Author Topic: NOTICE UPDATE EPA RRP Enforcement tatics  (Read 7250 times)

Offline admin

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 176
  • Flying this Spruce Goose
    • painterforum
NOTICE UPDATE EPA RRP Enforcement tatics
« on: February 09, 2012, 12:54:24 PM »
It is my understanding that the EPA is moving to enforce the RRP Rule in many States. Enforcement may not include onsite inspections, the EPA is auditing the job records of painting contractors in a given area, starting at the RRP enforcement date. If any jobs are found in which the home's build date is pre-1978 the EPA will look for the REQUIRED lead safe documentation records, a lack of these records can trigger a $30,000 + fine. In addition a fine can be levied for the lack of certification and the actual completion of the job. The liability exposure for the painting contractor can be $100,000 plus for a single job.

I suggest that you contact your Representative in Washington and urge them to revisit the EPA's deeply flawed RRP Rule and interject some common sense.

Admin
I am a webmaster in the tradition of Howard Hughes, I fly this Spruce Goose of a website through cyberspace by the seat of my pants and I usually manage to keep her just above the water, but every now and then I get a wet ass. Let me know if you feel a shudder.

Offline chrisn

  • postingpro
  • PF Mega God
  • *
  • Posts: 1153
    • http://www.paintingwallpaperinghagerstown.com/
Re: NOTICE UPDATE EPA RRP Enforcement tatics
« Reply #1 on: February 09, 2012, 05:39:44 PM »
It is my understanding that the EPA is moving to enforce the RRP Rule in many States. Enforcement may not include onsite inspections, the EPA is auditing the job records of painting contractors in a given area, starting at the RRP enforcement date. If any jobs are found in which the home's build date is pre-1978 the EPA will look for the REQUIRED lead safe documentation records, a lack of these records can trigger a $30,000 + fine. In addition a fine can be levied for the lack of certification and the actual completion of the job. The liability exposure for the painting contractor can be $100,000 plus for a single job.

I suggest that you contact your Representative in Washington and urge them to revisit the EPA's deeply flawed RRP Rule and interject some common sense.

Admin

Yea, good luck with that! ::)

the PAINTSMITH

  • Guest
Re: NOTICE UPDATE EPA RRP Enforcement tatics
« Reply #2 on: February 10, 2012, 08:55:35 AM »
I plaigerized your post, Roger. Hope you don't mind. As is the norm these last 20-30 years, virtually none of these cretins in congress read, much less respond, to correspondance from their constituancy. If this is an exception, I will update you.


to: Collin Peterson
Congressional representative, MN District 8

Mr. Peterson;

It is my understanding that the EPA is moving to enforce the RRP Rule in many States. Though enforcement may not include onsite inspections, the EPA is auditing the job records of painting contractors in a given area, starting at the RRP enforcement date. If any jobs are found in which the home's build date is pre-1978 the EPA will look for the REQUIRED lead safe documentation records, a lack of these records can trigger a $30,000 + fine. In addition a fine can be levied for the lack of certification and the actual completion of the job. The liability exposure for the painting contractor can be $100,000 plus for a single job.

This abuse of federal power is only a small part of the whole, though it affects a huge part of your constituancy. I would appreciate my representative in congress to grow a pair of testicles and represent more of us than his farming voting bloc and confront this abomination to Liberty. I realize that you rarely, if ever, actually read or answer your mail, but this needs vehemently addressed, whether it be by you or your successor in November. It would be such a breath of fresh air to actually have representation again, without having my Corvette or SUV designated "farm equipment". Kindly do your job. --Eric Riehle

Offline admin

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 176
  • Flying this Spruce Goose
    • painterforum
Re: NOTICE UPDATE EPA RRP Enforcement tatics
« Reply #3 on: February 10, 2012, 06:19:49 PM »
Quote
I plaigerized your post, Roger. Hope you don't mind. As is the norm these last 20-30 years, virtually none of these cretins in congress read, much less respond, to correspondance from their constituancy. If this is an exception, I will update you.

 No problem Eric. I believe that this regulation swings the pendulum so far that it defeats it's very purpose. Common sense has never been abundant in bureaucratic government regulation but this one is lunacy with teeth. I urge all interested parties, painting contractors and pre-1978 home owners, to contact their congressional representation and voice their concerns.
I am a webmaster in the tradition of Howard Hughes, I fly this Spruce Goose of a website through cyberspace by the seat of my pants and I usually manage to keep her just above the water, but every now and then I get a wet ass. Let me know if you feel a shudder.

the PAINTSMITH

  • Guest
Re: NOTICE UPDATE EPA RRP Enforcement tatics
« Reply #4 on: February 10, 2012, 07:01:30 PM »
It's simply insane. For every large paint & wall covering company there are 50 "little guys" like me who this regulatoric tyranny will not only put out of business but out of their own house.
 I smell a worst-case scenario in the works...

Offline admin

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 176
  • Flying this Spruce Goose
    • painterforum
Re: NOTICE UPDATE EPA RRP Enforcement tatics
« Reply #5 on: February 17, 2012, 10:16:36 PM »
It is my understanding that the next RRP amendment will be the roll out of "wipe test clearance testing" The contractor will be required to wipe interior and exterior areas after the project is complete, the contractor must submit the "wipe", at the contractor's expense, for laboratory testing to determine lead residue. The results must be given to the home owner and filed with the contractor's project documents.

It is my opinion that if the test reveals some lead residue, which is likely, the contractor will be  subjected to a tremendous legal liability, and the home owner will never be able to sell a house with even trace amounts of documented lead residue, and by the way, disclosure is required.

If the EPA's goal is to stop ALL professional renovations & maintenance of pre 1978 homes. This is the way to do it.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2012, 10:22:50 PM by admin »
I am a webmaster in the tradition of Howard Hughes, I fly this Spruce Goose of a website through cyberspace by the seat of my pants and I usually manage to keep her just above the water, but every now and then I get a wet ass. Let me know if you feel a shudder.

Offline KBP

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • www.KevinPalmerPainting.com
Re: NOTICE UPDATE EPA RRP Enforcement tatics
« Reply #6 on: April 26, 2012, 11:04:03 AM »
I figure the RRP rules add at least 20% additional to the painting (and any other mildly invasive construction project) cost of a pre-1978 project. With "opt-out" a thing of the past, everyone looses. I inform my customers of the EPA regulations and resulting costs, and I hope the devaluation of their real estate values will prompt them to become supporters of modifying and/or repealing the regulations.

Offline nikkoo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: NOTICE UPDATE EPA RRP Enforcement tatics
« Reply #7 on: September 24, 2012, 01:42:43 AM »
good luck with that!
« Last Edit: September 24, 2012, 01:45:50 AM by nikkoo »

Offline Tarasingh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: NOTICE UPDATE EPA RRP Enforcement tatics
« Reply #8 on: October 07, 2013, 12:36:23 AM »
I feel lucky to be on this forum and now it will be a regular visitor to this place and will also spread a word with my friend. Thanks for giving chance to be a path of this community.

SEO Company
Textile Designing Software
Erectile Dysfunction
Seforim
loadxtreme
namkeen making machines

Offline facembanidaimon

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7
Re: NOTICE UPDATE EPA RRP Enforcement tatics
« Reply #9 on: April 20, 2016, 03:11:12 PM »
For every large paint & wall covering company there are 50 "little guys" like me who this regulatoric tyranny will not only put out of business but out of their own house.
 I smell a worst-case scenario in the works...