BLOG: A LETTER TO WASHINGTON
The EPA is proposing more regulations under the LRRP Rule. Minnkota Windows GM writes Washington in response to the proposal.
Minnkota Windows recently posted an article that discussed the possibility of the EPA adding even more requirements to the Renovation, Repair and Painting regulations. We asked you to offer any feedback you may have had regarding this. We received a large response. The message was unanimous in that we should fight this proposal. To that end, we have contacted our Congressmen and shared our discontent with this situation and would suggest that you do the same. Here is the letter that was sent our representation in Washington, D.C.
This letter is to voice opposition to additional requirements being added to the EPAâ€™s Renovation, Repair and Painting regulations. The EPA is considering a dust wipe test that would be sent to a laboratory, with the results being sent back to the homeowner. They have stated that a decision will be made in July of this year. A dust wipe test for lead is currently required, and this proposal would only increase the burden to contractors in an already awkward process.
The education and training pertaining to the current regulations has been done primarily through various trade associations. The EPA has not done enough to educate contractors and consumers alike. I do not want to see any more steps added to this poorly understood program. Contractors who have taken the time and spent the money required to be trained and certified, are shying away from the targeted pre-1978 homes. The bid process is complex, the costs are high, and there is great chance that they will be underbid by someone that chooses to ignore the rules. Also, it is estimated that 60% of these remodel jobs are done by homeowners or tenants that do not have to comply.
Is this policy succeeding? The stated goal of protecting children is absolutely admirable but how can we be sure we are achieving this goal? There have been no benchmarks established to determine if the current program is working so why would we consider adding rules? This is a government mandate that has not been driven by consumers. We should not support any further regulations.
Fargo, North Dakota