# parodi on paperhanging--RRP as it Pertains to Paperhangers



## parodi (Mar 15, 2010)

Here is the *parodi on paperhanging *column from the new issue of PWC Magazine as promised. In a thread a while back I asked for questions here. A lot of those questions are answered on the Q & A at the EPA site so I did not re-ask them. Also can you believe there was a mix-up as my questions were relayed to a Washington official? Yes.... there was actually a communication problem between me, an ordinary citizen, and Washington DC which caused a big delay in getting my two answers.




******************************************************xx


_JULY/AUGUST 2010 PWC parodi on paperhanging:_

Just in case you are awakening from a coma, the news is that our whole world has changed thanks to the Renovation, Repair and Painting Lead Law which went into effect April 22 of this year. There has been more excitement about it among painters and paperhangers than the unquiet caused by a slippery foot on a 40 foot ladder when you are 36 feet up. And why not? When the feds talk about daily fines of $37,500 for non-compliance, contractors tend to get squeamish. There is so much that can be written about the law as it concerns painters that it is beyond the scope of this column. However its effect on paperhangers is much more manageable and may require only minor changes in behavior on the job.

Let’s start to boil it all down by asking, “What kind of paperhanging business do you have?” If you are a painting/paperhanging firm with a great deal of your work involved with interior and exterior painting projects, you are going to have to get RRP certified and registered if you work on houses that were built prior to 1978. But what if you are a paperhanger who specializes in the application of wallcovering with little to no involvement in painting, plastering, sanding and other patching work? The whole purpose of the RRP Law is to protect homeowners, their children and their neighbors from being exposed to paint dust that may contain lead. If your professional activities *do not create paint dust you are exempt from the lead law *even if you work in a pre-78 house every day*.* Actually the feds tell you flat out in many different EPA publications that you can create a small amount of paint dust if you disturb no more than 6 square feet of existing paint per room in an interior of a house built before 1978 (HUD is more stringent with a 2 square foot rule).

Great confusion was caused by the Final Rule of RRP in 2008 which said this: 
“_Potentially affected entities may include,_(emphasis mine)_ but are not limited to: _ _Specialty trade contractors (NAICS code 238), e.g., plumbing, heating, and air-conditioning contractors, painting and wall covering contractors_.” 

For some reason paperhangers who do little more than apply wallcovering primer and wallpaper freaked out and disregarded the words “may include” and only saw the words “wallcovering contractors” as if there were a target painted on their back. What they misunderstood was that the EPA was talking to “painting and wallcovering contractors”, i.e. contractors who do both painting and wallcovering and who *may* create lead paint dust. If you simply apply wallcoverings and only apply paint keeping sanding to a minimum of 6 square feet per room, you do not need to comply with the RRP Law. By the way, the 6 square feet rule means total square footage not a section of wall, say, 2 feet by 3 feet or 1 by 6 with contiguous areas of paint. A question up on the EPA web site from a contractor who drills numerous ½” holes in painted sheetrock to aerate walls after floods asks if this practice would now be under the RRP law. The EPA says no― unless the total area of all the holes is greater than the allowed six square feet per room (or 864 square inches per room.) I still don’t know how many holes it takes to fill the Albert Hall, but at least my rusty math tells me the flood contractor can drill 1,100 holes a half inch in diameter and stay within RRP limits.

I’m sure that there are many readers here whose daily work runs the gamut from “mostly painting” to “mostly wallpapering.” Personally I am in the “mostly paperhanging” camp and most of the time the only painting I do is the application of wallcovering primer. Some would say: Aha, parodi!...you are disturbing hundreds of square feet of existing paint by applying a primer. Yes folks, this erroneous rumor was actually flying around the internet earlier this year claiming that by merely touching pre-1978 walls it was “disturbing” the paint on them. Not so according to the EPA:

http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/sbcomplianceguide.pdf
_Q_. _Is painting considered renovation if no surface preparation activity occurs? _

_A. No. If the surface to be painted is not disturbed by sanding, scraping, or other activities that may cause dust, the work is not considered renovation and EPA’s lead program requirements do not apply. However, painting projects that involve surface preparation that disturbs paint, such as sanding and scraping, would be covered._

Bullet dodged? Unfortunately, no. There is a situation wherein paperhangers who perform the service of old wallpaper removal could possibly get themselves into a non-compliance situation by disturbing old paint. As I pored over EPA publications, one after the other, in preparation for this column I could find nothing definitive about the subject of wallpaper removal and lead paint dust. So I contacted the EPA in Washington regarding the “disturbance” definition and got this response from EPA Press Officer Dale Kemery:

_Question: Dale, can you list specific activities deemed a disturbance of painted surfaces?

_
_Answer: As a general matter, EPA believes that activities that create dust or paint chips are activities that disturb paint. *There is no definitive list of activities that disturb painted surfaces*_.(emphasis by J.Parodi)_ Some examples that can disturb painted surfaces include, but are not limited to:_
_• Making cut-outs in walls._
_• Replacing a window from the inside or outside._
_• Removing paint with a heat gun._
_• Scraping paint._
_• Removing kitchen cabinets._
_• Removing paint by abrasive sanding._
_• Removal of large structures, including demolition of interior plaster walls._
_• Window replacement._
_• HVAC repair or replacement, including duct work._
_• Repairs resulting in isolated small surface disruptions, including drilling and sawing into wood and plaster._
_• Scuff-sanding._
_These activities and other activities which disturb paint could be relevant to many trades, such as (but not limited to) renovation, remodeling, general repair, general maintenance, plumbing, electrical work, carpentry, window installation, painting, weatherization work, and more._

Everybody got that? There is no definitive list of activities that may land you a hefty fine, so I’m afraid you are all alone here with your common sense. If you think you may be creating dust or in some way causing a painted surface in a pre-1978 house to be degraded into particles in an area greater than 6 square feet per room you must stop the activity because you are not RRP certified and have not set up the job site for lead safe practices. What this means is that you are going to have to do a much more thorough test of wallcovering removability at the time of the bid to avoid a situation like that. Don’t forget that there is another perfectly legal, yet overlooked escape hatch in the RRP law, i.e. the law only applies to work for compensation. In the case of dry strippable materials like fabric backed vinyl, you can request that the customer rip it down or that they have someone else remove it since yanking FBV off the wall requires no real skills. Just remember to remove that aspect of the project from your original proposal.

Question (parodi):Would wet scrubbing/cleaning with something like a plastic pot scrubber and hot soapy water to clean a surface prior to priming be considered “disturbing” the surface?

Answer ([email protected]): The paint would presumably come off onto the pot scrubber, so yes, that would be disturbing. However, if you are just using a wet sponge to wipe down the wall to make it free of dust, that would not be disturbing the surface.

So does that mean you can’t use a scrubber pad on painted surfaces anymore? If you think so, you probably missed the “would presumably” in the answer above. In my world paint rarely comes off on a plastic pot scrubber and as long as we are “presuming” I would presume the same is true for your world. Remember we are using common sense here. If there is no evidence that you are disturbing—like a bucket of red colored water after you scrub a red painted wall or a yellow sponge turning to red—then you are not disturbing.

One question surfaces often and that is, “Should a paperhanger take the EPA lead course?” Numerous wallcovering installers have taken the course and have not registered with the government simply because they want to get up to speed on this law. This is up to you, but be advised that there is copious information online from the EPA and that these rules are presently in a state of flux. One important advantage to getting info online as opposed to taking a class is that changes in the rules are updated immediately. If you have a specific question for a particular work activity or want to see pages of specific updated questions posed by other contractors you can go to: 
http://toxics.custhelp.com/cgibin/toxics.cfg/php/enduser/std_alp.php?p_sid=
If you find a question there of particular importance to your work activities there take note that there is a “Notify Me by Email if this Answer is Updated” button. Contractors who are relying on only what they learned in their RRP class will be sorry because significant changes to the law have already taken place since April 22.

It is my opinion that paperhangers who do mostly paperhanging should know the law and turn down work involving lead containment and certification. Remember that once you sign on to do a lead job you are in a whole ‘nuther world of liability. Here in my state of NY I asked my insurance agent about the cost of being insured for lead liability and was told that cost increases would start at $2500 annually and would go up from there. Even though RRP certified contractors must keep records for lead jobs for a period of three years to satisfy the federal requirement it is still unclear how long a contractor can be held liable in a civil suit for any damages resulting from lead. Rather than become involved in this grotesque world of million dollar law suits, $37,500 daily fines, space suits and Biodome-like containment, my take on it is that paperhangers should make good business relations with RRP certified painters in their area and propose that they will send them work if they will reciprocate with a wallpapering recommendation after the verified cleanup of the dirty work.

It pains me to point out that, with the new law, paperhangers stand to make a small windfall by making a wallpaper job so much less of a hassle to the consumer. Most likely, consumers will gradually become aware of the law as they experience the sticker shock of having their pre-78 house painted. I’ll bet many homeowners will choose to have their home interiors painted illegally when they see the compliant painter’s bid which must cover containment costs (labor and material), insurance costs, record keeping costs, possible legal bills, plus new equipment and its upkeep as well as a slush fund in case they take a hit on a hefty government fine thanks to a careless employee. But there is also a chance that there will be other owners who will want to stay within the law yet will still want their homes spruced up with a pain-free alternative like the installation of wallcoverings. A further incentive for consumers to say no to RRP paint jobs is that the current “don’t ask, don’t tell” rule about the presence of lead in their home is still in effect which gets the homeowner off the hook for disclosure if they should sell the house. In other words, at present a seller can simply say, “I don’t know” when asked if their house contains lead. Once the house is determined to have lead by testing, there is a penalty for the seller to withhold this information at the time of sale. Here is a fun fact on the subject from the Real Estate Notification and Disclosure Rule which became effective March 1996: “…_anyone who leased or purchased a home covered by the Disclosure Rule can bring a civil action against the seller, landlord or agent for failing to disclose the required information for treble damages_.” 

Personally I am taking this issue head on with hand-out literature explaining that wall priming and wallcovering application are practices exempt from the law. I will also point out that in the “Renovate Right” EPA pamphlet (http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/renovaterightbrochure.pdf) the feds recommend:


*You may even want to move out of your home temporarily while all or part of the work is being done**.
*
 It looks like wallpaper application could turn out to be a cheaper and safer alternative to painting in pre-78 homes in many instances and it certainly looks like a more convenient alternative than checking into a hotel or with the in-laws for the duration of a paint job.


----------



## RCP (Apr 18, 2007)

Good article Jim :thumbsup:
Thanks for posting it.

So did you decide to get certified?


I think your point about an alliance with a painter is spot on, although, to me, it makes more sense to be Certified and not need it than to not be Certified and turn down the opportunity to even look at it.


----------



## Wallpaper Gypsy (Feb 22, 2010)

*painter/paperhanger alliance....*



RCP said:


> Good article Jim :thumbsup:
> Thanks for posting it.
> 
> So did you decide to get certified?
> ...


 
Much easier said than done. :yes:


----------



## parodi (Mar 15, 2010)

RCP said:


> Good article Jim :thumbsup:
> Thanks for posting it.
> 
> So did you decide to get certified?
> ...


I think it still goes back the question at the beginning of the column, "What kind of paperhanging business do you have?" 100%, 90%, 50/50 paint/paper?, and so on. I am doing so much work now for painters who want nothing to do with wallpaper that I barely even prime a wall myself now. One may ask why.

What has happened in my corner of the world is that the people with money to have wallpapering done have a lot of money to spend. Much of the residential material I hang is "by the yard price" upwards of $75 per yard requiring specialty adhesives and techniques. The painters want no part of this because they don't want to screw up something so expensive. There are other paperhangers in a similar position around the country. So I get further and further away from touching sandpaper since the painters are eager to make the extra $ on the wall priming.

I can see no reason for getting certified, no reason for registering with the Feds and no reason whatsoever for taking on the risk/liability of accepting a job requiring lead safe practices with all the potential headaches that go with it.

As this concerns painters I still say "know the law" and legally "avoid the law" (not illegally evade it.) Market to post-78 houses, join the Dustless Movement and vote for candidates who will repeal this version of the law to get something sensible enacted.


----------



## Wallpaper Gypsy (Feb 22, 2010)

...........


----------



## Wallpaper Gypsy (Feb 22, 2010)

Hey Jim, would the above be a satisfactory containment method?


----------

