I am writing this to explain my feelings about RRP

One Person’s Opinion: This is a guest blog submitted by Joe Levitch of Levco Builders to express his opinion.  Joe is a remodeling contractor and he is also a Licensed Lead Inspector and the owner of Lead Locators, a lead inspection firm in Boise Idaho. He comments and contributes to RRPedia quite often.  If you would like to express your opinion or offer something of value for RRPedia visitors let me know.

I am writing this to explain my feelings about RRP

There is a wide spectrum of folks who have been affected by the RRP rule from carpenters with a pickup and a dog, to multimillion dollar companies. Not all trades have the same challenges. I believe the painters have it the worst of all with their vertical containment issues and the concern of using ladders over plastic covered surfaces. However, since RRP is a blanket rule for all trades, I suggest we all need to be involved in collectively solving each other’s dilemmas.

How we all choose to respond to the EPA’s oversight of the remodeling industry is a personal one.   I will be the first to admit that initially I found it difficult to understand how invisible dust particles can cause serious health hazards.  But with a little research, I got it. I suggest you can understand it too. Take my word for it, or look it up. I’m sure you will come to the same conclusion.

Not everyone wants to have a real business.  I often describe that my business was akin to “A Lemonade Stand” (Not that I don’t like them in fact I have a family rule that it is illegal to pass one up without stopping).  I have evolved it into a real business and have accepted the responsibilities that go along with it.  My big step forward occurred when I joined NARI.

The business part turns me on right now.  However, I understand that there are those who prefer the hands on, the nail gun and the saw.  I happen to prefer the keyboard and the pen.  Having this new RRP rule is a huge challenge to incorporate into any business and I feel many of the same pressures you do.  I believe following the rules and separating my business from others will take me to the next level of success. I also understand there are those who are seeing it from a totally different perspective.

It reminds me of an old story from India about the six blind men that were asked to touch a different part of an elephant and describe what an elephant looks like. The man that touched the leg said it is like a pillar.  The man that touched the tail said an elephant is like a rope; and so on. The truth is that each man is absolutely correct. Only the sighted person can see what the elephant looks like as a whole.

From the perspective of a carpenter the RRP rule is a pain in the butt. From the homeowner’s perspective, it is a way to keep her kids safer, and it jacks up the price for remodeling. From many professional remodelers’ perspectives, the RRP rule is another level of certification and a credential that sets them apart from the competition.  No matter how you look at RRP, it is a new requirement and changes the game we were all used to.

As an industry I would like us to see us move to the fifth step in the Kübler-Ross model made famous in her 1969 book, On Death and Dying.

1. Denial= “ I feel fine, this can’t be happening to me“ (This was done prior to 4-22-2010)
2. Anger =”Why me?” (Lots of this still floating around)
3. Bargaining= “Just let me do it the way we always have… I did a fine job of cleaning.” (Some professional organizations are still lobbying for this.)
4. Depression= “I am so sad, why do I even bother?” (A whole lot of us are dealing with this)
5. Acceptance= “It’s going to be okay, I can do this thing”  (Most larger companies and some of the rest are well on the way to incorporating the RRP rule into their marketing strategies)

There is a sufficient body of scientific evidence that lead dust is created during renovation and while disturbing lead based painted surfaces. There is also a significant body of medical knowledge that lead is bad for people. I am educating my perspective clients as fast as I can. To the extent that they get it, and see a value in what I offer, I will be a clear choice for those who live in Pre 1978 homes.

For those among us that have made it to the fifth level, I would like to open a national discussion about how we are coping with the challenges and succeeding. The East coast has been dealing with these issues for a lot longer that the West. Shawn has been gracious enough to share the stage for a moment and see if the concept gains traction. My goal is to plant the seed.

Was The RRP Created for the Right Reasons?  

One Person’s Opinion: This is a guest blog submitted by Ray Douglas to express his opinion.  Ray is a remodeling contractor in Brodhead, Wisconsin and has been in business for 34 years. He comments and contributes to RRPedia quite often.  If you would like to express your opinion or offer something of value for RRPedia visitors let me know.

Was RRP Created for the Right Reasons?  

The EPA had good reasons and intentions at first to study the effects and causes of elevated blood lead levels, but the levels of EBLL’s in children ages 6 and under dropped dramatically in years 1997-2007. Data from the CDC documents the drop. 

So common sense and logic would say this problem was correcting itself without this new rule.  So what is the reason for RRP?

The EPA has been working for years on the effects of remodeling and renovation in connection with EBLL’s.  The EPA’s Proposed RRP Rule issued on January 10, 2006 describes how some of their research was conducted.  

In a document dated December 1998 EPA received a study that “was funded and managed by the US Environmental Protection Agency.”   I suspect EPA spent millions if not billions of taxpayer dollars on research, studies, the writing of and implementation of the RRP rule.

But something happened along the way and EBLL’s in children 6 and under dropped dramatically.  So why did EPA go ahead with the RRP?  In my opinion one of two things happened. 

1. EPA didn’t notice EBLL’s were dropping      
2. EPA knew the levels were dropping, but had to justify all the taxpayer money they had already spent. 

The EPA couldn’t go back to congress and tell them most of the money they spent was a waste because the problem was correcting itself.

So what did EPA do?  Create the RRP.  Why?  In my opinion I think it was to justify taxpayer money spent and to create a need for future EPA growth.   A similar situation would be like a department in industry that doesn’t use its entire operating budget in a year.   The next year the budget gets cut (layoffs etc), so the department finds a way to use the money whether it is productive or not, so they don’t have to face a budget cut the following year.

Education and public awareness were keys to EBLL’s dropping, but that may have been problematic for the EPA.  If education and public awareness were enough to reduce the problem then the EPA could potentially lose some of its congressional funding.   But by creating RRP, EPA takes a problem that was solving itself---creates regulations to solve it---then those regulations in themselves become a problem----therefore giving EPA a reason for its own existence and more congressional funding.

Is Money Spent On RRP A Cost Effective Approach To Lead Poisoning?

How bad is the child lead poisoning problem?  And, how many of the poisoned children were poisoned by lead due to renovation work?  The answer to these two simple questions might surprise you.  Had the EPA and Congress done adequate research, might they have found better and more cost effective ways to further reduce the number of lead poisoned children? 

First in the chart below from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevent (CDC) are the national numbers for lead poisoned children over the ten year period from 1997 to 2007.   Notice that the number of children tested went up two fold, while at the same time the number with elevated blood levels dramatically dropped from about 7.5% of those tested down to about 1%, representing about an 87% drop.     Keep in mind that all this happened before the RRP rule took effect in April of 2010 and while then Senator Obama was pushing EPA to enforce the RRP Rule.  The chart proves that a recently released confusing and shortsighted regulation is now in place to address a problem that was already being dramatically reduced by other means.  Might this prove that the government is going about solving the problem using tactics with limited effect while at the same time they are unaware of or even ignoring tactics they could expand upon that are already working?

No child should be poisoned by lead.  However, our government and politicians are concentrating in the wrong area if they really want to substantially address the lead poisoning problem.   As I had discussed in a previous blog, more children are poisoned by their own parents doing renovations than by contractors doing renovations.  One study in NY showed that only 14% of those children found to have lead poisoning got it as a result of RRP related activities.  The same study also reported that almost twice as many children were poisoned by their parents doing their own RRP work than by all others doing RRP work.  It is likely that most would be renovation companies, but a good number could also have been homeowners who did the work before selling to a new owner, amateur “flippers”, landlords and or property developers doing their own work.

If our government has limited resources and money for something as important as lead poisoning, why has it chosen to address the problem by spending so much money and resources on regulating contractors when that same money could be better invested if it were used to educate and regulate the homeowners (parents) who cause the majority of RRP related poisonings in children, unfortunately and often unknowingly, their own children? 

What You Don’t Know About Respirators and Probably Would Rather Not Know

On December 2nd I attended an RRP/OSHA Respiratory and Worker Protection Workshop put on by The Contractor Coaching Partnership and Safety Trainers.   The workshop was really helpful for me.  It helped me tie together some of my open questions and concerns regarding OSHA requirements and compliance as they relate to RRP related work activities for employees.

While at the workshop I found one thing the main instructor Darcy Cook of Safety Trainers said to be very important for contractors to be aware of.   Under the OSHA Lead in Construction Standard, contractors must assume their employees will be exposed to lead above OSHA’s established action level requiring the use of respirators until they actually conduct air monitoring testing to prove otherwise.

This means that respirators must be worn while doing RRP work until the testing is done and a written respirator plan is put in place that details when a respirator is required and when it is not.   Engineering controls can be used to limit the creation and or spread of lead dust while work is performed.  The requirement to wear the respirator or not all depends on the kind of work being done as well as how the work is performed. 

