Delegated States Likely Better Prepared To Enforce EPA RRP Rule

Several states around the country have assumed administration and enforcement of the EPA RRP rule and others are also thinking of doing the same.  EPA actually offers money for the states to use to investigate the practicality of doing so.  As this happens each state must create its own rule which is at least as strict as the EPA rule in order to get approval to do so from the EPA.  This will lead to confusion for many renovators. 

Variances in the rule requirements, from the EPA RRP rule and also from state to state, will make it difficult for renovators to understand the differences and keep up with amendments made by each entity.  Renovators working in more than one state many have to become certified firms in each state they operate in and or also with the EPA.  Are renovators better off if their states write a better thought out rule?  Would renovators be better served if there was just one well written rule for everyone to follow?   I predict that confusion may likely contribute to violations and fines for these renovators. 

In July of this year Massachusetts took over administration and enforcement of the RRP rule.  The Massachusetts Regulations, written by the Massachusetts Department of Occupational Safety (DOS), include many of the OSHA related considerations left out of the EPA RRP rule and the EPA required certified renovator training.   As a result, Massachusetts contractors are quickly becoming aware of the already existing OSHA considerations related to working with lead.  For example, the Massachusetts firm licensing application includes a requirement that a written respiratory protection and worker health and safety program evidencing compliance with the Massachusetts RRP rule and OSHA medical monitoring requirements be submitted with the application.  This will force businesses to have such a program in place before they can be licensed to do RRP work.   The requirement will also serve to dictate what the business must have in place should they be inspected by either the DOS or OSHA.   I predict the need for OSHA related training will increase dramatically as contractors become aware of violations and fines levied against their peers.

The MA DOS has also started conducting on-site inspections.  Though most inspections are triggered by citizens reporting suspected violations, the DOS is also out in the field and is stopping by renovation projects as they come across them.   In one of his recent blogs, RRP certification training provider and business coach, Mark Paskell of The Contractor Coaching Partnership, shares a real life story of a painter who was visited by DOS after a neighbor next door to one of his projects called the DOS with concerns about soil contamination.  The contractor was in compliance and made out fine, but the DOS left him with a message and asked that he would share it with others.  "Tell every contractor you know we're out there enforcing. Tell your friends, your neighbors, other contractors you know, suppliers and trades. We are here and we will enforce the new law"

NOTE: EPA has authorized nine states to administer their own RRP programs: Iowa, Kansas, Massachusetts, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah and Wisconsin.

Renovators Intending to Comply With EPA RRP Rule May Be Blind-Sided by OSHA Requirements

The following article, written by Dick Hughes of Excellence In Safety, was forwarded to me last week by a colleague.   Dick credits his sources at the end of the article.  I also verified the accuracy of the information through one of my contacts at the Massachusetts DOS. 

The article lists a variety of OSHA considerations that may likely blind-side well intentioned renovators as they attempt to comply with the new EPA RRP Rule.   The RRP Rule and OSHA requirements are in conflict with each other in many ways.  One EPA contact shared with me that EPA and OSHA did not collaborate on the rule while it was being written.   This one consideration alone should raise serious doubt and concern for business owners about business liabilities and potential fines. 

If an EPA enforcement employee and and OSHA Field inspector show up at one of your jobsites, at the same time, there is no way you will be able to satisfy both.  I suggest this is another example of shortsighted leadership within both organizations.  It also points out the lack of knowledge and awareness our political leaders in Congress have as it relates to understanding the construction industry and overseeing the creation of regulations that affect businesses of all sizes.

The Article:
Big Compliance Problems Ahead for Worker Safety

On April 22, 2010, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) implemented a rule that requires contractors that are hired to perform renovation, repair and painting (RRP) projects in homes, child care facilities, and schools built before 1978 that disturb lead-based paint to be certified and follow specific work practices to prevent lead contamination. This rule is expected to impact hundreds of thousands of employers and millions of employees.

EPA is already proposing an expansion of this rule into pre-1978 commercial facilities. That change will significantly expand the scope of employers and building owners covered by this new regulation. Failure to comply with this new regulation can result in fines as high as $65,000 per violation, including a potential prison term. The EPA will enforce violations of the new regulation starting on Oct. 1, 2010.

The new EPA rule includes the following requirements:

• The new EPA regulations require “firms” that disturb more than 6 square feet of paint per room (or more that 20 square feet on the exterior) in these pre-1978 buildings to become certified with the EPA and employ certified renovators who would train workers and oversee these projects.

• Firms include contractors who are hired to perform renovation, repair and painting work where paint is disturbed in the targeted housing.

• Building owners whose maintenance staff also disturb painted surfaces in targeted housing must also be certified and use certified renovators.

• Certified firms must send a supervisor or “renovator” to an 8-hour class where they become certified to oversee work covered by the RRP rule.

Here’s the rub: The 8-hour class only covers the EPA requirements and completely ignores OSHA worker protection rules. Therefore, safety professionals might find that “Certified Firms” are violating OSHA lead regulations because they were not taught about OSHA requirements for worker protection. This is going to be a huge issue for employers whose employees are exposed to lead hazards during work covered by the new EPA RRP rule.

EPA Rule Doesn’t Fulfill OSHA Requirements
Employers and building owners should be alert to the fact that OSHA rules differ significantly from the EPA RRP regulations. OSHA lead regulations apply to any work where employees come into contact with any level of lead or lead bearing coatings. They should also note the following worker protection and/or OSHA omissions in the new EPA lead-based paint rule:

• Lead-based paint. The EPA RRP rule defines lead-based paint as containing more than 0.5 percent lead by weight. Lead coatings below this threshold are exempt from any special EPA certification, training or work practices. However, OSHA regulates lead in any amount. Therefore, many employers will believe that lead-coated surfaces below the EPA standards of 0.5 percent by weight are not regulated when in fact they may still be regulated by OSHA.

• Regulated areas.OSHA mandates under 1926.62 that employers establish “regulated areas” when lead or lead-coated surfaces are disturbed. A regulated area requires specific OSHA signage. The EPA signs required by their new RRP rule do not meet OSHA requirements for a regulated area.

• Written compliance program. OSHA regulations require a detailed compliance program listing specific requirements for employers to document. The EPA RRP rule does not have any requirements or discussion of a written compliance plan.

• Mandatory respirator use. OSHA lead regulations require monitoring for employees exposed to lead dust or fumes during work. OSHA has established three work class tasks for which certain exposures above the permissible exposure limit (PEL) must be assumed when employers fail to perform exposure monitoring. All of the work practices covered by the EPA RRP rule require employee respiratory protection under OSHA. However, the EPA required training only discusses respirator use as optional. The EPA training does not discuss OSHA regulations for a written respirator program, medical clearance, respirator training and fit testing for employees who are required to wear respirators.

• Protective clothing. OSHA lead regulations require protective clothing when work tasks disturb lead coatings (without a negative exposure assessment). OSHA requires either disposable clothing or employer laundering. The EPA RRP rule lists disposable clothing as optional and trains workers to use HEPA vacuums to clean clothing before going home. OSHA also requires employers to notify other employees or employers who would launder the contaminated clothing. The EPA RRP rules do not provide any awareness for employees who launder their own contaminated work clothing.

• Annual training. OSHA regulations require annual training when airborne levels of lead dust or fumes exceed their action level. EPA’s new RRP rule only requires training every 5 years.

• Hygiene facilities. OSHA regulations require a separate area to change from work clothing to street clothing as well as providing for hand/face washing facilities. The EPA does not address change facilities and suggests that workers wash their hands and face prior to leaving the work place.

• Medical surveillance and biological monitoring. OSHA mandates biological monitoring for employees exposed above the action level for airborne lead dust and fumes. The EPA RRP rule briefly mentions that the only way to detect lead in your blood is with a blood test and does not inform the workers of the OSHA requirement for biological monitoring.

The new EPA RRP lead-based paint rule is an important regulation for reducing the unacceptable levels of elevated lead in children’s blood in certain areas of the country. However, this huge piece of legislation has done a disservice to the millions of workers who will be impacted by lead during common renovation, repair, and painting activities in residential and child occupied facilities by ignoring mandatory worker protection requirements mandated by OSHA. Contractors and building owners must take extra steps to ensure that their workers or employees of contractors disturbing lead bearing substances in their facilities are thoroughly trained and protected in all applicable regulations; specifically OSHA worker protection rules for lead.

Thanks to:

Jeffery C. Camplin, MS, CSP is president of Camplin Environmental Services Inc., a safety and environmental consulting firm based in Rosemont, Ill. He is a licensed lead risk assessor and accredited EPA lead-based paint instructor for abatement courses and the new RRP rule training.

Useful links related to this article:
• July 21 Virtual Audioconference: EPA’s New Lead Paint Regulations Will Get You in Trouble with OSHA http://www.workplacetrainingcenter.com/Prod-2067.aspx

• EPA information on the new RRP rule for lead-based paint can be found at http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/toolkits.htm

• HUD information on lead safe work practices for renovation work can be found at http://www.hud.gov/offices/lead/training/rrp/rrp.cfm

• OSHA information on worker protection for employees exposed to lead-bearing substances can be found at http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/lead/construction.html

About the author:
Dick Hughes
Excellence In Safety
24 Spring Bars Road Falmouth, MA 02540
Web: www.excel-in-safety.com
capesafetyguy@aol.com
1-508-548-0866
cell: 1-617-653-4950

This article was originally published at Work Place Magazine

There has been a lot of confusion regarding the recent announcements, delays, amendments and proposed amendments related to the EPA RRP Rule.  Many of these are explained and clarified in several articles that can be found here on this RRPedia page under the tag heading of "EPA RRP Rule Updates" found in the blue box on the right side of this web page. 

For additional RRPedia postings and updates, be sure to subscribe to this page to receive e-mail notifications of new postings as they happen.

This article is intended to remind you of a variety of new considerations that take effect on July 6th, 2010 due to the Amendment to the Opt-out and Recordkeeping Provisions in the Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program [RIN 2070-AJ55]. 

Below are considerations you should be aware of and be prepared for.  I have also provided some suggestions to help you. None of this information should be considered as all inclusive and or as legal advice.  I recommend you qualify and seek additional legal advice about this information from qualified legal counsel.  Contractors should also have any documentation they use to comply with the RRP Rule reviewed by legal counsel prior to use.

For clarification, the June 18, 2010 memo delaying enforcement of certain certification requirements does not have any effect on these new considerations:

1. As of July 6th, the home owner opt-out provision will no longer be available for use on RRP covered renovations.

• a. Even if the contract for the work was signed prior to July 6^th and/or the project has already been started, the RRP Rule work practices and documentation requirements must be followed starting July 6^th
• b. If, before midnight on July 5^th, you can complete any work or demolition that disturbs painted surfaces on projects where you already had a signed opt-out from the homeowner, I suggest you do so to avoid the additional costs to comply and/or the risks associated with operating in violation of the RRP Rule.
• c. As I have stated in other articles here on RRPedia, a signed opt-out would still not relieve you from potential liability should the work you do and/or how you do it causes lead contamination and/or lead poisoning.
• d. As an extra level of protection for you, your business, your employees, your customer and/or the occupants of the space you are renovating; if you plan to use the strategy suggested in item "1b" above, I suggest you still do the post renovation cleaning and cleaning verification procedure as required under the RRP Rule before restarting work again on July 6^th.
• e. Beginning July 6^th, 2010, as long as the work you do does not disturb any painted surfaces, you can precede using traditional work practices.
• f. To avoid any confusion, I also recommend you remove the opt-out information from whatever pre-renovation form you use to document delivery of the Renovate Right pamphlet.

2. There are also new requirements regarding documentation. Beginning July 6th, 2010, when the final invoice for the renovation is delivered, or within 30 days of the completion of the renovation, whichever is earlier, the renovation firm must provide information demonstrating compliance with the training and work practice requirements of the RRP rule to the owner of the building being renovated and, if different, to the occupants of the renovated housing or the operator of the child-occupied facility.

• a. For renovations in common areas of target housing, the renovation firm must provide the occupants of the affected housing units instructions on how to review or obtain this information from the renovation firm at no charge to the occupant. These instructions must be included in the notice provided to each affected unit or on signs posted in common areas. Similar requirements apply for renovations in child-occupied facilities.
• b. The renovation firm is also required to provide interested parents or guardians of children using the child-occupied facility instructions on how to review or obtain a copy of these records at no cost to the parents or guardians. This could be accomplished by mailing or hand delivering these instructions, or by including them on the signs posted.
• c. Renovation firms must provide training and work practice information to owners and occupants. The information should be provided in a short, easily read checklist or other form. EPA's "Sample Renovation Recordkeeping Checklist'' may be used for this purpose, but firms may develop their own forms or checklists so long as they include all of the required information.

