Home Talk USA Program!

KACHINA LEAD PAINT SOLTIONS TO SPONSOR HOME TALK USA RADIO PROGRAM IN 2011!

New Orleans, Louisiana, June 1, 2011, The "Cajun Contractor" Michael King, host of Home Talk USA, in a joint announcement with Paul E. Toub, vice president of marketing for Kachina Lead Paint Solutions, has signed on to sponsor the very popular home improvement syndicated radio program.

Kachina Lead Paint Solutions specializes in serving the remodeling and residential property management industries, including contractors, manufacturers, and landlords. They are a nationally-approved EPA-approved training company for the required Lead Renovation, Repair & Painting Program to become a Certified Renovator, required if working in homes built before 1978 where there could be lead paint. Additionally, Kachina has all the operational forms, pamphlets, guides, equipment and supplies to ensure contractors are in compliance with the law. When asked why he selected Home Talk USA Radio, Mr. Toub replied, "Michael King has an audience that will allow us to educate both homeowners and contractors about the law. Even more critical is why this law is so important to follow in terms of protecting human life, especially younger children, pregnant women and pets. Lead paint poisoning is deadly and if Michael King can help us protect just one additional innocent person, the investment will more than pay for itself."

Home Talk USA with the "Cajun Contractor" Michael King, is a weekly syndicated radio program broadcasted Nationally every--

SATURDAY-
10a-12p Eastern on the LifeStyle Talk Radio Network
4p - 7 p Eastern on the Genesis Communications Radio Network

SUNDAY -
7a - 8a Eastern on the Business Talk Radio Network

With over 217 Radio markets in the US and internationally in 47 Countries, Makes Home Talk on of the most listen to Home Improvement radio Shows on the air today.

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!

The EPA Issues More Fines!

EPA Fines Connecticut Dealer

A contractor specializing in spray-on vinyl siding and replacement windows and doors has agreed to pay $30,702 to settle claims by the New England office of the Environmental Protection Agency that it failed to provide lead hazard information to homeowners or occupants before doing renovations that may have disturbed surfaces coated with lead-based paint, EPA Reports.

The settlement resolves claims that Permanent Siding & Windows, based in Milford, Conn., failed to provide EPA’s lead hazard information pamphlet to at least 17 owners or occupants before the company began renovation activities. The violations in this case took place during renovation work done between January 2006 and March 2009.

Permanent Siding has certified that it is now in compliance with EPA’s Pre-Renovation rule and will submit a report to EPA later this year to demonstrate its continued compliance with this rule.

This is the second such settlement reported by EPA in recent weeks. It also settled a claim with Window World of St. Louis, which agreed to pay nearly $20,000 in fines and perform replacement window work for youth group homes in its area.

Click here to learn more!

EPA Enforcement Against Contractors Increasing

EPA enforcement of the recently enacted Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule ("RRP Rule") is finally becoming more common after a period of very little enforcement. NAPAC has reviewed a number of EPA enforcement-related actions against its members. The most common approach is for the EPA to send a simple letter advising that it is concerned about the contractor's compliance with the RRP Rule and is requesting documentation and information concerning the contractor's compliance. Of course, if the request for documentation and information is ignored, a formal government subpoena follows.

Aside from the obvious ruinous fines that the EPA can impose on a contractor for non-compliance with the RRP Rule ($37,500 per violation), an EPA request (via letter) or demand (via subpoena) is a tremendous burden on the contractor. In the EPA correspondence that NAPAC has reviewed, the EPA asks for a list of all jobs performed by the contractor, a list of each individual acting as a Certified Renovator on behalf of the contractor, the steps taken by the contractor to ensure that lead-safe work practices are being utilized in pre-1978 housing, etc. Any NAPAC member that has ever had to comply with a government subpoena can not only appreciate how much time it takes to compile the requested documentation and information, but also how costly it is to have legal counsel review all of the documentation and information first to make sure you are not blindly turning over documentation and information that makes it obvious that you violated the law.

How can NAPAC members avoid being targeted? First and foremost, you must comply with the RRP Rule. This is predicated on fully understanding the RRP Rule, whether the EPA rule or your state rule.

NAPAC's lead-based paint memos, which are available on www.NAPAC.net for FREE to NAPAC members, are the best place to learn what you must be doing to comply.

Leaving aside compliance, many contractors who have encountered run-ins with the EPA in the past can trace their problem to either a child testing for elevated blood levels or a disgruntled ex-employee or installer who has reported (ironically) his unlawful actions while he worked for the contractor. As NAPAC has noted before, ex-employees or installers know nearly everything about your business, and a disgruntled one is all too happy to "air your dirty laundry" to anyone who will listen. If it happens to be about your non-compliance with the RRP Rule, it can turn into a nightmare.

EPA Issues Fines for Lead Rule Violations

Replacement contractors pays nearly $20K in administrative action

Window World of St. Louis agreed on March 31 to pay a $19,529 civil penalty in connection with an administrative action by Region 7 of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The action cited Window World of St. Louis for failing to provide information — i.e., the agency's "Renovate Right" brochure — to "at least 20" owners and residents of St. Louis-area properties built before 1978. In addition to the fine, Window World agreed to supply $20,048 of in-kind services to nonprofit Youth in Need.

In January, officials of EPA Region 1, in New England, filed a Consent Agreement and Final Order in which Milford, Conn., contractor Permanent Siding & Windows agreed to pay a penalty of $30,702 for its failure to provide Renovate Right to 17 Connecticut property owners prior to performing renovations there.

In both cases, the companies were cited for failing to distribute the brochure as required rather than for ignoring specific steps and measures for containment and clean-up mandated by the EPA as of April 2009. Both cases involved a paperwork audit. According to a source at the EPA, the agency has yet to take legal action against contractors for specifically violating the Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) containment and clean-up rules.

The appearance of a press release regarding the Window World of St. Louis legal action on the EPA's website fed speculation that the agency may be stepping up audits and possibly even onsite inspections in connection with RRP enforcement. "I'm hearing grumblings," says Check for Lead's Scott Turman. On Monday, April 4, Check for Lead, a Florida-based online supplier of materials for contractors involved with lead-safe renovation, launched a new tool for contractors seeking solid information about EPA audits in their area. The online tool is a Google map flagging locations where EPA audits can be verified as having taken place.Turman says that 11 states are now administering their own audits. He plans to expand the sophistication of the map soon by adding Occupational Safety and Health Administration and state audits.

Click here to learn more!

College works painting pays $32,508 EPA penalty

College works painting pays $32,508 EPA penalty for failing to inform homeowners or residents of possible lead hazards

Seattle College Works Painting, a company operating in Oregon, has agreed to pay $32,508 penalty for alleged violations of the federal pre-renovation rule. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency alleged that the Irvine, California based company violated the federal pre-renovation rule while renovating nine properties in Portland, McMinnville, and Hillsboro, Oregon.

The federal Pre-Renovation Education Rule requires painters, contractors, carpenters, property-management companies and others involved in remodeling or renovation of pre-1978 housing to provide home owners and occupants with an EPA Renovate Right lead hazard information pamphlet. In 1978 lead was banned from paint used for housing.

This pamphlet educates home owners or occupants on how to minimize exposure to hazardous lead dust that is often generated during sanding, cutting, demolition or other renovation activities. The pamphlet also provides resources for more information about lead and minimizing lead hazards.

The violations in this case took place during renovation work done in 2008.

College Works failed to establish and maintain records necessary to demonstrate compliance with Toxic Substances Control Act regulations, according to the EPA. College Works has corrected the violations and is now in compliance with EPA’s Pre-Renovation Education Rule.

“Families have a right to know about possible lead health hazards around the home,” said Rick Albright, Director of EPA’s Office of Air, Waste and Toxics in Seattle. “By reading the Renovate Right pamphlet families can learn how to avoid hazardous lead dust during renovations.”

Lead-based paint can be on walls, ceilings, woodwork, windows, or even floors. When lead-based paint on these surfaces is chipped, sanded, or scraped, it breaks into tiny, barely visible pieces that children can swallow or inhale. Even small repair and renovation jobs, including repainting projects, can create enough lead dust and chips to harm children.

Lead poisoning is a silent disease that can cause serious health consequences for children because of its detrimental effects on both physical and mental development. Nearly one million children in the country are affected by elevated lead levels.

Click here to learn more!