Testimonials

Read below to hear what some of our attendees thought of our Lead Paint Solutions class and click here to learn more about Kachina's training options!

Testimonial 1: I just returned from a long but worthwhile day of training and am now a Certified Renovator for projects that fall under the EPA rule that went into effect last April 22, 2010. For those of you who were wondering if it was worth the $2xx bucks to attend, it was. The knowledge is worth much more, regardless of your involvement in projects, or how you intend to use the information. If you are involved in renovating or renting properties built before 1978, or even just wholesaling to those who do, you should take this class. Quality contractors who have this certification can (and will) charge a bit more for their projects that require the additional education, precautions, procedures, and clean-up required by this rule. Owners who elect to do the work themselves or hire non-certified contractors or use cheap day labor to get their projects done take all of the liability on themselves (not smart). If you think this doesn’t apply to you, you are probably wrong.
-H

Testimonial 2: If I had any doubts that this is my preferred strategy going forward, yesterday's excellent training brought that message home loud and clear.

That doesn't mean that I won't ever do a pre-1978 house. In fact, I probably will. It's just that I will treat such houses the way I treat houses with underground oil tanks. I will consider them only if they are extraordinarily profitable deals and I will invest the money in third-party certifications that the house is free of lead-based paint (or a leaking UST.) In the case of lead-based paint, there are vendors (we have one affiliate here in South Jersey) who will come out for about $350 - $400 with an XRF machine and test and certify the property (or declare that it does have lead-based paint.) As long as someone else will take on the liability to declare that the house is free of lead-based paint, I'll treat it like any other investment property. [Thank you for choosing Kachina Lead Paint Solutions for all your renovation needs.]

I am not a contractor. I don't want to be a certified renovator. I DO want to know everything that a certified renovator knows and the excellent course Kachina gave me that for $2xx.

I don't think that anyone who does pre-1978 houses can afford not to go to this training. The cost of ignorance can be huge.

Happy investing! M

NAHB Lawsuit Against EPA

NAHB Lead Paint Lawsuite Against EPA Moves Forward
Resolution not likely until next year

NAHB has filed its opening brief in what could be a drawn-out legal battle with the Environmental Protection Agency.NAHB and three other trade associations — the Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association; the Window and Door Manufacturers Association; and the National Lumber and Building Material Dealers Association — have filed suit against the EPA over the agency’s removal of the opt-out provision from the LRRP rules. The opt-out provision, included in the original LRRP rules EPA issued in 2008, allowed homeowners without children under 6 or pregnant women in the home to “opt out” of the stringent rules for handling pre-1978 homes. EPA removed that provision as part of a settlement with the Sierra Club and other groups.

NAHB is arguing that the removal exceeded the scope of the congressional intent in creating the program in its brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals.“Congress wanted them to make the renovation and remodeling rule different from the abatement rule, to really focus on children under 6 and pregnant women,” says Amy Chai, senior counsel at NAHB. “The opt-out provision allows the agency to better to do that, which is what the agency itself said in 2008 when it published the rule.”The EPA didn’t provide sufficient justifcation for the change as required under the Administrative Procedure Act, or properly evaluate the impact on small businesses as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, NAHB argued in its opening brief.“When they made such an about face, there was no new evidence in the record that supported them changing their minds in such a dramatic fashion,” Chai says.

NAHB and its partners are not challenging the LRRP rules in their entirety, just the removal of the opt-out clause. NAHB supports the regulations except for that change, says Therese Crahan, executive director of NAHB Remodelers.“The litigation is solely over the the opt-out provision, and some people misunderstand that,” she says.The problem for NAHB members is that many homeowners don’t understand the new rules and many, especially those without children, don’t understand why they have to pay for their projects to meet the requirements, Crahan says.That’s leading to NAHB members losing business to either DIYers or contractors that aren’t following the rules.It will probably be sometime in 2012 before the court makes a decision, Chai says.EPA has until June to file a brief with the court. The National Center for Healthy Housing is also expected to file an amicus brief in June in support of EPA. NAHB will have until July to respond to those briefs. That would be followed by oral arguments in front of a three-judge panel.In the meantime, NAHB’s lobbyists are also continuing to work on Capitol Hill in an effort to get Congress to address the issue.

Click here to learn more!