Renovation firms

The renovation activities were conducted by local professional renovation firms, using personnel who received lead-safe work practices training using the curriculum developed by EPA and HUD,... 

Lead Safety for Remodeling, Repair, and Painting. The activities conducted represented a range of activities that would be permitted under the 2006 Proposal, including work practices that are restricted or prohibited for abatements under 40 CFR 745.227(e)(6). Of particular interest was the impact of using specific work practices that renovation firms would be required to use under the proposed rule, such as the use of plastic to contain the work area and a multistep cleaning protocol, as opposed to more typical work practices. 

It is difficult to determine with any amount of certainty whether this final rule will have unintended consequences. However, EPA agrees that it is important to minimize disincentives for using certified renovation firms who follow the work practices required by this rule. EPA also agrees that practicality is an important consideration. Given the relatively low estimated overall average per-job cost of this final rule, which is 35, and the relatively easy-to-use work practices required by this final rule, EPA does not expect the incremental costs associated with this rule to be a determinative factor for consumers. However, that relatively low cost has resulted in part from EPA s efforts to contain the costs of this rule to avoid creating disincentives to using certified renovation firms, and EPA has viewed the comments received with those considerations in mind. 

With respect to the comment regarding the standard of care for do-it-yourselfers, EPA also plans to conduct an outreach and education campaign aimed at encouraging homeowners and other building owners to follow work practices while performing renovations or to hire a certified renovation firm to do so. 

Renovations must be performed by certified firms. The certification requirements for renovation firms are identical to the certification requirements for firms that perform lead-based paint activities, except that renovation firm certification lasts for 5 years instead of 3 years. A firm that wishes to become certified to perform renovations must submit an appUcation, along with the correct amount of fees, attesting that it will assign a certified renovator to each renovation that it performs, that it will use only certified or properly trained individuals to perform renovations, and that it will follow the work practice standards and recordkeeping requirements in this regulation. 

In contrast to the 2006 Proposal, this final rule does not allow dust clearance sampling in lieu of post-renovation cleaning verification, except in cases where the contract between the renovation firm and the property owner or another federal, state, territorial, tribal, or local regulation requires dust clearance sampling by a certified sampling professional and requires the renovation firm to clean the work area until it passes clearance. 

At a minimum, the program requirements must include accredited training for renovators and procedures and requirements for recertification. State, territorial, and tribal programs applying for authorization are also required to include work practice standards for renovations that ensure that renovations are conducted only by certified renovators or renovation firms and that renovations are conducted using work practices at least as protective as those of the Federal program. 

Some commenters expressed confusion over the mechanics of this exception. The certified inspector or risk assessor determines whether components contain lead-based paint, while the renovation firm is responsible for determining which components will be affected by the renovation. A renovation firm may rely on the report of a past inspection or risk assessment that addresses the components that will be disturbed by the renovation. 

EPA received a number of comments on this aspect of the 2006 Proposal. Several recognized the need for such an exception, but most of the commenters were concerned that the language of the proposal would make it possible for renovation firms to circumvent the training, certification, and work practice... 

In the 2006 Proposal, EPA proposed to require renovation firms to distribute the new renovation-specific pamphlet (then titled Protect Your Family from Lead during Renovation, Repair, and Painting) instead of the pamphlet currently used for this purpose (Protect Your Family from Lead in Your Home). 

EPA received no comments on this aspect of the 2007 Supplemental Proposal. Therefore, the final rule includes this requirement as proposed. Renovation firms performing renovations for... 

In addition, the renovation firm must provide the pamphlet to an adult representative of the COF if the facility and the building are owned by different entities. To document compliance with this requirement, the renovation firm must do one of the following ... 

EPA received three comments on this aspect of the 2007 Supplemental Proposal. One commenter expressed support for this proposed requirement. The other two provided a number of reasons why the final rule should not include such a requirement. These commenters noted that renovation firms have no contractual connection with or contractual responsibility to the parents or guardians of children using a COE. They believe that the child-occupied facility owner bears primary responsibility for maintaining a safe environment for children. 

Once the renovation firm has distributed the pamphlet, it has no further obligation to educate the owners or occupants about lead poisoning. The pamphlet contains this information and refers to additional resources. EPA acknowledges that it may be difficult to provide copies of the pamphlet to each parent, which is why this final rule allows renovation firms to comply by posting informational signs where parents or guardians would be likely to see them. 

Recertification also provides a means for EPA to ensure that it has updated firm contact information. Recertification also prompts the firm to positively reaffirm its commitment to adhere to the requirements set forth in this regulation. Finally, recertification allows EPA an opportunity to review a firm s compliance history before it obtains recertification. However, EPA has determined that these purposes can be adequately served by recertifying renovation firms every 5 years instead of every 3 years as proposed. 

In addition, EPA has made conforming changes to the performance standard that renovators and renovation firms are being held to in this final rule. EPA was concerned that the rule text and preamble were confusing because there were references to visible dust and debris or identifiable dust and debris and all dust and debris. For example, in the 2006 Proposal work area was defined as the area established by the certified renovator to contain all the dust and debris generated by a renovation. In the renovator responsibilities the renovator was responsible for ensuring that dust and debris is not spread beyond the work area. ... 

In describing the containment to be established, the rule text referred to visible dust and debris and in the section on waste from renovations the rule text referred to identifiable dust. It was not EPA s intention to create subjectivity as to whether dust and debris were being dispersed. By conforming its terminology EPA is clarifying that certified renovators and renovation firms must ensure that the dust and debris (as opposed to visible or identifiable dust and debris) generated by the renovation is contained. Should an EPA inspector observe dust or debris escaping from the containment, the certified renovator and the renovation firm would be in violation of this final rule. 

The final rule requires renovation firms to use precautions to ensure that all personnel, tools, and other items, including the exteriors of containers of waste, be free of dust and debris before leaving the work area. There are several ways of accomplishing this. For example, tacky mats may be put down immediately adjacent to the plastic sheeting covering the work area floor to remove dust and debris from the bottom of the workers shoes as they leave the work area, workers may remove their shoe covers (booties) as they leave the work area, and clothing and materials may be wet-wiped and/or HEPA-vacuumed before they are removed from the work area. 

EPA will allow the renovation firm to use both dust clearance testing and clearance instead of the cleaning verification step. 

In addition, as proposed in the 2006 Proposal, EPA has modified paragraph (a) of 40 CFR 745.86 to make compliance with the recordkeeping requirements the responsibility of the renovation firm, not the certified renovator. Although, as discussed in the following, this final rule requires the certified renovator assigned to a renovation to certify compliance with the work practice requirements for that renovation, the renovation firm may choose to delegate other tasks associated with recordkeeping... 

---