Those procedures have been around for years in many localities. I don't see much of anything new.

What IS 'new' beginning April 2010 is that any contractor that wants to work on any house built in the US before 1978 will have to get certified as a "Lead Abatement Contractor" or be subject to fine, imprisionment or both....

After April 2010, the EPA will be taking lead abatement in remodeled houses a LOT more seriously...

And if you don't think so...just ignore the EPA...and suffer the consequences....

You will also need to be certified, use HEPA filters, seal off the work area etc. No child under the age of 6 will be allowed to enter the property until the work has been completed and the final clean-up has been done and certified. The fine is $30,000 per day.

skydawggy-
That's the stated maximum, daily, statutory fine. But it doesn't mean that everyone who violates the regulations is going to be nailed to the wall. Having worked with EPA a lot, I can say it's most likely that someone who has a simple, first-time violation is going to have a small fine or a warning. Now if you're a big company that does this type of work regularly and you keep doing unsafe work, and having repeat violations, you might be in for some serious butt-kicking. EPA is not really as interested in collecting money as it is in getting people to do the work right. But sometimes assessing a few big fines against the worst offenders helps get everyone else's attention.

I am in favor of the regulations that help keep folks safe. However, I am also aware if some regulations increase the cost of work done by professionals, people will resort to DIY to save money. That is very likely going to be the result of this legislation. And unintended consequences, like older houses will either be sold as is, without emough disclosure, or increased in price to the point young families will not be able to afford a house.

The sold as is houses will be a huge hazard for those young families who could afford the house but not the repairs.

handymac-
It's a tough one, isn't it? If you don't inform people, they create hazards unknowingly, and if you do inform them then some people will still make a mess because they're trying to save money. It's something that will never be perfect. I'm inclined on the side of trying to put reasonable regulations in place and letting the marketplace work it out. I still think that is better than no regulation or simply making things optional.

Fine Homebuilding had a recent letter to the editor about home sprinkler systems.

The same argument holds.

It is tough to make affordable housing when rules and regulations keep driving up the cost of both new housing and repairs and renovation to old housing stock.

The EPAs main purpose is to justify the EPA.

Children's blood lead levels have been falling since lead was removed from gasoline.

Better is the enemy of good enough.

brickeeye-
I deduce from this and some of your other posts that you are generally suspicious of anything EPA does...and you're welcome to that opinion. I'm not going to pick a fight by trying to prove you wrong.

But some of us think there is a scientific basis for environmental regulations, and are aware there is a public process before new ones are implemented.

And EPA doesn't pull this stuff out of thin air. EPA's authority to assess environmental risk is circumscribed by law, and is highly influenced by both the President and Congress. Regulations that are put in place are often in response to specific acts passed by Congress directing EPA to develop and implement regulations. EPA has enough to do without trying to invent new regulations to mindlessly harass people with.

I agree that regulation is often imperfect, but that doesn't mean I condemn it whenever it occurs.

Let me know when children whose brains are not already damaged by eating lead paint suddenly become smart enough not to start.

"And EPA doesn't pull this stuff out of thin air. "

Funny, they pulled the most recent rules decreasing Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) in drinking water out of thin air.

It turns out they also caused lead leaching in older lead supply lines in Washington, DC.

The whole fiasco now require the Corpse of Engineers to add back organophoshate to the EPA compliant water to stop the problem created by complying with the new TDS standard.

The EPA failed to even consult with their 'in house' corrosion experts.

The EPA is free to ignore any comments made during the 'public comment' period, and let interested parties pursue them on court.

They screwed up asbestos removal, they screwed up TDS in water, what is there next screw up going to be? And how much will we pay for it?

brickeeye-
I understand you have a strongly held opinion which appears to be that the EPA can do no good. I'm not going to argue or try to refute you...not because there isn't a valid case, but because it would be pointless, and the amount of info we would both have to lay out to make a sound argument would make everyone else's eyes glaze over.

When you make sweeping, general characterizations like "EPA's main purpose is to justify EPA, " or "They screwed up asbestos removal," I just don't find it particularly enlightening. I've worked in environmental engineering on both sides -- both public and private sector -- and I have a different view. My whole point in even responding in the first place was to simply assert that some people think there can be benefits to regulation and that not everyone thinks EPA is evil and incompetent.

And now I'm done.

Brickeyee's opinion(mine also) and many other people's opinions are formed by years of watching our government over/under react to problems and usually making the problem much worse by the selected solution.

The latest example is the Consumer product Safety information Act scheduled to take effect in February, 2010.

This law is intended to protect American nchildren(in part) from toys with dangerous finishes/materials. Something that is needed, to be sure.

Oops, seems they did NOT do their homework. The law will do what it is intended, but also has put the small toy/clothing/doll making companies(one person/small family) out of business.

Why? Because to make toys now, the toys/dolls/doll clothing/etc. will have to be tested---EVERY SEPARATE ITEM!!!!!!!!! At a minimum cost of $200+ PER ITEM.

That means all the guilds/clubs/individual groups who make wooden toys DONATED as well as sold, doll/clothing makers are effectively out of business.

Know what I get when talking to Senator's office personnel to complain???

"Gee, we did not expect that UNINTENDED consequence."

Yeah, that kind of protection really makes me confident in the Government.

Here is a link that might be useful: CPSIA

"I'm from the government and I'm here to help!"

Some people just do not live in an area with a lot of old housing:

Here is a link that might be useful: Babies As Lead Detectors

Beats being on the street.

Maybe if the parents actually parented and watched their children or invested in a can of paint?

If only the EPA was as good about enforcing regulations on polluting companies. Doesn't do much good to have lead certified contractors for your house if the power plant across town is allowed to operate without toxin-removing scrubbers on its smokestacks.

That rule seems to only apply when lead paint is present and will be disturbed by the work. Rather sensible, actually.

Oh, riverspots, don't you know?

The EPA has made the regulations so tight that it's virtually impossible for an old power plant to meet them. Much cheaper to build a new plant. Oh, but wait, you can't do that because most states won't allow new power plants to be built. (See CA's entirely self-induced power shortage.) The company can at least upgrade to increase efficiency and lower pollution, though, right? WRONG! In the EPA's infinite wisdom, while old power plants are grandfathered in, if you make any improvements at all, you have to cme completely up to the new regulations.

Yeah, the EPA rocks. Motivated by politics and the press....

It's kind of funny how they declared the lake I lived next to "cured" of arsenic after a dredging only to say "oops! I guess you all got poisoned for years after!" later--and t let the company off scott-free. Ah, much better to make largely senseless politically visible splashes instead!

"I'm from the government and I'm here to help!"

You wanna help? Help the saw mills in the area of our build in nor cal that are shutting down because of a joint effort of the E.P.A. and forest service eliminating the thinning of our forests. Mechanical thinning produces employment in many areas. It keeps loggers, truckers, saw mill workers, landscapers, firewood businesses all busy while producing a healthy forest that limits fire danger. All positives that they have succesfully turned into negatives for their support of the big oil corporations. They have succesfully banned burning firewood in woodstoves hurting those who are dependent on it as a primary heating source because woodburning stoves pollute? Get real here. You wanna help? Get the E.P.A. outta our face so we can get on with jobs and energy efficient ways to heat our homes lessening the dependence on fossil fuels.

Hope you find this helpful: ZipWall has a lot of useful EPA information collected in one section, zipwall.com/epa.php

I talked to my contractor about this. If we waited until later this year for our renovations it would have added $20,000+ to the bid and we would have had to live somewhere else during the remodel. We've done work on our 185 yr. old house in the past 12 years and tried to be as safe as reasonably as we can. When the kids were under 5 I had their lead levels tested twice a year and their levels were acceptable. We moved out to Rocklin Ca for my husband's work for 18 months into a new house, new school and almost new preschool (about 4 yrs. old). My kids' lead levels doubled!! What most people thought it was either the lead in the air or water that caused the elevated readings. When we moved back to Boston into our probably lead painted house their levels dropped again. Go figure!

I'm a landlord and I tend to do a lot of remodeling. Rules like this are going to end up costing me quite a bit of money and time. In my experience (which may not be the most out there but I've been around the block), this kind of regulation is in a good and appropriate spirit but will be mishandled by the government. I don't know offhand if there is a better solution (without getting over political here), but I'm sure this isn't the best way.

The lead paint ruling for exchanging real estate really just comes down to a CYA issue. The sellers say they have no knowledge and the buyers have to get a pamphlet. It's so routine that Realtors just shuffle people through the process. I guess it raises some awareness but to me it just seems like a way to push liability around rather than actually addressing the lead paint problem.

Here is a link that might be useful: Get Snell Helmet