EPA May Soon Regulate Home Renovations

[sfloriII]

I don't think I'd mind paying 25% more for renovations if it prevents lead poisoning.

I received this from a realtor friend of mine today:


EPA May Soon Regulate Home Renovations

( February 2, 2006) -- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is on the brink of instituting the first regulations governing home remodels in an attempt to minimize lead poisoning in children.

The rules would govern owner-occupied and rental dwellings built prior to 1978, when lead paint was outlawed. The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that 65 percent of homes nationwide were erected prior to the ban.

Contractors — at least one of which per project would need EPA certification in lead-safe work practices — would be required to seal off the work area and purchase special vacuums and respirators.

Mike Nagel, president of Roselle, Ill.-based Remodel One, says most contractors do nothing to reduce lead-paint dust due to the absence of stringent regulations.

According to the National Association of Home Builders, home renovations could cost 25 percent more as a result of the new rule, as builders would have to pay for training, new equipment, and additional liability insurance. Other industry representatives are concerned that the rule is too broad and unnecessary.

The first phase of implementation would involve pre-1960 rentals, pre-1960 owner-occupied homes with residents under age 6, and dwellings built from 1960 to 1978 that house a child with high blood lead levels, with all rentals and owner-occupied homes with young children built between 1960 and 1978 covered by the second phase.

Source: The Wall Street Journal, Sara Schaefer (02/02/06)

[kerry]

When we were renovating and our daughter was young, we'd get lead tests done during her checkups. Never a problem.
There is some dispute as to whether the main source of lead in children's blood is the paint and dust in the home or the dirt outside.
Is there any evidence at all that children have suffered lead poisoning from home renovations? Or anyone has for that matter?

[Wes Bender]

My lead level went way down after I quit biting down on those lead fishing sinkers....

I'm not sure that this new EPA thing is really necessary, or is it because they have to show that they are DOING something?.

just my $.02,
Wes

[Hatterasguy]

Great another way for the gov to screw us. Pressure treated wood is next, that stuff will be treated like toxic waste in a few years.

Lead paint will only hurt you if you eat it, people over react a lot sometimes.

[Nate]

So who does the EPA have to answer to? Just like kim teal and her damn anti car painting plan... AHH

Its lead paint, you eat it, you get sick... Dont eat it, and wear a filter when sanding it...

I hate the EPA, PITA, and ACLU
~Nate

[Honus]

Originally Posted by Nateid15

...I hate the EPA, PITA, and ACLU
~Nate

Really? What's your position on disingenuous presidents who twist scientific studies to suit their warped political agendas?

Sorry to hijack the thread, but this is arguably relevant, and it gives me another chance to express scorn for W. Read this from www.washingtonmonthly.com:

BUSH IGNORES SCIENTISTS....FILM AT 11....I know this will come as a shock, but a group of scientists claimed yesterday that the Bush administration is ignoring their recommendations and twisting their research results:

In an unprecedented action, the Environmental Protection Agency's own scientific panel on Friday challenged the agency's proposed public health standards governing soot and dust.

....Some panel members called the administrator's actions "egregious" and said his proposals "twisted" or "misrepresented" their recommendations.

....Cal/EPA's air pollution epidemiology chief, Bart Ostro, charged during the teleconference that the EPA had incorporated "last-minute opinions and edits" by the White House Office of Management and Budget that "circumvented the entire peer review process."

He said research that he and others had conducted also had been misrepresented in the EPA's lengthy justification for the proposed new standards.

In an interview later, Ostro said he was referring to marked-up drafts of Johnson's proposals that showed changes by the White House budget office and language that was "very close to some of the letters written by some of the trade associations."

Sigh. I hardly even know what to say about stuff like this anymore. Of course the language was
"very close" to letters written by trade associations. The modern Republican Party doesn't do policy anymore, they just farm it out to K Street.

Maybe Chris Mooney will follow up on this later. It's his beat, after all.

[cmac2012]

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

Great another way for the gov to screw us. Pressure treated wood is next, that stuff will be treated like toxic waste in a few years.

Lead paint will only hurt you if you eat it, people over react a lot sometimes.

They've actually improved PT wood a lot already. For awhile, I think for a period of a few years ending a couple of years back, they had a new formula that wood eat nail that weren't stainless. Some guys still insist on using stainless only and I sorta go along with that.

PT wood should NOT be burned and I try to wear a respirator whenever I'm cutting it.

Problem with lead paint is that kids who eat the paint chips, which have a slightly sweet taste I'm told, suffer irreversible impairment of their intelligence potential.

Some of the big jobs I've worked on, the painters coat the existing stuff with a couple of coats of primer to make sure it's safely buried.

[Hatterasguy]

I really don't see why they have to overreact like this. If you think about it lead is probably one of the less toxic things we deal with. Heck a Big Mac probably has more dangerious chemicals.

If you are building a deck buy the good pressure treated stuff now, it is next.

[mikemover]

Originally Posted by sfloriII

I don't think I'd mind paying 25% more for renovations if it prevents lead poisoning.

I received this from a realtor friend of mine today:


EPA May Soon Regulate Home Renovations

( February 2, 2006) -- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is on the brink of instituting the first regulations governing home remodels in an attempt to minimize lead poisoning in children.

The rules would govern owner-occupied and rental dwellings built prior to 1978, when lead paint was outlawed. The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that 65 percent of homes nationwide were erected prior to the ban.

Contractors — at least one of which per project would need EPA certification in lead-safe work practices — would be required to seal off the work area and purchase special vacuums and respirators.

Mike Nagel, president of Roselle, Ill.-based Remodel One, says most contractors do nothing to reduce lead-paint dust due to the absence of stringent regulations.

According to the National Association of Home Builders, home renovations could cost 25 percent more as a result of the new rule, as builders would have to pay for training, new equipment, and additional liability insurance. Other industry representatives are concerned that the rule is too broad and unnecessary.

The first phase of implementation would involve pre-1960 rentals, pre-1960 owner-occupied homes with residents under age 6, and dwellings built from 1960 to 1978 that house a child with high blood lead levels, with all rentals and owner-occupied homes with young children built between 1960 and 1978 covered by the second phase.

Source: The Wall Street Journal, Sara Schaefer (02/02/06)

Completely absurd.

It would increase the cost of renovation work by significantly more than 25%. It's also a slippery slope, as someone already pointed out... What's next, pressure treated wood? Requiring hazardous materials disposal procedures for the scrapings of old lead-based paint, or plaster fragments that were painted with it?...

The potential for ridiculousness, and expensiveness, is VERY high with such legislation.

It would also make it even more difficult for "do-it-yourselfers" and independent contractors.... Local zoning laws and inspectors in many locales ALREADY make things very tough for DIY guys and small-time independent contractors.

More ridiculous knee-jerk legislation like this is the LAST thing we need right now.

Mike

[sfloriII]

Originally Posted by mikemover

It would also make it even more difficult for "do-it-yourselfers" and independent contractors.... Local zoning laws and inspectors in many locales ALREADY make things very tough for DIY guys and small-time independent contractors.

More ridiculous knee-jerk legislation like this is the LAST thing we need right now.

Mike

My brother in law is a private contractor in the home improvement business. He's extrememly talented and does high end quality work.

But he's getting run out of business. Why? Too many migrant workers in the area are willing to work for cheap, so he can't get any work unless he seriously underbids and makes little to no profit. On top of that, too many homeowners simply don't want quality (translate more expensive) work done on their homes because in the DC market, they don't plan to stay in their present homes for more than a few years. They'd rather have cheap work done of questionable quality since they won't be around when everthing falls apart.

So he and his wife are moving to Arizona where he'll build their house and then become a high school teacher. Not a bad profession, though.