And, so it begins. You might remember: Back in March I predicted that, because of the way the RRP law was written, it would be a field day for lawyers. It would, therefore, increase the cost of renovating old homes as contractors scrambled to cover themselves, both on the job site and off.

Well, despite that, I thought we were ready to put the whole RRP business behind us and would just have to live with the mess. Then, over the weekend, I got this email:

I’ve been following you on Twitter and decided to check out your web page. Great discussion on the lead paint law, which is tying me up in knots — my core biz is older homes. I’m thinking just to lay off for six months until I figure out what’s going on.

My daughter in OREGON got a letter from a Baltimore law firm inviting her to be part of a potential lawsuit — that would be against me, I guess – naming the home where she grew up, which fortunately was built after 1979. I guess this guy is writing everyone who ever lived in
Balto — I’ve gotten three letters from him naming properties I once owned. Thank heavens, I didn’t rent them (sold them).

So it’s a zoo for predatory attorneys.

Last month I pointed out just how much of a mess the RRP law is. Apparently I’m not the only one. Last week (the day before the public comment period ended), I got this email from the CONNER Institute:

To the Renovation, Repair and Painting Community,

Should you wish to submit written comments to the EPA regarding the RRP Rule, but have not yet done so, August 6th is the last day for such submissions. We suggest that if you or your company’s management feel:

• Damaging a surface with a hammer is not demolition — you may need to submit comments.
• Dust-lead sampling following rental unit “Make Ready Activity” is unnecessary — you may need to submit comments.
• Dust-lead sampling the floor of a room where you did not work is unnecessary — you may need to submit comments.
• Dust-lead sampling fees, per job, of $160 to $280 or more, are expensive — you may need to submit comments.
• Dust-lead sampling, mobile facilities, or transportable, self-contained operations to perform analytical lead testing under controlled environmental conditions have not yet reached your workplace — you may need to submit comments.
• Anodic stripping voltammetry (ASV) analyzers are not carried by your local hardware supplier — you may need to submit comments.
• Providing dust-lead test results directly to a resident of rental housing is not practical (i.e. you may not have access to the resident) — you may need to submit comments.
• Replacing a window or door frame is routine, and you can adequately clean the area without a dust-lead test — you may need to submit comments.
• Your 10+ years of federally-assisted housing work experience and passing dust-lead testing without using a HEPA vacuum is proof enough of thorough work practices — you may need to submit comments.
• The proper measurement for trim and base material is linear feet verse square feet — you may need to submit comments.
• 8 hours would be an appropriate amount of time for lead-safe worker training — you may need to submit comments.
• The exam’s minimum passing score of 80% is too restrictive — you may need to submit comments.

If you need the Federal Register for ease of reference please click HERE.

Please consider that your professional trade association may be of further assistance. They may already have organized a written response for your review and consideration, so today is the day to check in with them.

CONNOR Institute has launched its Countdown to Compliance program. We are working with our students, numerous trade associations, state agencies and other interested parties, to increase the level of compliance. This link is available 24/7 to assist you with some of the critical deadlines we must meet to achieve full compliance. To clarify, CONNOR Institute’s reference to the Firm Certification deadline is based on your certificate being “in hand” versus having an application “in the mail.” Please bookmark our Countdown to Compliancee for future reference.

We have several August class specials available for those individuals who must become Certified Renovators.

For a general determination of whether training is required for you, please review the CONNOR Institute Training Decision Logic Tree.

(Note that I printed the email intact, with it’s links, even though the comment period is over.)

It’s obvious that the CONNER Institute sees many problems with the RRP law as it stands. And while I don’t necessarily agree with all of the issues they cite, their list puts an interesting spotlight on what’s probably driving the bloom in predatory law practices that are lining up to sue anyone and everyone who has ever rented or renovated an older home. Put the two together and they provide an interesting way of looking at just how screwed up this thing is.

Emails reprinted with the permission of the original senders.

Originally set to expire this very month (March 2010), Business Week Reported this morning that CA Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger just signed an extention of the 1^st time home buyers $10,000 tax credit into law.

The new law doubles the amount of money set aside for the program and applies to purchases of both new and existing homes.

Have any more information on this program? Let us know in the comments.

If you’re planning on having your house (apartment, child care facility, or school) painted, or on doing some remodeling, after April 22, 2010, then you need to be aware of the new Federal regulations that effect that renovation. Regulations that may make that renovation or repainting job cost you more than you thought it would. In some circumstances, a lot more.

The concern is the lead content in paint produced before 1978. And it is a legitimate one. While it is of no particular hazard while on the wall (unless you chew on it), sanding turns the paint into a dust which, once airborne, is breathed and, as it settles on the toys of small children and pets, is ingested. Studies have shown that children exposed to even small amounts of lead can suffer from the effects of poisoning (don’t know if any tests were performed on pets, but I would assume a similar result): Reduced IQ, learning disabilities and behavioral problems are all symptoms. Adults are also susceptible, of course, but the dosage apparently must be higher.

So bring on the Federal Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP), or “Lead Law”. Passed in 2008, it goes into effect April 22, 2010. It requires contractors renovating more than six square feet of a home built before 1978 to a) be certified by the EPA and the work crew to be trained, and b) to treat that portion of the house being renovated as a toxic materials zone, which means establishing full containment and toxic waste control measures complete with placards, testing, and record keeping. Prior to even beginning work, the contractor must provide you with a copy of this nineteen page “brochure” (booklet would be more accurate), which the contractor must make you sign for. (It contains a lot of information. I suggest you read it carefully.)

If work is being done on the outside of the building and there is another building within twenty feet, then a containment dam must be established and maintained during sanding and/or demolition. Finally, all waste must be treated, and therefore disposed of, as a hazardous material.

Having read the heavy handed language of the actual regulations promulgated by the EPA to satisfy the legislation, I see hidden costs here too. I suspect remodeling, painting, and general contractors will see their liability insurance rates begin to climb. To try and limit potential future liability, even work sites that “test clean” may be treated as contaminated—just in case. Consider: Three years after renovating that 1950s craftsman little Johnny is found to have lead poisoning. The contractor didn’t follow containment procedures because testing showed no lead in any of the paint in the renovation area. But an investigator finds a trace of lead based paint embedded in the wood fibers of one window sill. Bammo! Lawsuit, fine, and damages.

So yes, the good news is, we finally have regulations in place to deal with one of the last remaining health hazards in the home. The bad news? The chest pounding of of Congress has produced a result that is expensive and ungainly. Every State in the Union has methods and procedures in place for dealing with asbestos, and after forty years of rubbing the rough edges off, they work well. Asbestos poisoning is by in large now a thing of the past. With one paragraph Congress could have directed the States to deal with lead paint in the same way. The States probably would have simply then rolled lead paint mitigation into their existing systems at little cost to the tax payer, contractor, or customer. But that would have denied the Congressional bulls an opportunity to bray come election time.

Got an opinion about “the lead law.” Let me hear it!

I’m pleased to announce that Alternative Building Services has been awarded the “Best of” award in the Building Contractors category by the US Commerce Association (USCA).

I’d like to thank the USCA for the honor. If memory serves, this is the second time it has awarded Alternative Building Services the award. All of us here are very proud of the quality of work we do and the service we provide to our community.

building, contractors, us commerce association, usca, awards

Powered by ScribeFire.

It’s no secret that here in California’s Pacific Northwest the idea of deconstruction is a pretty foreign concept. What little recycled lumber there is around has usually been salvaged from rotting rail road trestles or old barns. The idea of actually un-building a house to reuse the lumber in a new house just hasn’t caught on.

But as Erin Golden reports in Central Oregon’s The Bulletin, a little further north the idea is catching on. Read “Want to build green? Demolish with care here.

green, building, deconstruction, demolition

Powered by ScribeFire.

CityCenter Emerges as Leader of Sustainable Urban Development, Driving Green Economies of Scale in Multiple Industry Segments:

urban development, green economy, sustainability, building

Powered by ScribeFire.

A fascinating look at where energy efficiency in headed in the future of today.

green, energy efficient, home, LEED

Powered by ScribeFire.

It is often believe that “going green” costs more. Well, maybe yes and maybe no. (It depends on where you live and how much “reclaimed” material you’re willing to use, and whether you install alternative energy sources.) But one thing is for sure, the benefit is more than worth the cost because a large part of going green is about making the building more energy efficient, which significantly reduces operating costs over the life of the building. (See also my article on Building Green: Cost v. Benefit.)

Watch:

green building, leeds platnum

Powered by ScribeFire.

The Wall Street Journal asked four architects to design an energy-efficient, environmentally sustainable house. They weren’t to worry about cost, whether or not the technology was available to make the house perform the way they envisioned, or how much this the house would cost to build. It was to be an exercise in futurism. An exploration in what bleeding edge “building artists” thought the home of the future might look like. So, what did they come up with?

How about a house like a tree?

No? Not your style? Okay.

How about a house like a reptile?

Take the full walk down fantasy lane by clicking here.

Follow me on twitter.

architecture, green building, sustainable building

Powered by ScribeFire.

Interior Sec. Salazar and Sen. Reid announce plans to fast-track commercial-scale solar power development on 24 tracts of Bureau of Land Management land located in six of the western states. Known as “Solar Energy Study Areas”, the tracts would be evaluated for their environmental and resource suitability for commercial-scale solar energy production.

Read the rest of the story here.

Powered by ScribeFire.