For example; the sanding of painted surfaces.  If dry hand sanding is done, a respirator will definitely be required.   If wet sanding is done a respirator may not be required.  If the sanding is being done using a sander attached to a functioning HEPA Vac that captures all sanding dust, a respirator is probably not required.   The previous sentence is qualified with “may” and “probably not” on purpose.  The only way to know if a respirator is required or not is to monitor the air for lead dust while the work is actually being performed.

The chart below is from the EPA Certified Renovator Manual.  The chart shows exposure levels of airborne leaded dust for some common renovation activities.   OSHA’s permissible exposure limit (PEL) for workers is 50 Micrograms per centimeter squared (50 µg/m3).   If exposed over the PEL, workers must wear respirators.  All three activities in the chart exceed the PEL.

So, under OSHA requirements, before allowing them to do RRP related work or even enter a contained work area, employees must first be sent to a physician to be sure they are healthy enough to wear a respirator. Then they must be fit tested by a professional and provided with a properly fitted respirator that protects them from worst case lead exposure scenarios based on the kind of work they do. They must also be trained how to select, use, clean and store a respirator.   And, they must wear the respirator until the air monitoring testing is done to identify when a respirator is required and when it is not depending on how the work is performed and what engineering controls are being used.

Although these OSHA requirements are not new, the majority of residential contractors are not aware of them.  Unfortunately, ignorance of the requirements will not be an excuse if OSHA inspects one of your projects and or one of your employees is poisoned by lead.   Perhaps it would have been helpful if EPA had included the above information in the required eight hour certified renovator training when showing the chart above.

Click here for more information about Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) required for RRP work

Click here for more about what you need to know about Respirators when doing EPA RRP work

Click here for OSHA standards for cleaning a respirator

Six Ways Non-Compliance with The RRP Rule Could Affect Your Business

Renovators should be aware that in addition to EPA or administering states, other individuals or entities may likely take advantage of the documentation requirements to hold renovators accountable for their actions or lack thereof.

Here is a partial list of possible time bombs for renovators who are not in compliance with the new RRP lead laws:

• Lawyers could use non-compliance with the RRP rule to demonstrate negligence by the renovator.   Even if allegations of negligence have nothing to do with lead or the RRP rule, non-compliance with RRP documentation requirements will be easy to prove and will be an easy way for suing clients and their lawyers to argue that if negligent with RRP requirements, a contractor could also be negligent in other areas.
• Insurance companies could use a lack of compliance to deny coverage.  Several insurance agents have told me that insurance companies will soon be requiring proof of RRP compliance, both for the GC as well as subs the GC uses, before renewing general liability and workers compensation policies.  Insurance and the cost of a policy are all about risk.  Renovators not in compliance with the RRP rule increase the risk insurers take when they write insurance policies
• Home owners could use lack of RRP compliance to avoid paying their renovator.  Think of it as blackmail.   If the renovator did not follow RRP requirements, their customers could avoid paying for services by threatening to report non-compliance.  Think this is farfetched?  One contractor told me he knows of another contractor who already had this happen to him.
• Employees could use non-compliance against employers. Whether an employee really is affected by lead or not, it will be very easy for employees to prove their employers put them at risk and or were negligent in protecting them on the job by simply referring to the worker protection training and methods taught to them during the required eight hour certified renovator training class. 
• OSHA could use RRP paperwork to prove non-compliance with its Lead in Construction Standards.   OSHA’s worker protection requirements related to lead are very specific.   Information contained in the required RRP documentation, particularly the renovation checklist and non-certified worker training documentation, could easily be used to show workers were not adequately trained and or protected when working in contained work areas.  A lack of the required documentation could also be used by OSHA to demonstrate negligence by the business. 
• A renovator may want to store RRP documentation for a lot longer than the three years required by the RRP rule.  In regards to lead poisoning, the statute of limitations for children doesn’t start until they are 18 years old.  If a child, rather than their parents, decides to sue a renovator for lead poisoning, having the documentation to prove lead safe work practices will be an importance defense for the renovator.  If the documentation is no longer in existence, or never existed to begin with, proving compliance will be difficult or impossible.

If you are looking for forms and signage to help you with comply with the EPA RRP rule, I recommend you check out what The Lead Paint Forms Store has to offer.  They offer a complete assortment of multi-part carbon forms, signage and checklists to assist you and your employees with RRP compliance

RRP Work Can Be Risky if You Are Picking Up The Pieces After a Home Owner Does Their Own Work

In a recent RRPedia article titled “Most Children Poisoned by Lead during Renovations Poisoned by Their Parents”, One commenter posted the following the following comment and question:

“Shawn, this is actually something that I've been thinking about for some months now. As a handyman, I'm called upon to come in after a 'DIYer' has attempted and failed to complete a project. How are contractors supposed to protect themselves with the knowledge that anyone (especially kids) in the house could already have lead poisoning? It's kind of extreme, but do we need to have everyone in the home get tested before we sign a contract to begin repairing their repair work? It's troubling to say the least. There's no doubt that if homeowners were held to the same rules regarding the RRP, there would be more contractor work as they (the homeowners) would not want to go through all the protective measures. Thoughts?”

