6 Pop Songs Great for Audio Demos
Worst DIY Installs Ever Part 7
10 Must-Have Products for Your Next Install
6 Amazing High-End Home Theaters
Print
Email
Comments (0)
Share
EPA Won’t Impose More Onerous Lead Paint Rules
Remodelers cheer as EPA declines to impose new 'clearance requirements' as part of the Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting (LRRP) rule. NARI shares concerns, recommendations.
You’d think they were working with radioactive waste.
Remodelers, installers and any other professional that touches a home built before 1978 can breathe a sigh of relief.
The EPA says it will not impose a new lead-dust sampling requirement -- the so-called clearance requirements -- as part of the Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting (LRRP) rules issued last year.
The agency issued this statement:
The already burdensome lead paint regulations are driving consumers away from professional remodelers, claims the National Association of the Remodeling Industry (NARI). A recent survey conducted by the organization found that 29% of "home enthusiasts" would likeley hire a non-certified contractor in order to save money associated with the LRRP. Fifty-nine percent of homeowners would do the work themselves.
The most recent government census reports there are more than 652,000 remodeling businesses in the United States, and nearly 85 percent (or 552,191) of those businesses are not registered as a certified renovation firm with the EPA.
Not that homeowners really care -- 55% of those surveyed by NARI say they are unaware of lead paint regulations.
RELATED: Company Fined $30K for Lead Paint Violation
NARI has issued these concerns and recommendations regarding lead paint laws:
Concern #1
The rule application is presented as a "one size fits all" and fails to provide guidance on the varying conditions often found on job sites.
Recommendation #1
The EPA should revise the rule to define the desired outcomes and provide a tool box of options to address varying conditions.
Concern #2
The cost of compliance is driving homeowners to either DIY or hire an uncertified renovator thus defeating the purpose and intent of the rule. Also, the rule does not address the contractor's responsibility when the work of disturbing lead paint has been undertaken and completed by the homeowner or an uncertified contractor.
Recommendation #2
The EPA needs to educate the general public about the rule and assess the impact of homeowner-initiated projects on childhood lead poisoning.
Concern #3
The EPA lacks an effective method of providing updates and information on the rule. The Website housing over 600 FAQs is not a feasible communications tool.
Recommendation #3
EPA and states with oversight should provide a regular newsletter with necessary updates. The Website should be overhauled addressing the topical information needs of the user.
Concern #4
The rule is not clear on the training and certification requirements for subcontractors used by the certified renovator.
Recommendation #4
The EPA should clarify the responsibilities of subcontractors and define a "certified renovator of record" as a single point of contact throughout the project.
Concern #5
The model training program is not consistent with the current rule. Curriculum and materials do not reflect amendments.
Recommendation #5
The EPA must exercise responsibility in properly maintaining training curriculum and material content.
NARI isn't the only group annoyed by the EPA's lead paint regulations. The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) filed suit against the EPA last year. Integrators have had to undergo training and certification for virtually any pre-1978 residential retrofit.
Read More About Lead Paint Laws
The EPA says it will not impose a new lead-dust sampling requirement -- the so-called clearance requirements -- as part of the Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting (LRRP) rules issued last year.
The agency issued this statement:
The Agency believes that the existing lead-safe work practices and clean up requirements -- which went into place in 2010 -- will protect people from lead dust hazards created during renovations jobs without the need for additional clearance requirements.
The already burdensome lead paint regulations are driving consumers away from professional remodelers, claims the National Association of the Remodeling Industry (NARI). A recent survey conducted by the organization found that 29% of "home enthusiasts" would likeley hire a non-certified contractor in order to save money associated with the LRRP. Fifty-nine percent of homeowners would do the work themselves.
The most recent government census reports there are more than 652,000 remodeling businesses in the United States, and nearly 85 percent (or 552,191) of those businesses are not registered as a certified renovation firm with the EPA.
Not that homeowners really care -- 55% of those surveyed by NARI say they are unaware of lead paint regulations.
RELATED: Company Fined $30K for Lead Paint Violation
NARI has issued these concerns and recommendations regarding lead paint laws:
Concern #1
The rule application is presented as a "one size fits all" and fails to provide guidance on the varying conditions often found on job sites.
Recommendation #1
The EPA should revise the rule to define the desired outcomes and provide a tool box of options to address varying conditions.
Concern #2
The cost of compliance is driving homeowners to either DIY or hire an uncertified renovator thus defeating the purpose and intent of the rule. Also, the rule does not address the contractor's responsibility when the work of disturbing lead paint has been undertaken and completed by the homeowner or an uncertified contractor.
Recommendation #2
The EPA needs to educate the general public about the rule and assess the impact of homeowner-initiated projects on childhood lead poisoning.
Concern #3
The EPA lacks an effective method of providing updates and information on the rule. The Website housing over 600 FAQs is not a feasible communications tool.
Recommendation #3
EPA and states with oversight should provide a regular newsletter with necessary updates. The Website should be overhauled addressing the topical information needs of the user.
Concern #4
The rule is not clear on the training and certification requirements for subcontractors used by the certified renovator.
Recommendation #4
The EPA should clarify the responsibilities of subcontractors and define a "certified renovator of record" as a single point of contact throughout the project.
Concern #5
The model training program is not consistent with the current rule. Curriculum and materials do not reflect amendments.
Recommendation #5
The EPA must exercise responsibility in properly maintaining training curriculum and material content.
NARI isn't the only group annoyed by the EPA's lead paint regulations. The National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) filed suit against the EPA last year. Integrators have had to undergo training and certification for virtually any pre-1978 residential retrofit.
Read More About Lead Paint Laws
Subscribe to the CE Pro Newsletter
About the Author
Julie Jacobson, Editor-at-large, CE Pro
Julie Jacobson is co-founder of EH Publishing and currently spends most of her time writing for CE Pro, mostly in the areas of home automation, networked A/V and the business of home systems integration. She majored in Economics at the University of Michigan, earned an MBA from the University of Texas at Austin, and has never taken a journalism class in her life. Julie is a washed-up Ultimate Frisbee player with the scars to prove it. Follow her on Twitter @juliejacobson.
Post a comment