+1

I am guessing he was just using general terminology and referring to treating it as an "insert" vs. "full tear out" in this case. Todd is right that there are a bunch of different insert window options out there though.

Thanks to you both. We will look in to getting the lead testing done.

Keep in mind, the lead "testing" that is done when it comes to RRP is just a swab type confirmation and not a real lead test (i.e. legal document that goes with the home).

RRP lead testing can be done either way,full XRF testing by a licensed and trained professional is usually the best method. A postive reading even on a swab isdocument that should go with the home.

If it is indicated on the contract paperwork, it does go with the home. We started doing XRF testing originally, but the folks at EPA compliance were unsure of how to even deal with from the outset.

My understanding is the same as Todd's. Regardless of the test method, it is a certified, legal test that needs to be documented if it is to suffice as a negative result to avoid RRP. If it is positive it should still be tracked and documented as well.

+1 to the other comments. The composition material of the new window has nothing to do with lead safe procedures. The installation type really doesn't either, as both replacements and full frames require them. The difference is the extent of work that needs to be done. That may be why that particular contractor only offers the pocket replacements.

HUD requires all known presence , all known records pertaining to lead to be disclosed. A test showing that there is no lead present would still be pertaining to lead.