just seems like so much over kill(imagine that!!) to not view siding as a whole component,window as 1,trim as 1,door as 1,etc....


Take a house that was peeling and was scraped and repainted in 1950. When you test for LBP ... you could happen to test where it was scraped (to bare wood) and show no LBP. But if you tested where the paint adhered (back in 1950) it would show LBP.

Or if you just tested a window sill and found no LBP, but didn't know the sill rotted out years ago and was replaced ... ?

I've tested one side of an interior door and it showed negative. Tested the other side and it showed positive.

Overkill: I do think they should have spent 30 minutes in the 8 hour course and explained painting history, testing combinations and such. That way, the CR could have been trained and allowed to do "sampling".

By the way, if it is a LSHR (which 50% of homes are) ... a CR can't do testing anyway. :wallbash:


----------



## aaron61

O K, I'll bite...what is LSHR?????


----------



## RCP

aaron61 said:


> O K, I'll bite...what is LSHR?????


Oh, this is going to raise your blood pressure Aaron!:jester:

There is a whole 'nother set of rules if government funds are used, but these have been in place before RRP, so everybody has already been doing it, right?

Difference in LSHR and RRP

The rules


----------



## aaron61

RCP said:


> Oh, this is going to raise your blood pressure Aaron!:jester:
> 
> There is a whole 'nother set of rules if government funds are used, but these have been in place before RRP, so everybody has already been doing it, right?
> 
> Difference in LSHR and RRP
> 
> The rules


OOOHHHHH ...Yes! I get that,I just didn't recognize the abreviation. I would Have recognized HUD. I wouldn't touch HUD homes even if there were no lead checks involved!!!! They are just Nasty!!!!!!!!!
Not something I believe I will ever be doing!
By the way,what's the abreviation for abreviate???


----------



## Dean CRCNA

Aaron

You've probably have been doing LSHR homes already. You just didn't know it. A well written article on Lead Safe Housing Rule (LSHR)  http://rrpcompliance.com/news/you-could-be-certified-and-still-be-working-illegally/


----------



## aaron61

Dean CRCNA said:


> Aaron
> 
> You've probably have been doing LSHR homes already. You just didn't know it. A well written article on Lead Safe Housing Rule (LSHR)  http://rrpcompliance.com/news/you-could-be-certified-and-still-be-working-illegally/


O K...Now I'm flippin my Lid!!!!

You're tellin me I need to ask the potential customer, who I have no relationship with,what kind of loan do they have on their home?????

Are you F'n Kidding Me!!! I think they will tell me to get the H*ll off of their property.:blink:
I'm pretty sure that most will consider this to be a bit personal.IMHO


----------



## RCP

Dean, I was trying to break it to him gently!:whistling2:

Deep breaths, Aaron!

Yep, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Tarp, Block Grants and on and on!


----------



## Dean CRCNA

RCP said:


> Dean, I was trying to break it to him gently!:whistling2:
> 
> Deep breaths, Aaron!
> 
> Yep, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Tarp, Block Grants and on and on!


Oh ... I missed the word "gently".


----------



## aaron61




----------



## aaron61




----------



## RCP

It's ok Aaron, what doesn't kill us........

I think Neps was right "Just say no!"


----------



## aaron61

I'm just going to keep doing what I'm doing and hope it's right!


----------



## jacob33

aaron61 said:


> I'm just going to keep doing what I'm doing and hope it's right!


Thats all you can do I think just do your best to comply and hope for the best. In a couple of years this will not even be on the radar anymore is my belief. So just follow the law as best you can.


----------



## VanDamme

jacob33 said:


> Thats all you can do I think just do your best to comply and hope for the best. In a couple of years this will not even be on the radar anymore is my belief. So just follow the law as best you can.


And hope the fine is $5,000 and not $30,000


----------



## jacob33

VanDamme said:


> And hope the fine is $5,000 and not $30,000


I think if your are trying to comply they will work with you there are many who are not even trying. I could be wrong but thats my hope. I say follow the law but I have concluded you do the best you can and that is all.


----------