• d. The specific information that is required to be provided are training and work practice compliance information, as well as identifying information on the manufacturer and model of the test kits used, if any, a description of the components that were tested including their locations, and the test kit results.
• e. The checklist or form must include documentation that a certified renovator was assigned to the project, that the certified renovator provided on-the-job training for workers used on the project, that the certified renovator performed or directed workers who performed the tasks required by the RRP rule, and that the certified renovator performed the post-renovation cleaning verification.
• f. This documentation must include a certification by the certified renovator that the work practices were followed, with narration as applicable.
• g. EPA is not requiring that the renovation firm automatically provide a copy of the certified renovator's training certificate, which must be maintained in the firm's records as an attachment to the checklist or other form.

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.

The EPA has issued a FAQ document to help clarify their intent regarding the June 18, 2010 memo that delayed enforcement of the Certification requirements.  The text of the clarification document is as follows:

Frequent Questions on EPA's June 18, 2010 Implementation Guidance for the Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule

Q. Does EPA's announcement of June 18, 2010, modify the Lead Renovation Repair and Painting Rule's requirements that contractors use lead-safe work practices when working in pre-1978 housing or child-occupied facilities?

No. This announcement does not change the requirement that all contractors take steps to protect children and families from the dangers of lead poisoning by becoming certified and following the work practice standards and the associated recordkeeping requirements. As of April 22, all contractors have been required to be certified and follow the work practice standards described on EPA's website. The effect of the June 18 memorandum only provides firms more time to apply for and obtain certification as a lead-based paint renovation firm before active enforcement of the firm certification requirements begins. EPA is also providing individual workers additional time to enroll in and take the required training course to become certified lead-based paint renovators before active enforcement of the individual renovator training requirements begins. EPA will use its enforcement authority to ensure compliance by enforcing work practice standards and their associated recordkeeping requirements against all renovators and firms. Therefore, renovators who have not been able to complete the training requirements are advised to review EPA's model training materials available at www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/training.htm. Additional information on lead-safe work practices can be found at www.epa.gov/lead or obtained from the National Lead Information Center at 1-800-424-LEAD (5323).

All renovation firms, even those not yet certified under the RRP rule, are also reminded of their continuing obligations to comply with Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule's pre-renovation information distribution requirements, which require that before firms begin each renovation on pre-1978 housing or child-occupied facilities and to comply with the associated recordkeeping requirements. These requirements are explained in EPA's Small Entity Compliance Guide to Renovate Right.

Q. Does the June 18, 2010, announcement mean that EPA will not enforce certification and training requirements until after October 1, 2010, for firms and December 31, 2010, for renovators?

A. EPA is not stopping its enforcement against any renovation firms and individual renovators who do not comply with requirements of work practice standards and associated recordkeeping requirements. However, EPA is providing additional time for renovation firms and workers to obtain the necessary training and certifications before enforcement of the firm certification and individual renovator requirements begins.

Renovation Firms. Until October 1, 2010, EPA will not take enforcement action for violations of the RRP rule's firm certification requirement.
Individual Renovators. EPA will not enforce against individual renovation workers for failure to be trained if the person has applied to enroll in, or has enrolled in, by not later than September 30, 2010, a certified renovator class to train contractors in practices necessary for compliance with the final rules. Individual renovators must complete the training by December 31, 2010. Renovators who have not been able to complete the training requirements are advised to review EPA's model training materials available at www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/training.htm. Additional information on lead-safe work practices can be found at www.epa.gov/lead or obtained from the National Lead Information Center at 1-800-424-LEAD (5323).

Q. Thousands of renovators are already trained and their firms are EPA certified. Will EPA enforce against renovators who did not receive their training certification before December 31, 2010?

A. It is most important that all contractors follow the RRP work practice standards. However, EPA is providing additional time for renovation firms and workers to obtain the necessary training and certifications before the enforcement of the firm certification and individual renovator requirements begins. Therefore, renovators who have not been able to complete the training requirements are advised to review EPA's model training materials available at www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/training.htm. Additional information on lead-safe work practices can be found at www.epa.gov/lead or obtained from the National Lead Information Center at 1-800-424-LEAD (5323).

Q. Doesn't the June 18 memorandum extend an unfair advantage to members of the regulated community who have delayed compliance with the certification and training requirements and punish those who have complied with the rule?

A. EPA does not believe that allowing more time for firms to become certified and renovators to become trained extends an unfair advantage. To the contrary, firms that are already certified can benefit by continuing to advertise that they are certified and may continue to use EPA's program logo during this interim period. The Agency also recognizes the challenges some are facing in obtaining training in a timely fashion and is providing additional time to individual renovators to enroll in and take the required training courses before the Agency actively enforces the individual renovator requirements. EPA is committed to encouraging additional training opportunities in every state to meet this demand for classes.

Q. How does the June 18 announcement impact renovators in states that have adopted their own RRP programs?

A. As of June 21, 2010, eight states -- Wisconsin, Iowa, North Carolina, Mississippi, Kansas, Rhode Island, Utah, and Oregon - administer and enforce their own RRP programs.

Renovators working in these states must comply with all applicable state laws, notwithstanding this guidance.

Q. What happens if an individual applied or was accepted for training before October 1, 2010, but the course is cancelled or delayed by the training provider during that 90-day period (October 1 - December 31, 2010)? What recourse does the individual renovation worker have after 12/31/10?

A. The renovator must complete training by December 31, 2010. EPA encourages renovators and firms to take advantage of this opportunity and not delay in becoming trained and certified.

Q. How soon should renovation firms send their applications to EPA?

A. Firms should send their applications to EPA as soon as possible. All firms that are not certified by October 1, 2010, will be subject to penalties for failing to comply with the renovation firm requirements of the RRP rule. EPA has been working to expedite processing of applications but, under the regulations, may take up to 90 days.

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.

Several renovators seeking clarification about the EPA RRP Rule have asked me about working on buildings where a child occupied facility occupies part of the building, but not the entire building.  The most common example they ask about is a church.  The following question and answer are from the FAQ page of the EPA Web site.  Although not mentioned in EPA's answer, I suggest that play areas outside of the building would also be considered common areas where the required containment procedures and work practices would be required.

Question Posted to EPA Web Site: If a building contains a child-occupied facility, must all renovations in the building follow the RRP Rule?

EPA Answer: Not necessarily.  "Child-occupied facility'' means a building, or portion of a building, constructed prior to 1978, visited regularly by the same child, under 6 years of age, on at least two different days within any week (Sunday through Saturday period), provided that each day's visit lasts at least 3 hours and the combined weekly visits last at least 6 hours, and the combined annual visits last at least 60 hours.  Child-occupied facilities may include, but are not limited to, day care centers, preschools and kindergarten classrooms.  Child-occupied facilities may be located in target housing or in public or commercial buildings.

With respect to common areas in public or commercial buildings that contain child-occupied facilities, the child-occupied facility encompasses only those common areas that are routinely used by children under age 6, such as restrooms and cafeterias.  Common areas that children under age 6 only pass through, such as hallways, stairways, and garages are not included.  In addition, with respect to exteriors of public or commercial buildings that contain child-occupied facilities, the child-occupied facility encompasses only the exterior sides of the building that are immediately adjacent to the child-occupied facility or the common areas routinely used by children under age 6.

Areas of a building that fall outside this definition are not "child-occupied facilities" for purposes of the RRP rule.  

On Friday June 18, 2010 the EPA announced a delay in the enforcement of the firm and worker certification requirements under the EPA RRP rule.

The agency acknowledged the need for additional time for renovation firms and workers to become trained and certified under the new Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule.

The rule took effect April 22, but in the June 18th memo from EPA Assistant Administrator Cynthia Giles, EPA announced it is delaying enforcement, acknowledging concerns raised by many trade association including NARI.

The announcement left a few open questions, both sent to me by Andy Ault of Little River Carpentery:

(1) How do you know how to perform the practices if you haven't been trained?

(2) What about the record keeping and reporting requirements?  Do you have to do those too even if you haven't been trained?

It is with mixed feelings that I post this announcement.  EPA's lack of an effective strategy to get an adequate number of firms and workers certified does make it difficult or even impossible in some areas for consumers to hire only certified firms and workers.  On the other hand, those renovators who did get certified on time under the rule are essentually losing what should have been an advantage to them and their businesses.  Remember when a rule used to be a rule and only those who didn't follow the rules got punished?  

