Professional Painters > Professional Painters and associated Trades Forum
NOTICE UPDATE EPA RRP Enforcement tatics
admin:
jQuery(document).ready(function($){jQuery(function(){jQuery("#msg_26740").css("overflow-y", "hidden");});});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 $100,000 plus for a single job.
I suggest that you contact your Representative in Washington and urge them to revisit the EPA's deeply flawed RRP Rule and interject some common sense.
Admin
chrisn:
jQuery(document).ready(function($){jQuery(function(){jQuery("#msg_26741").css("overflow-y", "hidden");});});
--- Quote from: admin 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 $100,000 plus for a single job.
I suggest that you contact your Representative in Washington and urge them to revisit the EPA's deeply flawed RRP Rule and interject some common sense.
Admin
--- End quote ---
Yea, good luck with that! ::)
the PAINTSMITH:
jQuery(document).ready(function($){jQuery(function(){jQuery("#msg_26742").css("overflow-y", "hidden");});});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 $100,000 plus for a single job.
This abuse of federal power is only a small part of the whole, though it affects a huge part of your constituancy. I would appreciate my representative in congress to grow a pair of testicles and represent more of us than his farming voting bloc and confront this abomination to Liberty. I realize that you rarely, if ever, actually read or answer your mail, but this needs vehemently addressed, whether it be by you or your successor in November. It would be such a breath of fresh air to actually have representation again, without having my Corvette or SUV designated "farm equipment". Kindly do your job. --Eric Riehle
admin:
jQuery(document).ready(function($){jQuery(function(){jQuery("#msg_26743").css("overflow-y", "hidden");});});
--- 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.
--- End quote ---
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.
the PAINTSMITH:
jQuery(document).ready(function($){jQuery(function(){jQuery("#msg_26744").css("overflow-y", "hidden");});});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...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version