EPA's New Lead Renovation/Repair Rules

[kwired]

I think there are probably many more things besides pre 1978 wall paint that have lead in them. What is the point of getting all excited about the paint? Lead awareness has increased and we are starting to see products with a "lead free" label on them. I would assume many of these products before you started seeing the labels may not have been lead free or at least not verified that they were lead free.

 

[pfalcon]

I think there are probably many more things besides pre 1978 wall paint that have lead in them. What is the point of getting all excited about the paint? Lead awareness has increased and we are starting to see products with a "lead free" label on them. I would assume many of these products before you started seeing the labels may not have been lead free or at least not verified that they were lead free.

Since 1978 all products that might be nibbled on by small children are required to be lead free. The list has certainly expanded since then. Now lead is almost by permission instead of exclusion.

The point of the thread is that pre-1978 homes are still very common. A contractor working on a pre-1978 home will have to get certified by the EPA. If he doesn't then he'll have to stop work if the area expands over 6 sq ft or requires a banned technique. This effectively means that any established contractor takes the classes and only independent handymen ignore them. It also means that a certified contractor will usually have to use lead-safe work habits on all pre-1978 homes even when not required. This is extra cost.

The EPA claims to be doing this to protect children. 250 million homes still exist from pre-1978. They are primarily occupied by low-income residents. An estimated 64 million of these homes have children. Despite the claim to protect children, there is nothing in the provision to fix the homes by eliminating lead. The effect of the EPA ruling will increase repair costs for these homes thereby making housing less affordable to the working poor.

The EPA ruling also affects the poor through rental rates. Pre-1978 rental units are primarily low-income. Yesterday they would watch a repair; Now they probably have to leave the residence. Yesterday the contractor would casually repair the wall; Today the contractor moves the furniture, lays sheeting over the furniture and floor, hooks up a fine filtration vacuum, wears PPE, and avoids labor-saving techniques to make the same repair. Repair rates in pre-1978 homes shoot up; thereby rental rates increase to cover repair expenses; thereby low-income poor get hit with the cost.

The prior EPA ruling was bad enough. It also claimed to protect the children. Tenants and buyers have to be notified when buying a pre-1978 house that it might contain lead unless the seller or landlord has a lead-free certification done. Duh! It's a pre-1978 home! They ALL contained lead! But if you don't tell them this common knowledge the EPA will fine you $1000.00 per day. What they will NOT do is require you to eliminate the hazard.

The bottom line is that the EPA is doing nothing substantive to protect children. Rather by creating classes and fining violators they have created a new revenue stream for the EPA (government). The lack of remediation preserves the tax revenue from drying up. The tax falls primarily on the working poor.

 

[wtucker]

Not forcing people to do remediation? Well, yes and no. Here in Connecticut, the STATE Dept. of Public Health enforces not only the federal regulation (the feds reimburse their cost, to a limit) but also state regulations mandated by state law. There's a blood lead screening program in the schools, and if a kid turns up with lead poisoning, the Health Dept. sends an inspector to the house, and if it turns up hot, they order remediation. One of our employees got stuck in that (he got some bad advice when he bought the house and declined the lead inspection) and wound up having to cover all the painted walls with 1/4" sheetrock and replace or encapsulate the trim (lucky for him, 10 gallons of the encapsultion paint fell off another sub's truck). He had to get a $25,000 loan to replace all the windows (I think the loan was forgiven). Meanwhile, the guy's kids' lead poisoning went away after he and his wife got strict about making the kids wash their hands before eating.

I think the feds didn't want to mandate remediation because it'd cause a huge public outcry. They opted instead for a "let the buyer beware" approach that supposedly tips off the buyer to get the seller go lower the price to cover the cost of remediation. So the price goes down, but the buyer doesn't do the remediation. Same with radon.

One of the flaws in the new regulation is that contractors have to isolate their work area and check for lead dust before removing the protection. If there's lead dust, they have to clean until the clearance test passes. But what if there's lead BEFORE work begins? You're cleaning up your lead AND the pre-existing. I recommend that the test be done before the work is commenced.

 

[pfalcon]

Ow. Unfair that you can slide the cost to the buyer. I'll dig a little deeper in Indiana and see if something similar is hiding in the weeds.

If state.gov is gonna mandate stuff like that then they should require remediation of all homes prior to sale.

But again, it would probably cost less and be less burdensome if they helped screen and remediate homes. Do all the 1977 homes this year, then move back to 1976 homes next year. With the time and money they've wasted regulating they would be back into the early 1960's homes by now.

 

[kwired]

there is a difference between remediation and abatement.

abatement is to remove all of it remediation leaves it there but just covers it up so that it is not a problem. Later rennovations may disturb it again.

 

[One-eyed Jack]

Since 1978 all products that might be nibbled on by small children are required to be lead free. The list has certainly expanded since then. Now lead is almost by permission instead of exclusion.

The point of the thread is that pre-1978 homes are still very common. A contractor working on a pre-1978 home will have to get certified by the EPA. If he doesn't then he'll have to stop work if the area expands over 6 sq ft or requires a banned technique. This effectively means that any established contractor takes the classes and only independent handymen ignore them. It also means that a certified contractor will usually have to use lead-safe work habits on all pre-1978 homes even when not required. This is extra cost.

The EPA claims to be doing this to protect children. 250 million homes still exist from pre-1978. They are primarily occupied by low-income residents. An estimated 64 million of these homes have children. Despite the claim to protect children, there is nothing in the provision to fix the homes by eliminating lead. The effect of the EPA ruling will increase repair costs for these homes thereby making housing less affordable to the working poor.

The EPA ruling also affects the poor through rental rates. Pre-1978 rental units are primarily low-income. Yesterday they would watch a repair; Now they probably have to leave the residence. Yesterday the contractor would casually repair the wall; Today the contractor moves the furniture, lays sheeting over the furniture and floor, hooks up a fine filtration vacuum, wears PPE, and avoids labor-saving techniques to make the same repair. Repair rates in pre-1978 homes shoot up; thereby rental rates increase to cover repair expenses; thereby low-income poor get hit with the cost.

The prior EPA ruling was bad enough. It also claimed to protect the children. Tenants and buyers have to be notified when buying a pre-1978 house that it might contain lead unless the seller or landlord has a lead-free certification done. Duh! It's a pre-1978 home! They ALL contained lead! But if you don't tell them this common knowledge the EPA will fine you $1000.00 per day. What they will NOT do is require you to eliminate the hazard.

The bottom line is that the EPA is doing nothing substantive to protect children. Rather by creating classes and fining violators they have created a new revenue stream for the EPA (government). The lack of remediation preserves the tax revenue from drying up. The tax falls primarily on the working poor.

After sitting thru 2 hrs of a LBP presentation by NC rep for EPA this appears to be true. April 22,2010 is when they begin to start generating revenue. It is a hazard to your health while it is lying on the plastic you put down to catch it. Once you collect it and put it in whatever container that is approved be it a plastic zip loc bag or whatever it is not a hazardous material. Collect from 10,000 homes and put it in the same landfill. OK You think we are in a Recession now!!!!!!!!

 

[brian john]

More overhead, more federal government intrusion, more on the backs of those that can least afford to deal with more government paper work and taxes (in the disguise of fines) at a time construction can hardly afford this.

 

[wtucker]

Once you collect it and put it in whatever container that is approved be it a plastic zip loc bag or whatever it is not a hazardous material.

Not exactly. Lead is a "listed" toxin. If the dumpster you put it in doesn't pass the Toxic Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP), the whole load's gotta go out as hazardous waste. But a little baggie of lead wouldn't do it.

 

[One-eyed Jack]

More overhead, more federal government intrusion, more on the backs of those that can least afford to deal with more government paper work and taxes (in the disguise of fines) at a time construction can hardly afford this.

We are all going to die from something. " TAX POISON"

 

[MrT4]

" lead poisoning effects kids faster than adults, and causes behavioral problems, learning disorders and attention defiit disorders--which translate into a lifetime of decreased earning power and immeasurable financial loss."

This is so much propaganda. The behavioral problems are not associated with lead. The are exhibited by mostly low income children from homes where the parents are negligent and do not care for or watch over their kids. Ignorance and drug addiction are the main culprits.

Befor lead was banned in gasoline the average blood lead level in the US population was about 60+ micrograms per deciliter. This would demand hospital care now. These levels included children and were at these levels for 30 years or more. If the people who grew up with this exposure suffered "behavioral problems, learning disorders and attention defiit disorders--which translate into a lifetime of decreased earning power and immeasurable financial loss" our country would be a total disaster peopled by ignorant mental cases and would not have produced all the great inventions and nobel winners we routinely pump out.

Lead pain can poison folks who are deficieint in vitamins and iron, who live in filthy old housing and who are routinely neglected. These folks would exhibit the same deficiencies
when living in houses that have no lead exposure. All one need do is look at public housing where these maladies are rampant and lead is absent.

 

[c2500]

"
Befor lead was banned in gasoline the average blood lead level in the US population was about 60+ micrograms per deciliter. This would demand hospital care now. These levels included children and were at these levels for 30 years or more. If the people who grew up with this exposure suffered "behavioral problems, learning disorders and attention defiit disorders--which translate into a lifetime of decreased earning power and immeasurable financial loss" our country would be a total disaster peopled by ignorant mental cases and would not have produced all the great inventions and nobel winners we routinely pump out.

.

You might want to check your numbers....60 + micrograms per deciliter does not show up anywhere in the information I have obtained from RRP or the Lead inspector class. In 1976 it was more like 16 micrograms per deciliter and was below 10 micrograms per deciliter in 1980. The blood lead levels feel as leaded gas was eliminated.

You touched on a good point though that poor nutrition helps lead to lead poisoning. Diets rich in calcium help prevent lead poisoning. The body stores lead as it does calcium...in the bones. This goes back to some of the logic behind the law....keep lead dust under control and you are less likely to have a bunch of lowered IQ's due to lead.

c2500

 

[wtucker]

This is so much propaganda. The behavioral problems are not associated with lead. The are exhibited by mostly low income children from homes where the parents are negligent and do not care for or watch over their kids. Ignorance and drug addiction are the main culprits.

Yeah, the Mayo Clinic is one big propaganda machine. So's the National Institutes of Health. And we all know Wikipedia is slopping over with propaganda. Scientists! Who needs 'em? Oh, wait--I might need one to testify when I sue Exxon/Mobil for the attention deficit disorder I developed before 1978...

But you're right about parents not watching over the kids. Hand washing goes further toward preventing ANY illness than anything else. Goes for workers, too: wash your hands before you eat, drink, smoke or apply sunscreen or other topical preparations.

 

[pfalcon]

Yeah, the Mayo Clinic is one big propaganda machine. So's the National Institutes of Health. And we all know Wikipedia is slopping over with propaganda. Scientists! Who needs 'em? ...

I regularly dig through NIH.gov researching things. You would truly be amazed how much of their referenced research does not agree with their policy statements. An astonishing amount of NIH policy is dictated by popularism rather than science. Why should the EPA be any different?