Some Details about the announcement: 

Until Oct. 1, 2010, the EPA will not take enforcement action for violations of the RRP Rule's firm certification requirement.

For violations of the RRP Rule's renovation worker certification requirement, the EPA will not enforce against individual renovation workers if the person has applied to enroll in, or has enrolled in, by no later than Sept. 30, 2010, a certified renovator class to train contractors in practices necessary for compliance with the final rules. Renovators must complete the training by Dec. 31, 2010.

In the announcement the EPA makes it clear that it will still be enforcing the required lead-safe work practices.

The official announcement by the EPA can be downloaded here.

Question: Does the RRP rule require people working on a renovation to wear respirators, Tyvek(R) suits or other personal protective equipment (PPE)? 

Most renovation contractors have little knowledge or experience with OSHA requirements.  OSHA requirements concentrate on the occupational safety of the worker.  There are many OSHA requirements that contractors should already be following if they use employees or sub contractors on their job sites.  Because lead can create serious health risks for employees and workers, employers would be wise to become familiar with the OSHA requirements related to the work they perform under the EPA RRP rule. 

The required containment methods and work practices have changed the way work gets done in the field.  Even if working within OSHA requirements in the past, new activities and methods used on RRP related projects most likely trigger personal protection considerations under OSHA regulations.

Unfortunately, while creating the EPA RRP rule, the EPA did not include reference to any specific OSHA requirements.  Therefore, renovators need to know and understand both the RRP rule as well as any related OSHA requirements in order to protect workers and avoid potential penalties from OSHA and or EPA.  To learn more about the related OSHA requirements, renovators can refer to the OSHA Lead in Construction Standards.

In the new MA RRP rules, still yet to be enforced as of this posting, many of the OSHA requirements related to RRP work have been included in the regulations.  When I met with employees from the MA Department of Occupational Safety to discuss the proposed rule, they were very helpful in clarifying the reasons for adding these consideration.  So, although the EPA and OSHA may not have collaborated when the EPA RRP rule was created, MA renovation contractors will have the advantage of knowing what OSHA requirements they will need to consider depending on the work they do as well as the methods they use to do the work.  Reading the MA RRP rule would help renovators working under the EPA RRP rule identify many of the related OSHA considerations.

Here is EPA's response to the question at the beginning of this post:

"EPA would like to clarify the requirements for personal protective equipment.  The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has requirements for personal protective equipment, EPA does not.  For many years, EPA has recommended the use of personal protective equipment as a way to protect workers and to help ensure that leaded dust and debris does not leave renovation or abatement work sites.  EPA recommends that renovators make use of the minimum respiratory protection recommended by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) for environments where lead is present, but respiratory protection is not required by the EPA regulations.  In addition, disposable clothing, if removed and disposed of before the workers leave the work site, can provide additional protection for workers' families by ensuring that no leaded dust or debris is carried home on worker clothing.  However, EPA does not require this and allows renovators to use other methods to ensure that dust and debris does not leave the work area, including the HEPA vacuuming of clothing, tools, and other items before they leave the work area."  

In a June 3, 2010 Boston Globe articleby long time "Handyman on Call" Peter Hotton, Mr. Hotton graciously admitted he was not aware of the new EPA RRP rule when he had advised a homeowner regarding sanding of the exterior of his pre 1978 home before painting.  Fortunately for Mr. Hotton and his readers, Rick Cutler, production manager/project developer of Out of the Woods Construction & Cabinetry Inc.of Arlington took the time to inform Mr. Hotton about the law.

Hotton reports that in his message, Cutler suggested to Hutton:

 "... if you haven't read up on the new EPA RRP rule about lead and the updated dust containment procedures, please do before you give anymore inaccurate advice."

In his response to Cutler's message, Mr. Hotton wrote the following:

"That the handyman will do, with thanks to Rick Cutler, and I notice the regulations apply not only to renovation contractors and other professionals, but to homeowners as well."

Sorry Peter, I think you have it wrong again, or maybe need to clarify your message regarding the new EPA RRP Lead Paint Rule.  The EPA is clear that homeowners doing their own work are not required to follow the rule, only those who do it for compensation are subject to the rule.  I definitely am of the opinion this is not very wise, but, under the law, homeowners do have the right to create lead dust at their own homes in the course of renovating.  EPA suggests they use lead safe practices, but does not require they do so. Therefore, they can poison themselves, their own children and even their neighbors in the course of doing so. 

Statistics have shown, including EPA's own research, that more children are poisoned by lead due to renovations as a result of their parents doing the work than by professional remodelers. 

I hope this clarification will help homeowners seek to better understand the risks related to lead paint and how they choose to have work done at their homes, whether doing it themselves or hiring the work out. 

I posted a comment to Mr. Hottonon the Boston Globe's web site as well, to share the above information and my opinion about home owners doing their own work.  It is also my opinion that, unfortunately, Mr. Hotton has become just one more unfortunate example of someone who was unaware and then misinformed about the new RRP rule.  I suggest this is not his fault; he can't know everything and to his credit does provide an open forum for his readers to help clarify and verify the information he shares with his readers.  He also openly recognized the misinformation.  For that, kudos and keep setting a great example!

On the other hand, Mr. Hotton is just one more example of someone who was unaware of the new rule and the serious implications of lead poisoning potentially caused by renovations due to the lack of any public and industry awareness performed by the EPA. 

The EPA RRP Model Certified Lead Renovator Courses do not address one of the critical tasks for an renovation project:  How to use and maintain the HEPA vacuum.  But if a renovator gets this wrong, then HEPA may not help cleanup dust.  Worse, it could spread dust and cause contamination and poisoning. 

Some suggestions:

• Cleaning:  If the filter - whether the HEPA filter or the prefilters - gets loaded down with dust and debris, the HEPA vacuum will not move enough air to properly and efficiently collect lead dust and lead debris from the renovation. The renovator must periodically clean the vacuum and replace the prefilter - and depending on the design - the HEPA filter. 

• Sealing: Before you turn off a HEPA vacuum, you need to cover the end of the air intake home with tape or bag the beater bar.  If you don't do this, the dust and debris in the hose will fall out and recontaminate the workplace or be released in the truck or someone else's home.  When you need to use the vacuum, turn the vacuum on and then remove the tape or bag.  Remember, when the unit is turned off, the air intake openings must be sealed.

• Training: When training workers consider the following:

• • Consider adding a demonstration about HEPA vacuum cleaning to the training.  Allow traineees to open up a HEPA vacuum and see how it works. 

  • Consider having the trainees practice with a new unused HEPA vacuum so you can observe and help them.  Make sure it has not been used and contaminated with lead. 

  • Watch the trainees during hands-on exercises to make sure they seal up the vacuum when it is turned off.  If they forget, dump the debris and dust on the cleaned up workplace for a great visual and have them reclean.

The Wisconsin Department of Health Services developed this great two-page fact sheet on "How to Safely Change a Lead Contaminated HEPA Vacuum Bag." They use a common canister vacuum to show how to change the prefilter.

Use the following link to view and/or download the fact sheet to your computer: How to Safely Change a Lead Contaminated HEPA Vacuum Bag

Prohibited and Restricted EPA RRP Work Practices:

The following information comes from the RRP Rule and preamble:

"The final rule prohibits or restricts the use of certain work practices during regulated renovations. These practices are open flame burning or torching of lead-based paint; the use of machines that remove lead-based paint through high speed operation such as sanding, grinding, power planing, needle gun, abrasive blasting, or sandblasting, unless such machines are used with HEPA exhaust control; and operating a heat gun above 1100 degrees Fahrenheit.

EPA has concluded that these practices must be prohibited restricted during renovation, repair, and painting activities that disturb lead-based paint because the work practices in this final rule are not effective at containing the spread of leaded dust when these practices are used, or at cleaning up lead-based paint hazards created by these practices. Thus, the work practices are not effective at minimizing exposure to lead-based paint hazards created during renovation activities when these activities are used."

Note: The final rule does not prohibit or restrict the use of dry hand sanding or dry hand scraping. EPA has concluded that it is not necessary to prohibit or restrict dry hand sanding or dry hand scraping because the containment, cleaning, and cleaning verification requirements of the rule are effective at minimizing exposure to lead-based paint hazards created by renovations and the migration of dust-lead hazards beyond the work area when dry hand sanding or dry hand scraping is employed.

The following information is from the HUD Booklet titled Lead Paint Safety, A Field Guide for Painting, Home Maintenance and Renovation Work.