Scott Remsen

This is an excellent observation and question. The liability in such a situation is huge. I just recently had a conversation about this topic with an attorney well familiar with the RRP rule. Her suggestion was to consider asking the home owner to do testing of the occupants and perhaps even dust wipe testing at the home before beginning any work to establish a point of reference. Discussing this with and asking the home owner to do so would obviously be a sensitive conversation and could likely be a tough sell for many contractors.

In the video below Attorney Andrea Goldman discusses options renovators can consider if they are asked to do RRP work following behind a DIY Home Owner.  This video was filmed at a site where very large lead paint chips were left all around a recently repainted deck.  The video shows paint scraping debris all over the ground and on a picnic table.  The house was right near the ocean.  As you can probably tell from the audio the wind was blowing, causing the paint chips and dust to be spread all around the yard and walkways.  Obviously there was total disregard for any containment or clean up at all, as evidenced by the size of the paint chips.

If you are looking for forms and signage to help you with comply with the EPA RRP rule, I recommend you check out what The Lead Paint Forms Store has to offer.

What To Do If You Have Been Poisoned by Lead

Many RRPedia users, attendees of my seminars about the RRP Rule and a few others at several RRP workshops I have participated at have asked what should be done if someone has been poisoned by lead.  Perhaps you might even know a carpenter poisoned by lead.  I am not an expert in this area but thought it would be helpful to do some research and offer some guidance on what to do if affected by lead poisoning. You can find out about the symptoms of lead poisoning by reading this previous post.  However, keep in mind that the only way to know for sure if someone has been poisoned by lead and at what level would be a blood test.   If you do RRP work it would be a good idea to consider asking your doctor to test for lead the next time you visit with him or her.   If after reading about the symptoms of lead you are concerned that you might already be poisoned by lead, contact your doctor right away.

According to the Mayo Clinic Web site, the first step that should be taken if someone has been found to have lead poisoning is to remove the source of the contamination. The clinic also suggests that if you can't remove lead from your environment, you may at least be able to reduce the likelihood that it will cause problems. One option to reduce lead exposure would be sealing the surface to cover and prevent direct contact with, rather than remove lead paint.

Lead poisoning occurs in children and adults when lead builds up in their bodies, often over months or years. It is important to know that even small amounts of lead can cause serious health problems and possibly long term effects. Children under the age of 6 are especially vulnerable to lead poisoning, but adults, particularly those who do RRP related work can suffer serious consequences due to long term and or multiple exposures.  At very high levels of exposure, lead poisoning can be fatal.

For children and adults with relatively low blood lead levels, simply avoiding any additional exposure to lead may be enough to reduce levels and avoid long term consequences.

For more severe cases of lead poisoning, your doctor may recommend treatments such as Chelation therapy or EDTA therapy.  Chelation therapy is a treatment that includes taking a medication that binds with the lead in your body and is eventually excreted in your urine.  EDTA therapy is typically used for more serious cases.  This treatment includes treating the patient’s blood with a chemical called ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). Depending on the patient’s blood lead level, more than one treatment may be required. Unfortunately, in severe cases, it may not be possible to reverse damage that has already occurred.  Children with lead toxicity may also be iron deficient and can be treated with iron supplements.

Study shows that the majority of children poisoned by lead during renovations were poisoned by their own parents doing the work.

According to Medscape Today, investigations conducted during 2006-2007 in New York state (excluding New York City) for 972 children with Blood Lead Levels (BLLs) ≥20 µg/dL, RRP activities were identified as the probable source of lead exposure in 139 (14%) of the 972 children. Resident owners or tenants performed 66% of the RRP work that was determined to have caused the poisoning, which often included sanding and scraping (42%), removal of painted materials or structures (29%), and other activities (29%) that can release particles of lead-based paint. Although this study only included one state, we can probably assume other states with older housing would likely have similar findings.

From this information we can deduct the following. 86% or 836 of the poisoned children were poisoned by exposure to lead in some way other than RRP activities. Also, of the children proven to be poisoned by RRP activities, 92 were poisoned by their own parents doing the renovation work, leaving a total of 47 children poisoned by RRP activities performed by someone other than their parents. The study did not specify who these others were. It is likely that most would be renovation companies, but a good number could also have been landlords or property developers doing their own work.

Although I agree renovators should be required to work lead-safe, I suggest that the RRP rule falls way too short in preventing lead poisoning. Allowing home owners and tenants to do RRP work without the knowledge and proper training required should be considered a travesty. Without understanding how lead poisoning happens and how to perform the work in a lead-safe manner, these parents are often unknowingly poisoning their children.

Sadly, many children are also poisoned by dads and moms who do RRP work for a living. Read this blog for a true story about a contractor who, while attending the required certified renovator training, panicked when he discovered he might be poisoning his own children. I wonder how many of the 972 children in the study mentioned above might have been poisoned by hugging their daddy when he got home from work. I know this happened at my home when I was working in the field. The good news is that the story is evidence that education can make a difference when it comes to preventing lead poisoning.

EPA Announces Lead Poisoning Prevention Week, Misses Opportunity to Promote Benefits of Hiring RRP Certified Businesses and Workers.

The EPA sent out the press release below to announce National Lead Poisoning Prevention Week.   Although the announcement mentions the RRP Rule and that contractor training and certification are required, it certainly falls short in giving consumers sound advice about having renovations done at their homes.  Earlier this year many in the industry expressed this same concern about the EPA's Public Service announcments.

Unfortunately the announcement does not mention anything at all about making sure to only hire certified businesses and individuals to do the work or that those who are not certified are operating illegally and may be putting their health and safety at risk.

Legitimate businesses have been demanding that EPA enforce the rule and go after illegally operating renovators.  This announcement could have assisted in that effort.   Had the announcement encouraged consumers to check for and report violators of the rule perhaps we could protect more children.  In effect, by not adequately enforcing this rule, the gap between legitimate businesses and the underground economy is widening.  

------------------------

CONTACT:
Dale Kemery
kemery.dale@epa.gov
202-564-7839
202-564-4355

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 21, 2010
 
EPA Announces Lead Poisoning Prevention Week

Agency urges parents to protect children from exposure

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is recognizing National Lead Poisoning Prevention Week (NLPPW), October 24–30, 2010, to raise awareness of lead poisoning in children. Lead causes a variety of adverse health effects, including brain and nervous system disorders, high blood pressure and hypertension, and reproductive problems. For children, even low levels of exposure to lead can cause a host of developmental effects such as learning disabilities, decreased intelligence and speech, language, and behavioral problems, which can affect children for a lifetime.

“Lead exposure can have serious, life-altering health effects, especially for our children. Those effects are entirely preventable if we take the right steps to raise awareness and give every family the tools they need to protect against lead exposure,” EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson said. “It’s vital that we help educate parents and caretakers on the importance of safeguarding children from the dangers of lead in their homes. National Lead Poisoning Prevention Week gives us the opportunity to strengthen our prevention efforts and ensure safety year round.”

In April 2010, EPA published its Lead Renovation Repair and Painting Rule to reduce contamination associated with the removal of lead-based paint chips and dust generated when homes are remodeled. The rule requires training and certification of all remodeling contractors to engage in safe lead paint-handling procedures. The agency anticipates the rule will further reduce the incidence of lead poisoning in the United States.

Lead paint poisoning affects more than 1 million children today. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimate that nearly 250,000 children living in the United States have blood lead levels high enough to require public health intervention, based on data from a 2003–2004 national survey. Major sources of lead exposure among children are lead-based paint and lead-contaminated dust found in deteriorating buildings. Despite the continued presence of lead in the environment, lead poisoning is entirely preventable.

This year's NLPPW theme, Lead-Free Kids for a Healthy Future, underscores the importance of sting your home and your child, and getting the facts about how to prevent lead poisoning’s serious health effects.

Parents can reduce a child’s exposure to lead in many ways. Here are some simple things you can do to help protect your children:
•Get your home tested. Have your home inspected if you live in a home built before 1978.
•Get your child tested. Even if your young children seem healthy, ask your doctor to test them for lead.
•Get the facts. Visit http://www.leadfreekids.org or call 1-800-424-LEAD.

More information on lead: http://epa.gov/lead/pubs/lppw2010.htm

Jury Awards Nearly $21M in Baltimore Lead Paint Case.

If you have been concerned about the legal risks and liabilities due to the RRP rule your concerns may be well founded.  Although very brief and lacking details, this Associated Press article from the Washington Examiner is probably very bad news for renovation contractors and landlords: