### RECEIVE D OPP T C8I C 201 3 AP R - U A H 9:1* 2 ASSOCIATE D GENERA L CONTRACTOR S O F NE W YOR KSTATE , LL C Th e Ne w Yor k State Chapte ro f th e Associated Genera l Contractor s o f Americ

a Lead ; Renovation , Repai r an d Paintin g Progra

mfo r Publi c an

d Commercia

l Building s EP A Docke t I D Number : EPA-HQ-OPPT-2010-017 3 

# AP R 

# 0 3 2013 Followin g i s asynopsi s o f comment

s received fro mMembershi p o f Associated Genera

l Contractor s o f

New York

Stat e an d th e AGC NY S Safet

y Committee regardin g EPA' s propose d Lead ; Renovation , Repai

r an d Paintin g Progra

mfo r Publi c an

d Commercia

l Buildings . Th

e AG C NY S i s a statewid e trad e association representing ove r 60 0 genera l contractors an

d constructio n manager

s performin g ove

r $ 6 billio n i n service s fo r publi c an

d privat e owners . AG C NY S i s th e larges t trad e association i n th

e Stat e o f Ne w Yor

k an d comprised o f

ope n sho p an d unio n contractors . Th

e AG C NY S Safet y Committee i s mad

e u p o f buildin g an

d highwa y contracto

r safet y director s fro macros s th e Stat e o f Ne w York . Th

e grou p size varie s bu

t ha s a s man y a s 7 0 companie s represente d tha t mee t thre e time s a year . Mos t Member s o f th e AG C o f

New Yor

k Stat e ar e routinel y involve d i n renovatio n an d demolitio n activitie s tha

t result i n th e disturbanc e o f

lea d containin g paint . Som e o f ou r contractors ar

e directl y involve d wit h th

e activitie s tha

t creat e th e disturbanc e an

d othe r Membe r contractors serv

e a s agenera

l contracto r who ha s hire d asubcontracto

r to perfor mth e work . I n eithe

r case , thi s issu

e i s not ne w t o the m an d ther e ar e regulation s tha

t must b e followed .
Th e EPA , HUD , an

d OSHA al l hav

e regulation s coverin g th e disturbanc e o f

lea d an d i t i s importan

t to not e th e difference s i n th

e existin g regulations . EP A an d HU D regulation s ma

y appl y dependin

g on th e natur e o f th e project ; i f

th e projec t i s considere

d to b e "targe t housing " o

r a"chil d occupied facility" ; an d i f th e paint i s considered to b

e "lea d containing " a

s define d by these agencies . Th e EP A define s paint

a s "lea d base d paint " i f

th e paint chip sampl

e contain s >.5 % lea

d o r i f th e XR F reading i s 1.

0 o r more . OSHA' s 29 CF

R 1926.62 Standards , however , conside r paint t o b e "lea d containin g coatings " i f ther e i s an y detectabl

e amoun t o f lea d i n th e sample . OSH

A als o onl y recognize s chip samples a s th e metho d to b e use d to tes t fo r lead . XR

F an d swa b testin g ar

e not a n acceptabl

e mean s o f samplin g fo r

lea d according to the Occupationa l Safet y an d Healt h Administration . Chi

p sample s must

b e teste d by a n accredited laborator

y an d again , i f

th e lea d conten t i s belo w >.5 % o

r 1. 0 i t woul d not

b e considere

d "lea d containing " paint

a s define d b y EP

A o r HUD , bu t i t woul d no w trigge

r man y OSH A requirements . Unde r th e curren t OSHA regulations , th

e presenc e o f an y amoun t o f lead , eve n belo w EP

A threshold s fo r "lea d base d paint" , require s tha

t th e contracto

r disturbin g th

e lea d conduct

a n assessment

. Th e employee s performin g th e assessmen

t ar e provide d wit h th

e appropriat

e persona l protectiv e equipmen

t fo r th e task bein g performe d an

d actua l exposur e to airborne lea

d i s measured . OSHA Standar d 1926.6 2 (d ) covers th e followin g fo r

employe e protectio n durin g exposur e assessments . Existin g Regulation s

1926.62 (d)Exposure assessment. 

### CONTAIN S N O CB ! 

# MAR 

# 2 8 2013

1 0 AIRLIN E DFUVE , SUIT E 20 3 • ALBANY , NE W YOR K1220 5 518-456-113 4 P • 518-456-119 8 F • www.agcnys.or g

## RECEIVE D OPP T CB1 C 2013 APRAH

9: kZ 1926.62(d)(1) General. 1926.62(d)(l)(i ) Eac

h employe

r who ha s aworkplac e o

r operatio n covere

d by thi s standar

d shal l initiall y determin e i f an y employe

e ma y b e expose d to lea d a t o r abov e th e actio n level . 1926.62(d)(1)(H ) Fo

r th e purpose s o f

paragrap h (d ) o f thi s section , employe

e exposur e i s tha t exposur e whic h woul d occu

r i f th e employe

e wer e not usin g arespirator . 1926.62(d)(l)(iii ) Wit h th e exceptio n o f

monitorin g unde

r paragrap h (d)(3) , wher

e monitorin g i s require d unde r thi s section , th

e employe

r shal l collec t

persona l samples representative o f aful l shif

t includin g a

t least on e sampl e fo r eac h jo b classificatio n i n eac h wor k are aeithe r fo r eac h shif t o r fo r th e shif t wit h the highes t exposur e level . 1926.62(d)(l)(iv ) Ful l shif t persona l samples shall b

e representative o f

th e monitore d employee' s regular , dail y exposur

e to lead . 1926.62(d)(2) Protection of employees during assessment of exposure. 1926.62(d)(2)(i ) Wit h respec t to th e lea d relate d task

s liste d i n thi s paragrap

h (d)(2)(i ) o f

thi s section , wher e lea d i s present , unti l th

e employe

r perform s a

n employe

e exposur e assessmen

t a s require d i n paragrap h (d ) o f thi s sectio n an

d document

s tha t th e employe

e performin g an

y o f th e liste d task

s i s not expose d abov e th e PEL , th e employe

r shal l trea t th e employe

e a s i f th e employe

e wer e expose d abov e th e PEL , an d not i n exces s o f

ten (10 ) time s th

e PEL , an d shall implemen

t employe e protectiv e measures prescribed i n paragrap

h (d)(2)(v ) o f

thi s section . Th

e task s covere d b y thi s requiremen

t are : 1926.62(d)(2)(i)(A ) Wher e lea d containin g coating s o

r paint ar e present : Manua

l demolitio n o f

structure s (e.g , dr y wall) , manua

l scraping , manua

l sanding , hea

t gu n applications , an

d powe r too l cleaning wit h dust collectio n systems ; . 1926.62(d)(2)(i)(B ) Spra

y paintin g wit h lea

d paint 1926.62(d)(2)(H ) I n addition , wit h regar d t o task s not liste d i n paragrap

h (d)(2)(i) , wher

e th e employe

r ha s an y reaso n t o believ e tha

t a n employe

e performin g th

e task ma y b e expose d to lea d i n exces s o f

th e PEL , unti l th e employe

r perform s a

n employe

e exposur e assessmen

t a s require d by paragrap

h (d ) o f thi s section an d document

s tha t th e employee' s lea

d exposur e i s no t abov e th e PE L th e employe

r shal l trea t the employe e a s i f th e employe

e wer e expose d abov e th e PE L an d shall implemen

t employe e protectiv e measure s a s prescribe d i n paragrap

h (d)(2)(v ) o f

thi s section . 1926.62(d)(2)(iii ) Wit h respec t to th e task s liste d i n thi s paragrap

h (d)(2)(iii ) o f

thi s section , wher

e lea d i s present, unti l th

e employe

r perform s a

n employe

e exposur e assessmen

t a s require d i n paragrap

h (d ) o f thi s section , an

d document

s tha t th e employe

e performin g an

y o f th e liste d task

s i s no t expose d i n exces s o f 50 0 ug/m(3) , th

e employe

r shal l trea t th e employe

e a s i f th e employe

e wer e expose d to lea d i n exces s o f 50 0 ug/m(3 ) an

d shal l implemen

t employe e protectiv e measure

s a s prescribe d i n paragrap

h (d)(2)(v ) o f thi s section . Wher

e th e employe

r does establish tha

t th e employe

e i s expose

d to level s o f

lea d belo w 50

0 ug/m(3) s th

e employe

r ma y provide th

e expose d employe

e wit h th e appropriat

e respirato

r prescribe d fo r suc h us e a t suc h lowe r exposures , i n accordanc

e wit h Table 1 o f

thi s section . Th

e task s covere d by thi s requiremen

t are : 1926.62(d)(2)(iii)(A ) Usin g lea d containin g mortar ; lea

d burnin g1926.62(d)(2)(iii)(B ) Wher e lea d containin g coating s o

r paint ar e present : rive t

busting ; powe

r too l cleaning withou t

dust collectio n systems ; cleanu p activitie s wher

e dr y expendabl

e abrasive s ar

e used ; an

d abrasiv e blastin g enclosur

e movemen

t an d removal . 1926.62(d)(2)(iv ) Wit h respec t to th e task s liste d i n thi s paragrap

h (d)(2)(iv ) o f

thi s section , wher

e lea d i s present, unti l th

e employe

r perform s a

n employe

e exposur e assessmen

t a s require d i n paragrap

h (d ) o f thi s section an d document

s tha t th e employe

e performin g an

y o f th e liste d task

s i s no t expose d to lea d i n exces s o f 2,50 0 ug/m(3 ) (5 0 x PEL) , the employe r shal l trea t th e employe

e a s i f the employe

e wer e expose d to lea d i n exces s of2,50 0 ug/m(3 ) an d shal l implemen

t employe e protectiv e measures a

s prescribed i n paragrap

h (d)(2)(v ) o f

thi s section . Wher

e th e employe

r does establis h tha

t th e employe

e i s expose d to level s o f

lea d belo w 2,50

0 ug/m(3) , th

e employe

r ma y provide th

e expose d employe

e wit h th e appropriat e respirato

r prescribe d fo r

us e a t suc h lowe r exposures , i n accordanc

e wit h Table I o f

thi s section . Interi mprotectio n a s described i n thi s paragrap h i s require d wher

e lea d containin g coating s o

r paint ar e presen t o n structure s whe

n performing : 1926.62(d)(2)(iv)(A ) Abrasiv e blasting , 1926.62(d)(2)(iv)(B ) Welding , 1926.62(d)(2)(iv)(C ) Cutting , an d 1926.62(d)(2)(iv)(D ) Torc h burning . 1926.62(d)(2)(v ) Unti l th

e employe

r perform s a

n employe

e exposur e assessmen

t a s require d unde

r paragrap h (d ) o f thi s sectio n an

d determine s actua

l employe e exposure , th

e employe

r shal l provide to employee s performin g th e task s describe d i n paragraphs (d)(2)(i) , (d)(2)(ii) , (d)(2)(iii ) an d (d)(2)(iv ) o f thi s section wit h interi mprotectio n a s follows : 1926.62(d)(2)(v)(A ) Appropriat e respirator

y protectio n i n accordanc e wit h paragrap

h (f ) o f thi s section . 1926.62(d)(2)(v)(B ) Appropriat e persona l protectiv e clothin g an

d equipmen

t i n accordanc

e wit h paragrap h (g ) o f thi s section . 1926.62(d)(2)(v)(C ) Chang e area s i n accordanc

e wit h paragrap

h (i)(2 ) o f

thi s section . 1926.62(d)(2)(v)(D ) Han

d washing facilitie s i n accordanc e wit h paragrap

h (i)(5 ) o f

thi s section . 1926.62(d)(2)(v)(E ) Biologica l monitorin g i n accordanc e wit h paragrap

h Q)(l)(i ) o f

thi s section , to consis t o f bloo d samplin g an

d analysi s fo r

lea d an d zin c protoporphyri n levels , an d 1926.62(d)(2)(v)(F ) Trainin g a s require d unde

r paragrap h (l)(l)(i ) o f

thi s section regarding 2

9 CF R 1926.59 , Hazar

d Communication ; trainin g a s require d unde

r paragrap h (l)(2)(iii ) o f

thi s section , regarding us

e o f respirators ; an

d trainin g i n accordanc

e wit h 2 9 CF R 1926.21 , Safet

y trainin g an

d education . 1926.62(d)(3) Basis of

initial determination.1926.62(d)(3)(i ) Excep t a s provide d unde

r paragraphs (d)(3)(iii ) an

d (d)(3)(iv ) o f

thi s section th

e employe r shal l monito r

employe e exposure s an

d shal l bas

e initia l determination s o n th e employe

e exposur e monitorin g result s an

d an y o f th e following , relevan

t considerations : 1926.62(d)(3)(i)(A ) An y information , observations , o r calculation s whic h woul d indicat e employe

e exposur e to lead ; 1926.62(d)(3)(i)(B ) An y previou s measurement s o f airborne lead ; an

d 1926.62(d)(3)(i)(C ) An y employe e complaint s o f

symptom s whic h ma

y b e attributabl e to exposur

e to lead . 1926.62(d)(3)(a) Monitorin g fo r th e initia l determinatio n wher e performe d ma

y b e limite d t

o a representative sampl

e o f th e expose d employee s who th

e employe

r reasonabl y believe s ar

e expose d to th e greates t airborne concentration s o f lea d i n th e workplace . 1926.62(d)(3)(iii > Wher

e th e employe

r ha s previously monitore d fo r lea d exposures , an

d th e dat awer e obtained withi n th

e pas t 1 2 month s durin g wor

k operation s conducte

d unde r workplac e condition s closely resembling th

e processes , typ e o f

material , contro l methods , wor k practices , an

d environmenta

l condition s use d an d prevailin g i n th

e employer' s curren

t operations , th

e employe

r ma y rel y o n suc

h earlie r monitorin g result s to satisf y th e requirements o f

paragraphs (d)(3)(i ) an

d (d)(6 ) o f

thi s section i f

th e samplin g an

d analytica

l method s mee

t th e accurac y an d confidenc e level s o f

paragrap h (d)(10 ) o f

thi s section . 1926.62(d)(3)(iv ) Wher

e th e employe

r ha s objectiv e data, demonstrating tha t aparticula

r produc t o r materia l containin g lea

d o r aspecifi c process , operatio n o r activity involvin g lea

d canno t result i n employe e exposur e to lea d a t o r abov e th e actio n leve l durin g processing , use , o r handling , th

e employe

r ma y rel y upon suc

h dat ainstea d o f implementin g initia l monitoring . 1926.62(d)(3)(ivKA ) Th

e employe

r shal l establis h an

d maintai n a

n accurat e recor d documenting the natur e an d relevancy o f

objectiv e dat

aa s specifie d i n paragrap

h (n)(4 ) o f

thi s section , wher

e use d i n assessin g employe

e exposur e i n lie u o f

exposur e monitoring . 1926.62(d)(3)(ivKB ^ Objectiv e data , a s describe d i n thi s paragrap

h (d)(3)(iv ) o f

thi s section , i s not permitte d to b

e use d fo r exposur e assessmen

t i n connectio n wit h paragrap h (d)(2 ) o f

thi s section . 1926.62(d)(4) Positive initial determination and

initial monitoring. 1926.62(d)(4)(i ) Wher

e adeterminatio n conducte d unde r paragraph s (d)(1) , (2 ) an d (3 ) o f thi s sectio n show s the possibilit

y o f an y employe

e exposur e a t o r abov e th e actio n leve l th

e employe

r shall conduct monitorin g whic h i s representative o f th e exposur e fo r eac h employe

e i n the workplac e who i s expose d to lead . 1926.62(d)(4)(H ) Wher

e th e employe

r ha s previousl y monitore d fo r lea d exposure , an

d th e dat awer e obtained withi n th

e pas t 1 2 month s durin g wor

k operation s conducted unde r workplac e condition s closely resembling th

e processes , typ e o f

material , contro l methods , wor k practices , an

d environmenta

l condition s use d an d prevailin g i n th

e employer' s curren

t operations , th

e employe

r ma y rel y o n suc

h earlie r monitorin g result s to satisf y th e requirements o f

paragrap h (d)(4)(i ) o f

thi s section i f

th e samplin g an

d analytica l methods mee

t th e accurac y an d confidenc e level s o f

paragrap h (d)(10 ) o f

thi s section .1926.62(d)(5 ) Negative initia l determination . Wher e adetermination , conducted unde r paragraph s (d)(1) , (2) , an d (3 ) o f thi s sectio n i s mad

e tha t n o employe

e i s expose

d to airborne concentration s o f lea d a t o r abov e th e actio n leve l th

e employe

r shall mak

e awritte n recor

d o f suc h determination . Th

e recor d shal l include a t least the informatio n specifie d i n paragrap h (d)(3)(i ) o f

thi s section an

d shal l als o include th

e dat e o f determination , locatio n withi n th e worksite , an

d th e nam e an d socia l securit y numbe r o f eac h employe e monitored . 1926.62(d)(6) Frequency. 1926.62(d)(6)(i ) I f

th e initia l determinatio n reveal s employe e exposur e to b e belo w th

e actio n leve l furthe r exposur e determinatio n nee

d not b e repeate d excep t a s otherwis e provide d i n paragrap h (d)(7 ) o f thi s section . 1926.62(d)(6)(ii ) I f

th e initia l determinatio n or

subsequen

t determinatio n reveal s employe e exposur e to b e a t o r abov e the actio n leve l bu

t a t or belo w th e PE L th e employe

r shal l performmonitorin g i n accordanc e wit h thi s paragrap

h a t least ever y 6 months . Th

e employe

r shall continue monitorin g a t th e require d frequenc y unti l a

t least tw o consecutiv

e measurements , take

n a t least 7 day s apart , ar

e belo w th

e actio n leve l a t whic h tim e th

e employe

r ma y discontinu e monitorin g fo r tha t employe e excep t a s otherwis e provide d i n paragrap

h (d)(7 ) o f

thi s section . 1926.62(d)(6)(iii ) I f

the initia l determinatio n reveal s tha t employe e exposur e i s abov e th e PE L th e employe r shal l performmonitorin g quarterly . Th e employe

r shal l continue monitorin g a t th e require d frequenc y unti l a

t least tw o consecutive measurements , take n a t least 7 day s apart , ar

e a t or belo w th e PE L but a t o r abov e th e actio n leve l a

t whic h tim

e th e employe

r shal l repea

t monitorin g fo r

tha t employe e a t th e frequenc y specifie d i n paragrap h (d)(6)(ii ) o f

thi s section , excep

t a s otherwis e provide d i n paragrap h (d)(7 ) o f thi s section . Th

e employe

r shall continue monitorin g a t th e require d frequenc y unti l a t least tw o consecutive measurements , take n a t leas t 7 day s apart , ar

e belo w th

e actio n leve l a

t whic h tim e th

e employe r ma y discontinu e monitorin g fo r tha t employe e excep t a s otherwis e provide d i n paragrap h (d)(7 ) o f thi s section . 1926.62(d)(7 ) Additiona l exposur e assessments . Wheneve

r ther e ha s bee n achang e o f equipment , process , control , personne l or ane w tas k ha s bee n initiate d tha

t ma y result i n additiona

l employee s bein g expose d to lea d a t or abov e th e actio n leve l o

r ma y result i n employee s alread

y expose d a t o r abov e th e actio n leve l bein g expose d abov e th e PEL , th e employe

r shal l conduc

t additiona l monitorin g i n accordanc

e wit h thi s paragraph . 1926.62(d)(8) Employee notification. 1926.62(d)(8)(i ) Th

e employe

r must , a s soo n a s possible but

n o late r tha n 5 workin g day s after

th e receipt o f th e result s o f

an y monitorin g performe d unde r thi s section , notif

y eac h affecte d employe

e o f these result s eithe

r individuall y i n writin g o r by postin g th

e result s i n a

n appropriat

e locatio n tha

t i s accessibl

e t o employees . 1926.62(d)(8)(ii ) Wheneve r th e result s indicat

e tha t th e representative employe

e exposure , withou t

regar d to respirators , i s a

t o r abov e th e PE L th e employe

r shall include i n th

e writte n notic e astatemen t tha t th e employee s exposur

e wa s a t o r abov e tha t leve l an d adescriptio n o f

th e correctiv e actio n take

n o r to b e take n to reduce exposur

e to belo w tha

t level .1926.62(d)(9 ) Accurac y o f measurement . Th

e employe

r shal l us e ametho d o f

monitorin g an

d analysi s whic h ha s a n accurac y (to aconfidenc e leve l o f 9 5 percent ) o f no t les s tha n plu s o r minu s 2 5 percen t fo r airborne concentration s o f lea d equa l to o r greate r tha n 3 0 ug/m(3) . Th e abov e note d requirements ar

e not require d by th

e EPA . Thi s componen

t o f th e OSH A regulatio n i s o f grea t importanc e a

s the expansio

n o f RR P to commercia

l an d publi c building s i s bein g considered . Employer s ar

e require d to performth e assessment

, protect thei r employee s durin g th

e assessmen

t an d obtai n th e assessmen

t result s to determin

e actual employe

e exposur e to respirable dust

durin g renovatio n an d demolitio n activities . Employer s ar e abl e to determin

e to wha t level , i f any , thei r

employee s ar

e expose d to lea d containin g dust . Th

e assessmen

t result s als o allo w a

n employe

r to identif

y i f th e wor k practice s bein g use

d durin g th

e assessmen

t (ventilation , water , etc ) ar e effectiv e i n minimizin g exposur e to their employees . EP A RR P expansion i s geare

d towar d protectin g th

e public . I f

employee s tha

t ar e actually performin g th e wor k ar e not ove r exposed , wh

y woul d on

e assum e thos e no t

associate d wit h th e projec t woul d be ? EP A RR P wil l no t

requir e suc h monitorin g an

d ther e i s n o evidence tha

t demonstrate s tha

t additiona

l regulation s ar

e necessar

y to protect

th e publi c i n commercia

l o r publi c building s wher

e thi s typ e o f

wor k i s bein g performed . The experience of

our Members has consistently demonstrated that good work practices, housekeeping and the use of

HEPA vacuum systems can minimize actual employee exposure to levels that are below the OSHA permissible exposure limit of 50ug/m3. Contractors understand the hazards associated

with lead exposure and

OSHA regulations require that these assessments are done. OSHA standards dictate that "engineering and

work practice controls be utilized to "reduce and

maintain employee exposure to lead to or below the permissible exposure limit to the extent

that such controls are feasible". OSH A Standar d 1926.62(e)(2 ) require s aComplianc e progra mprio r to th e commencemen

t o f an y jo b wher e lea d i s present . EP

A RR P does not

requir e suc h aprogram . Th

e Complianc e progra

mi s require d to minimiz e th

e exposur

e to lea d i n th e workplac e an

d ha s stringen t components . 2

9 CF R 1926.62(e

) coverin g Method s o f

Complianc e states th

e following : 1926.62(e) Methods of

compliance 1926.62(e)(1 ) Engineerin g an d wor k practic e controls . Th

e employe

r shall implemen

t engineering an

d wor k practic e controls , includin g administrativ e controls , to reduc e an d maintai n employe

e exposur e to lea d to o r belo w th e permissibl e exposur

e limi t to th e exten t tha t suc h control s ar

e feasible . Whereve

r al l feasibl e engineering an

d wor k practice s control s tha

t ca n b e institute d ar

e not sufficien t

to reduce employe e exposur e to o r belo w th e permissibl e exposur

e limi t prescribe d i n paragrap

h (c ) o f thi s section , th e employe

r shal l nonetheles s us

e the mto reduc

e employe

e exposur e to th e lowes t feasibl e leve l an

d shall supplemen

t the mby th e us e o f respirator

y protectio n tha

t complie s wit h th

e requirements o f paragrap h (f ) o f thi s section . 1926.62(e)(2) Compliance program. 1926.62(e)(2)(i ) Prio r

to commencemen

t o f th e jo b eac h employe

r shal l establis h an

d implemen

t awritte n complianc e progra

mto achieve complianc e wit h paragrap h (c ) o f thi s section . 1926.62(e)(2)(ii ) Writte n plan s fo r these complianc e programs shal l include a t least th e following :1926.62(e)(2)(ii)(A ) A descriptio n o f eac h activit y i n whic h lea

d i s emitted ; e.g . equipmen t used , materia

l involved , control s i n place , cre w size , employe

e jo b responsibilities , operating procedure s an d maintenance practices ; 1926.62(e)(2)(ii)(B ) A descriptio n o f th e specifi c mean

s tha t wil l b e employed to achieve complianc e and , wher e engineering control s ar

e require d engineering plan s an d studie s use

d to determin

e methods selecte

d fo r controllin g exposur

e to lead ; 1926.62(e)(2)(ii)(C ) A repor t o f th e technology considere

d i n meeting th

e PEL ; 1926.62(e)(2)(ii)(D ) Ai r

monitorin g dat

awhic h document

s th e sourc e o f lea d emissions ; 1926.62(e)(2)(ii)(E ) A detaile d schedul e fo r implementatio n o f

th e program , includin g documentation suc h a s copie s o f

purchas e order

s fo r equipment , constructio n contracts , etc. ; 1926.62(e)(2)(H)(F) A wor k practic e progra

mwhic h include s item s require d unde r paragraphs (g) , (h ) an

d (i ) o f thi s sectio n an

d incorporate s othe

r relevan t wor k practice s suc

h a s thos e specifie d i n paragrap h (e)(5 ) o f thi s section ; 1926.62(e)(2)(ii)(G ) A n administrativ e contro l schedul e require d by paragrap

h (e)(4 ) o f

thi s section , i f applicable ; 1926.62(e)(2)(ii)(H ) A descriptio n o f arrangement

s mad e amon g contractors o n multi-contracto r site s wit h respec

t to informin g affecte d employee s o f potentia l exposur e to lea d an d wit h respec

t to responsibilit

y fo r complianc e wit h thi s section a s set-fort h i n 1926.16 . 1926.62(e)(2)(ii)(I ) Othe

r relevan t information . 1926.62(e)(2)(iii ) Th

e complianc e progra

mshall provide fo r

frequen t an d regula r inspection s o f

jo b sites , materials , an

d equipmen

t to b e mad e by acompeten

t person . 1926.62(e)(2)(iv ) Writte n programs shal l b e submitte d upon reques

t t o an y affecte d employe

e or authorize d employe

e representatives , to th

e Assistan

t Secretar y an d th e Director , an

d shal l b e availabl e a

t th e worksit e fo r examinatio n an

d copyin g by th

e Assistan

t Secretar y an d th e Director . 1926.62(e)(2)(v ) Writte n programs must b e revise d an

d update d a t least annuall y to reflec t

th e curren t statu s o f th e program . 1926.62(e)(3 ) Mechanica l ventilation . Whe

n ventilatio n i s use

d to contro l lea

d exposure , th

e employe

r shal l evaluat

e th e mechanica

l performanc e o f

th e syste mi n controllin g exposur

e a s necessar

y to maintai n it s effectiveness . 1926.62(e)(4 ) Administrativ e controls . I f administrativ e control s ar e use d a s amean s o f reducin g employee s TW A exposur e to lead , th

e employe

r shal l establish an

d implemen

t ajo b rotatio n schedul

e whic h includes : 1926.62(e)(4)(i ) Nam

e o r identificatio n numbe

r o f eac h affecte d employee ;p . 8

1926.62(e)(4)(H) Duratio n an d exposur e level s a t eac h jo b o r wor k statio n wher

e eac h affecte d employe

e i s located ; an

d 1926.62(e)(4)(iii ) An y othe r informatio n whic h ma

y b e usefu l i n assessin

g th e reliabilit y o f

administrativ e control s to reduc

e exposur e to lead . 1926.62(e)(5 ) Th

e employe

r shal l ensur

e that , to th

e exten t relevant , employee s follo w goo d wor k practice s suc

h a s described i n Appendi x B o f thi s section . I t i s clea r tha t OSHA' s Method s o f

Complianc e requirements cove r al l employee s workin g a t th e project . Writte n pla

n requirements cove

r al l aspect

s tha t woul d affec t

th e employee s or

fo r tha t matter , th e public . EP

A RR P doe s not addres s issue s identifie d i n th e OSHA' s complianc e progra m requirements . Existin g OSHA regulation s ar e effective , an

d a s aresult , protec t

th e publi c fro mlea

d base d hazards . I t i s importan

t to remembe

r tha t lea d dust i s heav y an d i t does not sta y airborne fo r

lon g becaus

e i t i s a metal . EP

A clea n u p procedure s requir

e pol y to b

e placed o n th

e floor , disposa

l o f al l debri s i n plasti c bag s tha t ar e goose d necked , an

d utilizin g aSwiffer-typ e o f amo p repeatedl

y unti l i t i s cleane r tha n a sampl e template . Onc

e again , th

e curren t OSH A regulation s ar

e a n effectiv e mean

s to manag

e thi s issu e withou t puttin g unnecessar

y an d burdensom

e regulation s i n place . Th e OSHA requirements fo r Housekeepin

g covered i n 29 CF

R 1926.62(h

) provid e th

e most effectiv e mean

s to captur

e an y lea d dust tha t remain s i n th

e workplac e durin g an

d after renovatio n activitie s ar e performed . 29 CF

R 192 6 Standard s coverin g housekeepin

g include: . 1926.62(h)(1 ) Al l surface s shal l b e maintained a

s fre e a s practicabl e o f

accumulation s o f

lead . 1926.62(h)(2 ) Clean-u

p o f floor s an d othe r surface s wher

e lea d accumulate s shall whereve r possible , b

e cleane d b y vacuumin g o

r othe r methods tha

t minimiz e th

e likelihoo d o f

lea d becoming airborne . 1926.62(h)(3 ) Shoveling , dr y o r we t sweeping , an

d brushing ma

y b e use d onl y wher

e vacuuming o

r othe r equall y effectiv e methods hav

e bee n trie d an d foun d not

to b e effective . 1926.62(h)(4 ) Wher

e vacuuming methods ar

e selected , th

e vacuum s shal l b e equipped wit h HEP

A filter s an d use d an d emptie d i n amanne

r whic h minimize s th

e reentr y o f lea d into th e workplace . 1926.62(h)(5 ) Compresse d air shal l not b e use d to remov

e lea d fro man

y surfac e unles s th

e compresse

d ai r i s use d i n conjunctio n wit h aventilatio n syste mdesigne

d to captur

e th e airborne dust

create d by th e compresse

d air . OSHA' s cleanin g procedure s ar e mor e stringen

t tha n wha t th e EP A requires . HEP

A vacuums ar

e th e metho d o f

choic e an

d captur e 99.97 % o f

th e particulate s tha

t g o throug h th

e filter . Contractors tha t performsuc

h renovatio n o

r demolitio n wor

k i n publi c o

r commercia

l building s als o creat

e critica l barrier s to separat

e themfro mthe publi c durin g al l phase s o f constructio n an

d ar e actuall y removin g th

e lea d hazard s tha t exist . Th

e highes t ris k t o peopl e wil l b e to thos e tha

t perfor mth e wor k an d OSH A regulation s cove

r tha t a s previously noted .Th

e scop e o f renovatio n an

d demolitio n wor

k typicall y call s fo r

ne w wal l materials , doors , frames , floors , etc . Al l these area s ar e cleane d on a n ongoin g basi s a

s th e variou s phase

s o f constructio n progress . Th e en d resul t i s aspac

e tha t present s les s o f alea d ris k to th e publi c tha

n befor e th e wor k started . Studie s conducted by the Nationa l Associatio n o f

Hom e Builder s provid e abasi s tha t Renovation , Repai

r an d Paintin g activitie s d

o no t creat e lead-base

d pain t hazards , bu

t rathe r minimiz e an

d eve n eliminat

e suc h hazards (refe r

to NAHB , Lead-Saf

e Wor k Practice s Surve

y Projec t Repor t 2 - Nov . 2006) . Mos t often , assessmen

t result s ar

e belo w the OSHA' s PE L an d the employee s performin g th e wor k ca n d o s o withou t

an y respirator

y protection . AG C NY S Membershi p conduct

s these assessment

s wheneve r ther e i s an y lea d presen t becaus e i t i s th e law . Upo n request, AG C NY S Membershi p wil l provide suc

h data . Assessmen

t result s demonstrat

e tha t airborne dust

ca n b e minimize d throug h goo d wor k practices . Contractor s wil l us e specialized tool s to contro l an d captur e lea d dust whil e performin g demolitio n activitie s an

d practice s suc

h a s spo t abatemen

t ar e utilize d whe

n torchin g activitie s ar

e required . Expanding th

e RR P t o commercia

l an d publi c building s woul d rais e th e cost o f doin g th e wor k an d no t provide an

y benefi t to th e public . Th

e projecte d cost

s fo r th e Lead : Renovation , Repair , an d Paintin g (LRRP ) rul e wer

e underestimated an

d expandin

g RR P seem s to b e a t th e poin t o f diminishin g returns . A n articl e publishe d on Augus t 5 th , 201 2 on housingZon

e noted th e following : On July 25, 2012, The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Inspector General reported on the findings of

an investigation into the agency's economic analysis of the Lead: Renovation, Repair and Painting (LRRP) rule. The report determined

that The EPA Office of

Chemical

Safety and

Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) underestimated the rule's cost

and overestimated

its benefits. Moreover, The EPA Inspector General found that the training manual

and subsequent

"certified renovator " training failed to clearly delineate which lead-safe work practices are mandated

and which are simply recommendations. The report

recommended

that OCSPPreexamine the costs and benefits of

the rule to determine whether it should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or repealed in accordance with the Obama Administration's directive to reform unnecessary and burdensome regulations. The inspector's report further recommends that

the EPA revise its training manual to more clearly distinguish which work practices are mandatory. Bristling at

the Inspector

General's findings, the OCSPPresponded by asserting that

it does not intend to review its economic analysis, and that it has already addressed

issues related

to training under

the lead paint rule. Nevertheless, the report's findings —

coupled with numerous complaints voiced by NAHB and others regarding the rule's lack of clarity, the absence ofan approved test kit, and more — have put added pressure on the EPA to resolve the issues related to this poorly written and implemented

rule. Similarly, NAHB chairman Barry Rutenberg's recent congressional

testimony on inefficient government

regulations that

are harming housing and the economic recovery

focused, in part, on the lead paint rule and provided further impetus for lawmakers to push the EPA into making the necessary revisions. Th e EP A mus t conside r th e scop e o f it s authorit

y befor e proceeding wit h an

y regulations . Th

e Toxi c Substances Contro l Ac t

clearl y limit s th

e Agency' s authorit

y to promulgat

e regulation s tha

t gover n RR Pp . 1 0

activitie s i n commercia

l an d publi c buildings . Amon g othe r things , EP

A must complet e acongressionally

mandate d stud y o f RR P activitie s i n commercia l an d publi c building s to determin e th e exten t to whic h the y creat e lead-base

d paint hazards befor

e the y ca n procee d wit h an y regulations . Excerpts fro mcomment

s submitte d on July 6 , 2010 , by Thoma s C . Jackso

n o n behal f

o f acoalition , includin g th

e Associated Genera

l Contractors o f

America , opposing RR

P fo r Commercia

l an d Publi c Building s ar

e provide d below . EP A Has Limite d Authorit y t o Impos e Requirement

s o n RR P Activitie s i n Commercia

l an d Publi c Buildings Ther e ar e severa l ground s o n whic h th

e rule s contemplated i n th e ANPR M woul d excee

d th e statutor y authorit y Congres s granted to EP A unde r Titl e X . First , th

e statut e give s EP

A the authorit

y to issu e guideline s fo r

wor k practic e standard

s applicable to RR

P activitie s bu

t does not gran t th e Agenc y the authorit y t o impos e regulator

y requirement s concerning wor k practices . I n addition , o n it s fac e Titl e X provide s tha

t EP A ca n onl y regulat

e RR P activitie s i f

the y ar e show n to creat e lead-base

d paint hazards . Finally , th

e Agenc y canno

t promulgat

e an y regulation s governin g RR P activitie s i n commercia l an d publi c building s unti l i t

complete s th

e typ e o f stud y mandate

d by Congress . Eac

h o f these issues i s discusse d furthe r below . A . EP A Lack s Statutor y Authorit

y t o AdoptRequirement

s fo r RR P Activitie s i n Commercia l an d Publi c Buildings an

d Can Only Issu e Guidelines Base d o n th e statute' s text , EP

A lack s authorit y unde r TSC A to promulgat

e regulation s governin g RR P activitie s becaus

e suc h requirements woul d almos t certainly b

e par t o f wor k practic e standards , whic h ca n onl y b e th e subject o f Agenc y guidelines . Th

e plai n languag

e o f TSC A Section 402(a)(1 ) authorize s EP

A "to ensur

e tha t individual s engage

d i n [lead-base

d paint ] activitie s ar

e properly trained ; tha t trainin g programs ar

e accredited ; an

d tha t contractors engage

d i n suc h activitie s ar

e certified'' ' 1 5 U.S.C . § 2682(a)(1 ) (emphasi s added) . Th e statut e als o grants EP

A th e authorit y to creat e standard

s fo r "lead-base

d paint activities, " whic h ar

e define d i n th

e contex t o f commercia

l buildings , publi c building s constructed befor

e 1978 , bridge s an

d othe r structure s to include "identificatio n o f lead-base d paint an d material s containin g lead-base d paint , deleading , remova l o f lea d fro mbridges , an

d demolition. " 1 5 U.S.C . § 2682(b)(1) . Wor k involvin g renovation , repai r an d paintin g i s not

include d unde

r th e "lead-base

d pain t activities " definition . I n enacting Section 402(c) , Congres s wa s carefu l to distinguis h betwee n lead-base

d paint activitie s an

d RR P activitie s - an

d tha t section does not

authoriz e EP

A t o promulgat

e regulation s affectin g th e wor k practic e standard

s fo r RR P i n commercia

l an d publi c buildings . Instead , EP A i s authorize d to "promulgat

e guideline s fo r

th e conduct " o f

RR P activitie s an

d to requir

e certificatio n o f

RR P firm s tha

t ar e engage d i n activitie s tha

t creat e lead-base

d hazards . 1 5 U.S.C . § 2682(c)(1 ) an d (3) . Althoug h th

e statut e als o require s EPA , afte r undertakin g astudy , to revis e th e regulation s develope

d fo r abatemen

t an d othe r lead-base

d paint activitie s to appl

y to RR P activities , Congres s intended tha t EP A woul d appl

y th e appropriat

e certificatio n requirements develope d i n connection wit h lead-base d paint activitie s to RR

P contractors but

tha t wor k practic e standard

s woul d remain th

e subject o f guidelines , not

regulations . 1 5 U.S.C . § 2682(c)(3) . See

, e.g. , Spear

s v . U.S. , 12

9 S . Ct . 840 , 84

2 (2009 ) ("'[T]h e cocain

e Guidelines , like al l othe r Guidelines , ar

e advisor y only . " (emphasi s added)) , (quotin g Kimbroug h v . U.S. , 12 8 S . Ct . 558 , 56 0 (2007)) ; Broc k

v . Cathedral Bluff

s Shal e Oi l Co. , e

t al. , 79 6 F.2 d 533 , 53 7 (D.C . Cir . 1986 ) ("'Th e critica l distinctio n betwee n asubstantive rul e an

d agenera

l statemen t o f polic y i s th

e differen t

practica l effec t tha t these tw o type s o f

pronouncement

s hav e i n subsequen

t proceedings.... A properly adopte dp . 1 1

substantive rul e establishe s astandar d o f conduct whic h ha s th e forc e o f

law.. . . A genera

l statemen t o f policy , o n th

e othe r hand , doe

s not establish a"bindin g norm.'") , (quotin g Pacifi c Ga s & Electri c Co . v . FPC , 506 F.2 d 33 , 3 8 (D.C . Cir . 1974)) . Thi s plai n readin g o f

the statut e i s supporte

d by th e fac t tha t th e provisio n requirin g EP

A to engag

e i n astud y prio r t o promulgatin g regulation s fo r RR P activitie s (Sectio n 402(c)(2) ) i s entitle d "Stud y o f certification " an

d the provisio n concerning subsequen t promulgatio n o f

regulation s (Sectio n 402(c)(3) ) i s heade d "Certificatio n determination. " Se e I.N.S . v . Nationa l Cente r fo r Immigrants ' Rights , Inc. , 502 U.S . 18 3 (1991 ) (sectio n title s ca n serv e a s aids to th

e constructio n o f

statutor y languag e wher e the languag

e i s ambiguous) ; se

e als o Bel l v . Reno , 21 8 F.3 d 8 6 (2 d Cir . 2000 ) (th e titl e o f asection i s a

n indicatio n o f

it s meaning) . I n contras t

to th e preceding provisio n concerning guideline s fo r wor k practic e standards , th

e focu s o f Section 402(c)(2 ) an

d (3 ) i s th e certificatio n o f

contractors . Therefore , th e focu s o f

rulemakin g developmen

t unde r Section 402(c)(3 ) must

b e o n certification s o f

contractors . An y attempt by EP A to requir e contractor s to comply wit h wor k practic e standard

s i n publi c an

d commercia

l building s i s beyon

d EPA' s statutor

y authority . Base d on EPA' s statement

s i n th e ANPRM , i t

appear s tha t th e Agency i s considerin g implementin g regulation s simila

r to th e Residentia

l RR P Rule a t least fo r externa l RR P activitie s a

t commercia

l an d publi c buildings . Se

e 7 5 Fed . Reg . a

t 24855 . Unde

r it s statutor

y authority , EP

A ca n onl y issu

e suc h standard s a s guideline s an

d no t regulator y requirements . B . EP A Lack s Authorit y t o Regulat

e Activitie s Unles s Thos e Activitie s Disturb Lea d an d Create a Lead-Base d PaintHazar d Th e regulation s contemplated i n th e ANPR M als o excee

d EPA' s statutor

y authorit y becaus e EP A ha s not established tha

t th e RR P activitie s i t

seek s to regulat

e i n commercia

l an d publi c building s creat

e an y lead-base d paint hazards . TSC A Section 402(c)(3 ) require s EP A to promulgat

e regulation s wit h respec

t to RR P activitie s onl y wher

e suc h activitie s creat

e alea d base d paint hazard . Th

e statut e doe s not provide specifi c authorizatio n to EP A to regulat

e RR P activitie s tha

t distur b lea d but d o not creat e alead-base

d paint hazard . 1 5 U.S.C . § 2682(c)(3) . Consequently , fro mtha t silenc e EP

A lack s authorit y to regulat

e RR P activitie s unles s the

y creat e alead-base

d paint hazard . See

, e.g. , I n r

e Haas , 4 8 F.3 d 1153 , 115 6 (11t h Cir . 1995 ) (wher

e Congres s know s ho w to sa y somethin

g bu t chooses not

to , it s silenc e i s controlling) . I n orde r to regulat

e RR P activitie s i n commercia l an d publi c buildings , th

e EP A woul d nee

d to sho w tha t suc h activitie s creat

e alead-base

d pain t hazard . Withou t

mor e informatio n tha

n i t currently ha

s regarding RR

P activitie s specificall y i n th e commercia

l an d publi c settings , EP

A canno t sho w tha t suc h activitie s creat

e alead-base

d paint hazard . Indeed , EP

A acknowledge s i n th

e ANPR M tha

t i t does not hav e enoug h informatio n to conclud e tha t specifi c RR

P activitie s i n commercia l an d publi c building s creat e alead^base

d paint hazard . Se

e I S Fed . Reg . a

t 2485 7 an d 24859 . Base d o n statement

s i n th e ANPRM , th

e EP A apparentl

y plan s to dra

w upon th e finding s i t

mad e i n th e Residentia

l RR P Rul e to determin

e tha t alead-base

d pain t hazar d i s als o create

d b y RR P activit y i n commercia

l an d publi c buildings . Se

e 7 5 Fed . Reg . a

t 2485 6 an d 2485 8 ("EP

A request s commen

t on th e exten t to whic h [th e "Characterizatio n o f Dus t Lea d Level s Afte r

Renovation , Repair , an

d Paintin g Activities " (th

e "Dus t Study" ) an

d th e Phas e I , Environmenta

l Fiel d Sampling Stud

y (th e "Phas e I Study") ] shoul d infor mEPA' s determinatio n on lead-base d paint hazards create

d by renovation s on th

e interior s o f

non-residentia

l buildings." ) Thi s reliance , however , i s misplaced . Ther e i s alack

o f evidence to suppor t aconclusio n that , eve

n i n aresidentia

l setting , al l RR

P activitie s tha

t distur b lead-base

d paintp . 1 2

creat e alead-base

d paint hazard . No r

i s ther e areasonabl

e basi s fo r

EP A to extrapolat

e fromeithe

r th e Dus t Stud y o r the Phas e I Stud y - bot h o f whic h wer

e conducted mostly i n residentia l setting s - to determin e tha t renovation s i n commercia l an d publi c building s creat

e lead-base

d paint hazards . In any event, as a general matter, most

RRPactivities either

eliminate or

reduce the potential

for future lead-based

paint hazards. For

example, the Mercatus Report found that "evidence collected

[in EPA's Study]following the passage of the statute has indicated

that lead hazards created

by renovation and remodeling work

are minimal, and

RRPwork

removes chipping and

deteriorating paint

- two of the leading causes of

elevated blood-lead

levels." See Comments of

the Regulatory Studies Program, Mercatus Center, George Mason University at 30(May 25, 2006) ("Mercatus Report"). Othe r studie s reac

h simila r conclusions . A stud

y conducted by th

e Nationa l Associatio n o f

Hom e Builder s ("NAHB" ) explaine d tha t "when considering lea

d dust loadin g o n surface s throughou t asingl e property , result s showe

d tha t overal l al l bu

t on e o f th e propertie s evaluate

d showe d lowe r level s o f lea d dus t whe n R& Rcontractor s completed th e wor k tha n whe n the y arrived. " NAHB , Lead-Saf e Wor k Practice s Surve

y Projec t Repor t 2 (Nov . 2006 ) (th

e "NAH B Report" ) (emphasi s added) . Moreover , th e Wisconsi n Departmen

t o f Healt h an d Family Service s note d tha t "ou r experience i n Wisconsi n i s tha t professional renovatio n i s rarel y th e caus e o f lea d poisonin g i n children " Wisconsi n Departmen t o f Healt h an d Famil y Services , Comments : Lead ; Renovation , Repair , an d Paintin g Program ; Propose d Rul e (emphasi s added) . I n ligh t o f thes e studies , a

n ampl e basi s exists i n th

e recor d t o conclud e tha t most RR P activitie s d

o not creat e lead-base

d paint hazards , but

rathe r minimiz e an

d eve n eliminat

e suc h hazards . A s discusse

d above , th e statut e limit s EPA' s regulator

y authorit y to thos e activitie s tha

t actually creat

e alead-base

d paint hazard , whic h mean

s tha t RR P activitie s woul d generall y b e exemp t fro mEPA' s authorit

y unde r Section 402(c)(3) . Withou t additiona l information , suc

h a s astud y examinin g differen t

form s o f RR P activitie s exclusivel y i n th

e contex t o f commercia

l an d publi c buildings , EP

A canno t conclud e tha t an y specifi c RR P activitie s creat

e alead-base

d paint hazard . Furthermore , to th e exten t tha t EP A intend s to rel y o n th

e Dus t Study , th e Phas e I Study , o

r som e othe r existin g stud

y to provide evidence o f

alead-base

d paint hazar d create d b y RR P activitie s i n commercia l an d publi c buildings , the evidence does not suppor t suc h aconclusion . Moreover , befor

e i t ca n mov e forwar d EP

A must addres s th

e fac t tha t i t currentl y canno

t determin e whethe r an y RR P activitie s i n commercia l an d publi c building s creat

e lead-pain

t hazard s becaus e i t ha s no t ye t adopte d standard

s fo r determinin g th

e presenc e o f lead-base d pain t hazards i n commercia

l an d publi c buildings . Th

e lead-base

d paint hazar d regulation s previously adopte d b y the Agenc y apply onl y to targe t housing an

d child-occupie d facilities . Se e 40 C.F.R . § 745.65 . Those standard s ar e base d o n risk s o f exposur e to youn g children . EP

A ha s n o rationa l basi s to conclud

e tha t residentia

l standard s tha t appl y wher e youn g childre n ma

y hav e onl y minimal exposur

e ar e pertinen t to commercia

l setting s wher

e youn g childre n ar

e not routinel y present . C . EP A Canno tAdoptRegulation s Unti l I tComplete

s th e Statute' s "Stud

y o f Certification " Requirement

s I n additio n to these fundamenta l limit s o n it s rulemakin g activity , an d assumin

g arguend o tha t EP A ha s authorit y to issu e regulation s fo r

RR P activitie s i n commercia l an d publi c buildings , an

y suc h regulation s woul d b

e prematur

e becaus e EP A ha s no t satisfie d th

e prerequisit

e o fp . 1 3

conducting acongressionally-mandated stud y regarding RR

P activities . Prio r

to promulgatin g an

y regulation s involvin g RR P activities , EP

A i s require d to conduct

a"Stud y o f Certification " to determin e whic h o f th e "variou s type s o f

renovatio n an

d remodelin g activitie s distur b lea d an d creat e alead-base

d paint hazar d o n aregula

r o r occasiona

l basis. " 1 5 U.S.C. § 2682(c)(2) . Thus , EP A canno t promulgat

e an y regulation s affectin g RR

P activitie s unti l after

i t ha s satisfie d th

e "Stud y o f Certification " requirements . Thi s statutor

y requiremen

t to conduct

acertificatio n stud

y explicitl y applie s to commercia l building s an

d publi c building s (constructe d befor e 1978) . 1 5 U.S.C . § 2682(c)(2) . Th e EP A ha s not conducted astud

y tha t focuse s o n RR

P activitie s i n commercia l building s an

d publi c building s constructed befor e 1978 , an

d th e potentia l o f suc h activitie s to creat

e lea d base d pain t hazards . EP A ha s requeste d comment

s i n th e ANPR M regarding th

e exten t o n whic h i t

shoul d rel y on previou s studie s i t ha s conducted regardin g lead-base d paint i n residentia

l settings . 7 5 Fed . Reg . a

t 2485 6 an d 24858 . Thes

e studie s include th

e 200 7 Dust Stud y an d th e four-par

t stud y conducted b y EP

A betwee n 199 7 an d 199 9 (th e "Study") . EP

A canno t rel y on suc

h studie s a

s these di d no t

focu s o n RR

P activitie s i n commercia

l building s an

d publi c building s constructed befor e 1978 . Althoug h th

e Dus t Stud y ma y hav e include d informatio n o n renovation s a t aschool buildin g frequentl y occupied by children , thi s i s to o limite d o f adat ase t fromwhic h to dra

w an y conclusion s regarding RR P activitie s generall

y i n publi c an

d commercia

l buildings . 7 5 Fed . Reg . a t 24856 . Unti l i t

conduct s astud y tha t actuall y focuse s o n RR

P activitie s i n commercia

l an d publi c buildings , i t

i s prematur

e fo r EP A to contemplat

e an y regulation s a

s i t doe s not hav e th e statutor y authorit y to tak e th e typ e o f regulator y actio n i t

appear s to b e contemplating . No t onl y d o th e studie s previously conducte d by EP A involv e irrelevan

t subjec t matter , but , a

s discusse d previously , seriou s doubt s exis t regarding th

e methodologie s use

d an d th e conclusion s o f

th e studies . On

e o f th e most comprehensiv

e critique s o f

th e Stud y come s fro mth e Mercatu s Cente

r a t Georg e Mason University , whic h conducted a"carefu l an d independen

t analysfis ] employin g contemporar y economic scholarshi

p to assess [the ] rulemakin g proposal[ ] fromth e perspective o f

th e publi c interest. " Mercatu s Repor

t a t 1 . Accordin g to th

e Mercatu s Report , th

e conclusion s mad

e i n th e Stud y di d no t matc h it s content . Id . a

t 23 . Fo r example , base

d on arevie w o f

EPA' s ow n data , the Mercatu s Repor t concluded that : * Phase

s I an d I I o f the Stud y "faile d to fin d aconnection betwee n elevate d blood-lea

d level s an

d workers ' exposur

e t o considerabl

e amount s o f lead-contaminated dust; " an d "[T]h e Wisconsi n [Phas

e III ] stud y canno t clai mtha t an y RR P wor k increase s th

e ris k o f elevated blood-lea d level s i n children. " Id . a t 10,21 . Severa l member s o f the pee r revie w pane

l involve d i n evaluatin g th e Stud y als o raised concerns abou t variou s aspect

s o f th e methodologie s employed . Fo r example , EP

A reported that " [i] n regar d to the Wisconsi n blood-lea

d registry , anothe

r issu e o f concer n amon g th e reviewer s wa

s ho w representative the registr y i s o f th e stat e population. " Se

e Phas e I V Repor

t a t 1.3.However

, the Stud y faile d to adequatel

y addres s thes

e an d othe r concerns . I n othe

r words , contrar

y to EPA' s conclusions , th e Agency' s ow n Stud

y faile d to sho

w tha t unregulated RR

P activit y contribute d to increase

d blood-lea

d level s i n eithe

r RR P worker s o r i n childre n residin g i n homes tha t wer e bein g remodeled . Thes e concern s regarding th

e accurac y o f th e conclusion s drawn i n EPA' s previou s studie s underscor e th e nee d fo r EP A to conduct

acomprehensiv

e stud y o f RR P activitie s i n commercia l an d publi c building s befor e i t seek s to regulat

e suc h activities . However , eve n i f ther e wer e n o doubts regardin g th

e previou sp . 1 4

studies , EP

A canno t promulgat

e an y regulation s affectin g RR P activitie s i n commercia l an d publi c building s unti l after

i t ha s satisfie d th

e statutor y requiremen

t to conduc

t astud y o f these specifi c activities . II . Polic

y Considerations Relate d t o EPA' s Intention t

o Propos e Regulation

s fo r RR P Activitie s in Commercia

l an d Publi c Buildings A . EP A MustConside r a Numbe r o f Factors i n Developin

g Potentia

l Regulator

y Requirement

s fo r RR P Activitie s i n Commercia l an d Publi c Buildings A s EP A ha s acknowledged i n th

e ANPR M by it s numerou s request s fo r publi c comment

s o n awid e rang e o f issue s relate d to RR

P activitie s i n commercia l an d publi c buildings , ther

e ar e numerou s factor s th e Agenc y must

conside r prio r to proposing an

y regulator

y requirements fo r

suc h activities . Thes

e factor s rang

e fro mdeterminin g ho w to develo p standard

s tha t protec t differen t populatio n group s wit h differen t exposur e risk s to avoidin g conflict s wit h pre-existin g regulator y program s alread

y i n place . W

e highligh t belo w afe w o f

the ke y factor s tha

t EP A must conside r i n an y rulemakin g proces s fo r RR P activitie s i n commercia

l an d publi c buildings . 1 . Issues Presente

d by Differen t

Sub-Population s An y lead-base

d pain t hazar d standard

s developed by EP

A to gover

n RR P activitie s i n commercia l an d publi c building s must

tak e int o accoun

t th e potentia l exposur e o f differen t subpopulation s to lead-base d pain t i n suc h settings . These exposur e pattern s ar

e likel y ver

y differen t

fro mth e exposur e pattern s EP

A ha s previously encountere

d i n targe t housing an

d child-occupie d facilities . Furthermore , these exposur e pattern s ar

e likel y to var

y greatly betwee

n differen t

type s o f commercia

l an d publi c buildings . Fo

r example , on

e might expec t to fin d young childre n or pregnan t wome n a t a"big-box " commercia

l retai l establishmen

t mor e frequentl y tha

n a t amanufacturin g facilit y located i n a n industrial area . EP A ha s acknowledged tha

t i t doe s no t hav e th e informatio n i t

need s to understan

d the exposur

e risk s to differen t

sub-populations . Th

e ANPR M states tha

t although EP

A "ha s developed research-base d dail y activit y pattern s fo r

genera l us e i n it s analyses fo r

childre n an

d adults , non

e o f th e pattern s distinguis h activitie s base

d o n th e characte r o r ownershi p o f the building s wher

e activitie s occur. " 7 5 Fed . Reg . a t 24860 . Thi s i s exactly the typ e o f informatio n EP

A must hav e befor e i t ca n attemp t to develo p regulation s governin g suc

h settings . Withou t

a n understandin

g o f th e sub-population s likel y to b e expose d to lead

base d paint i n an y particula

r building , EP

A canno t determin e whethe r aRR P activity present

s alead

base d paint hazard . A s discusse

d previously , EP

A lack s authorit y to regulat

e RR P activitie s unles s the

y creat e alead-base

d paint hazard . An y lead-base

d paint hazar d standard

s must no t onl y allo w fo r

awid e variet

y i n exposur

e pattern s o f differen t sub-populations , the

y must als o accoun

t fo r th e differen t

vulnerability level s to th e danger s o f lead-base d paint betwee n suc h sub-populations . Unles s EP A ca n establis h tha

t asingle se

t o f lead-base d paint hazar d standard

s should appl

y to protect

bot h youn g childre n a

s wel l a s olde r childre n an

d adults , th e Agenc y wil l nee

d to conside

r adopting differen t

wor k practic e standard

s fo r commercia

l buildings , suc h a s offic e building s o

r industrial facilities , wher e youn g childre n ar

e expecte d to b e foun d onl y infrequentl y (i f

a t all) . Althoug h th

e ANPR M states i t

"does not

believ e tha

t option s considere

d i n thi s rulemakin g shoul d b

e limite d to thos e building s o r situation s wher

e young childre n ar

e likel y to b

e exposed, 5 ' EP

A als o acknowledge s tha

t i t "continue s to believ e tha t i t i s importan

t t o emphasiz

e th e deleteriou s effect s o f

lea d exposur e o n young children , asub-populatio n tha t ha s lon g bee

n identifie d a

s bein g particularl y susceptible to the advers e effect s o f

lead. " 7 5 Fed . Reg . a

t 24855 . Becaus

e th e EP Ap . 1 5

does not appea r to hav e informatio n suggestin

g tha t al l RR P activitie s presen

t the sam e hazards to al l populatio n groups , EP

A must determin e ho w to structur

e an y standard

s to addres s suc

h differin g risks . I n orde r to bette r understan

d bot h th e likelihoo d o f

exposur e o f differen t sub-population s a

t specifi c commercia

l an d publi c locations , an

d th e nee d to protect

th e most vulnerabl e group s differentl y from thos e least

susceptibl

e to lead-base

d pain t hazards , EP

A should conduct

acomprehensiv

e stud y analyzin g RR P activitie s i n differen t

commercia

l an d publi c buildings . Withou t thi s information , i t

wil l b e impossibl e fo r

th e Agency to craf

t rationa l standard s to addres s an

y potentia l lead-base

d paint hazards . 2 . Presenc

e o f Lead-Base

d Pain t I n evaluatin g th

e nee d fo r lead-base d pain t standard s i n commercia

l an d publi c buildings , EP

A als o must conside r th e fac t that , although th

e us e o f lead-base d paint wa s no t completel

y banne d i n al l industrial an

d commercia

l buildings , th

e us e o f suc h paint s ha

s bee n dramatically limite d since th e 197 8 restrictio n o n th

e us e o f lead-base

d pain t i n interio r

an d exterior surface s i n housing an

d othe r building s an d structure s use

d by consumers . Se

e 7 5 Fed . Reg . a

t 24856 . Industr

y practic e ha

s bee n to restric t

th e us e o f lead-base d paint s i n al l bu

t th e most industria l o f use s datin g bac

k t o th e 1970s . EP

A acknowledge s tha t th e prevalence o f

lead-base d pain t i n commercia

l an d publi c building s i s a

n importan

t facto r i n determinin g whethe

r RR P activitie s creat

e lead-base

d paint hazards . 7 5 Fed . Reg . a

t 24858 . I n draftin g th

e 200 8 Residentia

l RR P Rule , EP

A ha d acces s to tw o nationa

l studie s evaluating th

e prevalenc e o f

lead

base d paint i n targe t housin g an

d daycar e centers . Se

e 7 5 Fed . Reg . a

t 24858 . EPA , however , does not hav e simila r informatio n on th

e prevalence o f

lead-base

d pain t i n commercia

l an d publi c buildings . Thi s lac k o f informatio n i n ye

t anothe r are acrucial to EPA' s deliberation s agai n highlight s th

e nee d fo r EP A to conduct

acomprehensiv

e stud y o f th e issue s relate d to lead-base d paint i n publi c an d commercia

l buildings . Withou t

suc h astudy , i t

i s impossibl e fo r

EP A to determin

e ho w the reduce d amoun t o f lead-base d pain t i n us e a t commercia

l an d publi c building s affect s whethe r RR P activitie s i n suc

h setting s creat

e hazards . Fo

r example , i t

ma y b e appropriat

e t o limi t th e applicabilit

y o f an y wor k practic e standards fo r

RR P activitie s i n commercia l building s t

o commercia

l structure s tha

t wer e buil t befor e 197 8 (a s Congres s ha

s don e wit h targe

t housing an

d publi c buildings) . Alternatively , EP A ma y determin

e tha t an y applicatio n o f

wor k practic e requirements to RR P activitie s i n commercia l building s buil t

after 197 8 shoul d b

e limite d to th

e type s o f post-197 8 commercia

l building s wher

e lead

base d paint i s mor e likel y to b

e found , suc

h a s industrial facilitie s a

s oppose d to offic e building s o

r retai l facilities . Moreover , EP

A shoul d conside

r th e area s withi n commercia

l an d publi c building s tha

t ma y b e mor e likel y to hav

e lead-base

d paint an d th e potentia l implication s o f

th e pattern s fo r

huma n exposure . Fo

r example , i n offic e an

d retai l setting s th

e area s occupied by tenant

s ar e ofte n renovate

d whe n ther e i s a changeove

r i n tenants . A s aresult , toda y th e area s occupied b y tenant

s ar e les s likel y t

o hav e an y lead

base d pain t eve n i f th e buildin g wa

s constructed prio r

to 1978 . Areas tha

t ma y b e mor e likel y to hav

e som e lead-base

d pai n ar e th e "cor e areas " wher

e th e exposur e o f an y individua l woul d b

e ver y limited . Therefor e renovation s i n tenant-occupied area s i n a t least som e type s o f commercia

l building s ma

y no t requir e significan t

regulatio n becaus

e th e likelihoo d tha

t lead-base

d paint i s presen t i s ver y low . These ar

e th e type s o f issue s tha

t EP A must conside r carefull y i n an

y rulemakin g process . 3 . Consideratio n o f

Differen t

Type s o f RR P Activitie sp . 1 6

Similarly , EP

A must conside r th e potentiall y significan t

difference s betwee

n variou s type s o f

RR P activitie s tha

t ma y b e conducted i n commercia l buildings . Fo

r example , i n offic e buildings , retai l facilitie s an d othe r type s o f commercia

l building s i t

i s common fo r

RR P activitie s to b

e undertake

n i n connectio n wit h achang

e o f occupants , suc

h a s whe n ane w busines s lease

s acommercia

l space . However , durin g these type s o f

renovation s the onl y individual s who woul d b e presen t i n th e spac e bein g renovated woul d b e th e worker s undertakin g th e renovation , who woul d b e subject to existin g Occupationa

l Safet y an d Healt h Administratio n ("OSHA" ) regulations . I t ma y b e appropriat

e to establis h standard

s fo r suc h renovation s tha

t ar e differen t

fro mth e standard

s tha t might appl y i n connectio n wit h renovation s i n a n occupied buildin g or

to exemp t suc h renovation s fro mwor

k practic e requirements entirely . EP A mus t explor e th e difference s i n exposur

e to lead-base

d paint hazard s tha t ma y b e associate

d wit h differen t

type s o f RR P activitie s i n commercia l buildings . Furthermore , EP

A mus t understan

d tha t routin e maintenance i s a

n on-goin g dail y practic e fo r commercia

l buildings . An y stud

y EP A undertake s must

examin e an d distinguis h betwee

n ordinar y operation s an

d maintenance activities , an d renovatio n an

d remodelin g activities . Otherwise , standard s fo r RR P activitie s coul d b

e triggere d on virtuall y adail y basis , a t million s o f

commercia

l building s acros s thi s country . Neithe

r regulators , workers , o

r buildin g owner

s an d manager

s coul d conten

d wit h th e expens e an d administrativ e burden s associate d wit h requirements governin g RR P activitie s i f

the y aris e continuall y i n the contex

t o f on-goin g buildin g operation s an d maintenance . 4 . Impacts o f

an d on Existin g Regulator

y Program

s Th e ANPR M recognize s tha t extensiv e OSH A regulation s alread

y exis t tha t gover n exposur e to lead

base d paint bot h i n constructio n activitie s an d genera l occupationa

l settings . Se

e 7 5 Fed . Reg . a

t 24858 ; 2 9 C.F.R . § § 1910.1025,1926.62 . Th e OSH A standard

s se t permissibl e exposur

e level s fo r

employee s i n th e workplace . 29 C.F.R . § § 1910.1025(c) , 1926.62(c) . I t i s reasonabl

e to believ e tha

t employee s ar

e the singl e larges t

sub-populatio n tha

t woul d b e affecte d by exposur

e to lead-base

d paint fro mRR P activitie s i n publi c an

d commercia

l buildings . Th

e ANPRM , however , does not include adiscussion o f

th e effectivenes s o f

th e OSHA regulation s whic h alread y addres s lead-base

d paint hazards tha

t resul t fro m RR P activitie s i n commercia l an d publi c buildings . Give n th e fac t tha t th e OSH A regulation s ma

y effectivel y eliminat

e an y lead-base

d pain t hazards , EP

A must conside r th e impacts o f

th e existin g OSHA requirements i n assessin

g th e nee d fo r furthe r guideline s o

r regulation . I n ligh t o f th e protection s alread

y offere d by OSHA regulation s to arguabl y th e larges t sub-populatio n wit h th e highes t level s o f exposur e to lead-base

d pain t RR P activitie s i n commercia l an d publi c buildings , th e EP A should carefull y conside r whethe r i t i s necessar

y to impos e additiona

l regulation s tha

t woul d serv e primaril y to creat

e aburdensom

e two-tiere d regulator

y structure . Suc

h additiona

l regulation s coul d onl y b e justifie d b y anee

d to protec t

th e most vulnerabl e o f

sub-population s suc

h a s youn g children . However , these sub-population s ar e generall y no t encountere

d i n most commercia

l setting s excep

t on a ver y limite d basi s an

d woul d likel y not

hav e enoug h exposur e t o RR P activitie s to benefi t

fro msuc h additiona l heightened standards . 5 . Additiona l Factor

s EP A Mus t Conside r Whil e th e issue s discusse

d abov e highligh t

th e lac k o f informatio n EP

A ha s regardin g RR

P activitie s i n commercia

l an d publi c buildings , the

y ar e onl y afractio n o f

th e unanswere

d question s relate d to lead

base d paint hazards i n thes e settings . Prior to issuin g an

y regulation s relate d to RR P activitie s i n commercia

l an d publi c buildings , th

e EP A must conside r thes e issue s a s wel l a s provide answer

s to severa l othe r question s includin g th

e following :p . 1 7

Ho w shoul d commercia

l buildin g b

e define d fo r

purpose s o f

th e rule ? Wha t ar e the curren

t use s fo r lead-base d paint i n commercia

l buildings ? D o th

e owner s o r manager s o f commercia

l building s test

fo r th e presenc e o f lead-base d paint ? Unde

r wha t circumstances ? Wha t type s o f renovation s ar

e commonl

y performe d i n commercia l buildings ? Ho w frequentl y ar e renovation s performe d i n agiven building ? T o wha t exten t d o routin e maintenance activitie s i n commercia l building s involv e th

e disturbanc e o f painte d surfaces ? Wha t steps , i f any , ar e commonly take

n i n connection wit h renovation s i n commercia

l building s t o restric t

acces s to th

e are abeing renovated whil e th e activit y i s underway ? Wha t steps , i f any , ar e commonl

y take n i n connectio n wit h renovation s i n commercia

l building s t

o limi t th e sprea d o f dust beyon d the wor k area ? Ho w frequentl y d

o commercia

l building s exis t

i n clos e proximity t

o residences ? Ho w woul d th

e impositio n o f

certification , trainin g an

d wor k practic e requirements affec t

renovatio n activitie s i n commercia l buildings ? Ho w woul d buildin g owner s an d manager

s b e affected ? Th e EP A must conside r awide variet

y o f factor s i n pursuin g thi s rulemaking . I t jus t does no t mak e an y sens e to expan

d th e scop e o f RR P to Commercia

l an d Publi c buildings . Again , OSHA' s 29 CF R 1926.62 standard

s ar e alread y i n plac e an

d provide s measure

s tha t protect employee s an

d a s aresult , th

e public . I t

seem s clea r to AG C NY S Membe

r Firm s tha

t i t woul d not

mak e sens e to impac t

cost s whe n ther e ar e regulation s i n plac e tha t accomplis h th

e inten t o f RRP . Th e Membershi

p o f th e Associated Genera

l Contractors an

d th e Associated Genera

l Contractors Safet

y Committee appreciat

e you r consideratio n i n regar

d to thi s issue . Th

e AGCNY S Member

s an d Safet y Committee loo k

forwar d to workin g wit h th e Agenc y a

s i t consider s expansion o f

RR P activitie s to publi c an d commercia

l buildings . W

e appreciat

e th e opportunit

y to submi

t thes e comments . Respectfull y submitted_o

n their behalf , ;dmon d Associated Genera

l Contractors o f

Ne w Yor k Stat e Director , Safet

y an d Healt h Services .