Technically you can't even look at or quote an older house if you aren't certified. You don't have the certification to use the swab to see if it is lead paint.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

1978 is the cut off date.

 

If somebody else sanded and primed, that isn't your problem.

Don't sand. Don't score anything with a knife. Don't hammer on anything.

Doing patches, sponge sand. Wall prep by cleaning is fine.

What they don't tell you is hammering on a board or wall could be interpreted as disturbing the entire board or wall.

If you have more specific questions, ask.

The 6 sqft is only used to trigger compliance requirements. You can do interior patch prep and paint using methods that disturb 0 sqft. The first thing to go is using sbrasives in patching and prep / paint.

 

This is taken from the EPA site . While I think the whole RRP thing is a joke, I think one needs to be careful when working on older homes. Like hdavis said no sanding , cutting or anything, although I disagree with if someone else did it is not your problem. Probably a gray area until they are looking to nail you.

 

Easier to read...

.

 

https://www.epa.gov/lead/renovation-repair-and-painting-program-contractors

At first it says:

Firms that require certification

"In general, anyone who is paid to perform work that disturbs paint in housing and child-occupied facilities built before 1978 must be certified"

But then:

"The following housing or activities are not covered by the rule

Minor repair and maintenance activities that disturb 6 square feet or less of paint per room inside"

Which seems self-negating -- having certification is stated as a generality, and seems to apply when 6 foot or more is disturbed.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

It is an arbitrary rule. Then some states like ours have their own interpretation. Then it also comes down to what the meaning of is is most of the time.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

Each state can have it's own statute, it has to be as restrictive as the federal statute. The intetpretations aren't arbitrary, but there are some gray areas. One example would be cutting a piece of painted trim. The entire area of that piece is the area. OTOH, if you drill a series of very small holes in it until it's in 2 pieces, it's only the drilled area. Driving a nail through it, it's the entire area of the piece. Not necessarily so with driving a scew in.

 

That's correct, 6 sq ft or less does not require cimpliance with the law.

Have documented procedures dealing with patch prep and paint in older hones which disturbs 0 old paint.

Theoretically, there could be an issue if you came in on a projects and disturbed any when the rule has already been triggered. It's open to interpretation.

HOs are exempt, so they csn sand, saw, and bang away.

BTW, I received certification with a perfect score. I also have a copy of the EPA enforcement manual somewhere, and have read it, and some relevant EPA interpretations which have come along.

Having been trained, the fines I face for noncompliance are much stiffer than those who aren't trained and are unaware. Even so, I've been able to adjust so interior patch and paint do not trigger compliance.

 

Do state statutes prevail? Or, can national EPA standard apply at the same time?

I can see where documenting individual patch/sand spots could quickly prove too difficult...working areas not showing on pictures, etc. Then there is the question of how can anyone else know besides the painter what exactly was done at the time and by who?

If someone else has been on the job 1st, then certain, many, or most, doors and trim could have been stripped first. Or sanded. Showing this after the fact could be next to impossible especially if re-priming was already done before pics taken. Then, the question of what primer type was used after the stripping, etc..

 

I would assume it only has to do with what you are working in. If I go in and am just painting preprepped surfaces, it doesn't come into effect. Or even if I am just covering old lead paint and not hard prepping it.

I can use TSP substitute and wash it down and degloss then prime and paint, and it doesn't activate the protocals.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

I don't know a single contractor, painting or otherwise that even pays attention to these laws.

 

Most of the buildings up here are pre 1978. Exterior repaints tend to be under RRP. All the larger paint contractors seem to.

 

Yes there are numerous ways around it but document, document, document - proper scope of work with contract is your best defense along with pictures.

Be sure you know the exemptions, especially regarding demo...
http://thehtrc.com/2012/epa-rrp-enforcement-actions-impacts & http://thehtrc.com/2010/rrp-620-exemption-limits might help you on some of this - granted some are older pieces but to my knowledge not much has changed

As for other agencies - OSHA is big followed by HUD --- there should be a link to OSHA in the related articles section or linked in one of the pieces

 

As a mason I don’t know much about the law but the one large window company that I do a lot of work for follows it and I can say damm that is a lot of wasted plastic

I think the plastic associated industry must have lobbied hard to pass that law


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I always like the question of removing and hanging a door. If the hinges aren't painted, you really disturbed no paint, but the interpretation is if something is removed, it counts toward the sq ft. I haven't been able to verify, but there sre some reports that removing something, sending off site for restoration, then reinstalling is OK, but trashing the old snd installing new triggers the demolition clause, and compliance is required. No matter the sq ft.

Obviously, the law wasn't written by people who really thought this all through well. The idea that taking unpainted hinges apart to remove and then trashing the door somehow poses a larger hazard than slamming a door is pretty amazing.

 

There's another option as well. Even if you aren't certified, you can have a testing professional certify it as lead free. From that time on, any architectural elements certified lead free can be worked on with no requirement for compliance.

I don't know of any HO that would want to pay for that, but it could happen.

 

If you have a hunch there's no lead, then the overall paint job could be cheaper, even after testing.

 

people have been breathing lead dust particles forever without ever even knowing it. Wash it down with a little Budweiser you'll be fine

The EPA is like OSHA or a traffic cop. They pretend to be concerned about public safety when all they really want is money.

 

This wasn't the EPA's idea, it was HUD for section 8, but HUD had no authority to create environmental legislation.

 

RRP lead tests may only be used by the RRP certified firm fir a given project. Noone else can use them for other purposes.

 

interestingly enough, the regulations allow homeowners to do whatever they want with no restrictions, and also allow any work done for free ( as in donated)not to follow any protocols.

 

The government shouldn't be able to force me to as a home owner. I think the legality is a lot different.


Mike.
_______________
[emoji631] [emoji631]

 

Depending on how serious homeowners take this, however, it might make some pre `78 homes worth less, based on cutoff year. Knowing that a certain type contractor has to work on it, if they're that informed that is. While their home inspector may or may not pick up on this.

And larger cities have these in droves...

Older home appeal can suddenly turn a little less charming.:sad:

 

It can be handy to know. If I pry off a nailed board, the whole board area counts. If I make a small hole saw bit just large enough to go around nail heads, then just remove the board it's just the hole area. Repair and prep offsite, then return and install with screws.

No demo, since it's reinstalled. Area rules aren't triggered, and stripping, sandung, etc aren't done on site, so anything goes.

Doing it that way costs $$, but some people up here will pay for it.

 

Fantastic way to reduce costs around foolish law. Obviously they'll object someday.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

But what about, since much of this is focused on "the painting"...what if a primer coat is applied to the trim, can it all then be abrasive sanded afterward or this considered disturbing? A local paint dealer said yes. But I don't know.

 

I don't think so. 90, maybe 100% of the lead tests I've done had no lead on the top layer or 10 layers. Still not allowed to sand. Just because you do a new layer doesn't change that.

 

Assuming documenting is important- when disturbing < 6 sq ft. per room;

Taking pictures I've discovered don't really show the amount of surface detail needed to discern what is loose or been disturbed. Even when the surface has already been partly of wholly sanded down to wood or else stripped, or some of it, sealed before a painter even arrives on the job.

You could outline a layout of the place, and mark places patched/wet sanded. But I keep coming back to the idea that it's going to be really difficult to show that I followed the sq ft rule, when I actually did, when everything is paint covered. Is this left to the "ruling parties" personal judgement?

Another thing, is lead dust. If there is dust in the place and I didn't create it...I don't even own a HEPA vac. What then? Can enforcement discern wood-lead dust by sawing from hand-sanding trim?

It almost seems like someone has to witness someone sanding. Unless they could discreetly remove layer(s) of paint for any abrasion tracking.

 

This isn't CSI.

Pretty much either someone turns you in, or permits issued are checked against build date and documentation checked.

The worst case is some kid gets lead poisoning. Lawyers go in and everyone who worked on it us going to get sued. Have your scope of work and work practices ready. That's what you need to be ready for.

I also recommend you use HEPA vacs, even if they aren't RRP compliant. It's a general recommendation for any homeowner from HUD or the EPA, but it isn't a requirement. Ridgid also has a compliant HEPA vac at a resonable price, or they used to.

 

Nothing murky about that, HOs can do anything they want, it doesn't trigger fed regulations.

 

Just so they know I wasn't the one who did it.

 

I would think a signed notarized affidavit from the home owner saying they done the work would remove the liability from you.

 

I seen a young married couple poison their 3-4 year old daughter with lead dust circa early 1990s stripping Minneapolis 1900s two story down to bare wood with sanders, indoor and out over two years, the lead paint dust piled on the dirt all around the home out doors, and every room had lead paint dust uncollected for months, very sloppy no drop cloths during the vertical sanding, sanding in place in nearly every room including the play room and nursery bedroom.

The girl child had palsy for years, 1-3? before she stopped ingesting enough lead to keep her sick.

I told them to get her checked out, and "chelated" treatment for lead poisoning, Shocked to see even college educated farm kids could be so ignorant of the dangers of old paint dust for young mammals including children.

she supposedly returned to "gifted' normal.....

Sadly the EPA won't compare leaded paints to unleaded in black mold producing environs.....

Wouldn't lead based paints lower Radon exposure levels???

 

Wouldn't lead based paints lower Radon exposure levels???

Sad story.

Being Radon is a gas, not sure how lead paint would cause any significant environmental change.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

I too have met people who permanently injured their children.

The intent of the rule is to make sure kids don't get poisoned. Criminality is directly linked to lead exposure levels. Frontal lobe brain damage decreases impulse control. As professionals we can leave a safer healthier society behind as our legacy if comply with the intent of the law: dont poison people with lead.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk