1 Richmond, Jonah

From: Richmond, Jonah Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 12:47 PM To: 'Jones, Danielle' Cc: Hofmann, Angela; Smith, Peterj Subject: RE: EO 12866/13563 Interagency Review: Lead -Based Paint Program; Amendment to Jurisdictions and Renovator Refresher Training Requirements (RIN 2070-AK02) Attachments: EO12866_Rin2070-AK02_LRRP Minor Amendm ents_FRM_Interagency Comments Response_2015-12-31.pdf; RIN2070-AK02_EO12866 _Lead_MinorAmendments_FRM_FR document_REDLINE_2015-12-31.pdf

Danielle,

Here are EPA’s responses to both the 12/17 and 12/21 interagency comments combined into a single response document, as well as a redline markup of the final rule document reflecting changes made in response to interagency comments.
Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you.
Jonah Richmond Regulatory Coordination Staff Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Mailcode: 7101M, WJC East Room 3379H Phone number: 202

‐ 564

‐ 0210

From: Jones, Danielle [mailto:Danielle_Y_Jones@omb.eop.gov] Sent: Monday, December 21, 2015 12:03 PM To: Richmond, Jonah <Richmond.Jonah@epa.gov> Cc: Hofmann, Angela <Hofmann.Angela@epa.gov>; Smith, Peterj <Smith.Peterj@epa.gov> Subject: RE: EO 12866/13563 Interagency Review: Lead

‐ Based Paint Program; Amendment to Jurisdictions and Renovator Refresher Training Requirements (RIN 2070

‐ AK02) Jonah,

Some additional comments for the Lead rule came in this morning. Please find the attached comments. Best, Danielle

From: Jones, Danielle Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 3:02 PM To: 'Richmond, Jonah' < Richmond.Jonah@epa.gov > Cc: hofmann.angela@epa.gov ; Smith, Peterj ( Smith.Peterj@epa.gov ) < Smith.Peterj@epa.gov > Subject: EO 12866/13563 Interagency Review: Lead

‐ Based Paint Program; Amendment to Jurisdictions and Renovator Refresher Training Requirements (RIN 2070

‐ AK02)2 Jonah,
Please find the attachment with the interagency reviewer comments on the Lead

‐ Based Paint Program; Amendment to Jurisdictions and Renovator Refresher Training Requirements final rule.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Danielle Y. Jones Policy Analyst Office of Management and Budget Phone: (202) 395

‐ 1741 | djones@omb.eop.gov*** EO 12866 Deliberative – Do Not, Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** December 31, 2015

Page 1 of 7 EO 12866/13563 Review of RIN 2070-AK02 FRM; Lead-based Paint Program; Amendments to Jurisdiction-Specific Certification and Accreditation Requirements and Renova tor Refresher Training Requirements 

### EPA Response to Interagency Comments

EO12866_Rin2070-AK02_LRRP Minor Amendments_FRM_Interagency Comments Response_2015-12-31.docx This document provides EPA responses to the interagency comments received by EPA on December 17, 2015 and December 21, 2015. The comments are repeated verbatim for context. Responses that involve changes to the documents are reflected in redlines for those documents.

COMMENT 1 : Currently the proposal has three years for refresher training without a hands-on component for the training certification without any rationale for this selection. This reviewer urges the EPA to consider a five year interval for the for refresher training without a hands-on component for the final rule. This would be consistent with the other training certification intervals. EPA RESPONSE 1: EPA shortened the certification period for the renovator course that does not include hands-on training to 3 years instead of 5 to address concerns from commenters. Several commenters believed that a training conducted completely online without hands-on learning was not as good as a classroom training with hands-on learning. Below is a paragraph from page 7 of the FR notice that discusses why EPA chose the 3-year certification. “Many commenters believe that an in-class course provides better training than an online course. One commenter stated that students learn more when they can interact with other students and share information. Many commenters stated that students learn better by performing hands-on activities. One commenter stated that it is important for students to practice what they learn and get immediate feedback from instructors. Another commenter stated that people who work with their hands, such as renovators, learn better from doing rather than watching. While EPA believes that renovators can sufficiently learn the RRP requirements via online training, the Agency understands the commenters’ concerns about students missing out on potential benefits of hands-on training and interaction with trainers and students when they take an online course. These concerns are another reason EPA shortened the certification period for the renovator course that does not include hands-on training to three years and required in-class training every other certification. This way, renovators who may learn more in a classroom setting will not be able to take the online course perpetually without ever having classroom refresher training. Further, they will have to take the in-class training sooner, after only three years from when they completed the online course.” COMMENT 2: Did EPA get any specific comments on the alternative as proposed to require hands-on training every other time a refresher course is required? If so, who and what were the comments? EPA RESPONSE 2: The North Carolina Department of Health (EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0304- 0159) and Allsafe Environmental ( EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0304-0110) stated that conducting*** EO 12866 Deliberative – Do Not, Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** December 31, 2015

Page 2 of 7 hands-on learning once every ten years was too long an interval but did not suggest an alternative. An anonymous commenter (EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0304-0094) stated that it would be difficult to track which students needed hands on training under a system where hands-onwas only required for every other certification. Another anonymous commenter (EPA-HQOPPT-2014-0304-0057) stated that requiring hands-on training every 10 years is not a good idea and that hands-on should be performed for every refresher certification. The commenter also suggested increasing the number of hands-on activities in the refresher course from two to six but did not state why this should be done. The National Association of the Remodeling Industry (NARI) (EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0304-0136) believes that hands-on training for every other certification is not necessary. NARI claimed that students should be able to show proficiency in the hands-on activities via an online training but did not give any examples of how this could be accomplished. The El Group (EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0304-0103), an EPA accredited training provider, did not comment on the alternative to require hands-on for every other certification. However, the commenter stated that the only way removing the hands-on requirement would be feasible would be to require refresher training every two to three years. Accordingly, the final rule requires the refresher training to be taken three years after taking a refresher training that does not include the hands-on training. COMMENT 3: What is the cost difference between the proposed rule’s requirement of allowing online training every time and the final rule’s requirement of only requiring online training every other time (every 3 or 5 years depending on hands-on or online)? EPA RESPONSE 3: As shown in Table 3 of the preamble, the proposed rule’s requirement of allowing online training every training cycle, valid for 5 years (designated as Option 1 in the table) saves $8.2 million to $12.4 million per year, compared to the baseline. The final rule, designated as Option 4(c) in the table, saves $1.8 million to $3.4 million per year compared to the baseline. Thus, the cost difference between proposal and final is $6.4 million to $9 million per year. COMMENT 4: The draft amendment itself does not use the term “online” but simply refers to renovator refresher training as either having or not having hands-on training. In the part of the amendment regarding notification of renovator or LBP training courses, the terms “electronic learning” and e-learning” are used, and all usage of the term “online” occurs in the preamble. Consistent terminology should be used. Functional descriptions of the terms might be inserted in the preamble at the end of Section A, Hands-on Training, or a new section could be created to discuss and define online training. Where appropriate, new definitions should be included in the regulatory provisions. EPA RESPONSE 4: The term online was replaced by the term e-learning in the preamble for consistency. COMMENT 5: The draft preamble indicates that EPA anticipates an increase in the number of certified renovators by allowing online refresher training at prescribed intervals during an individual’s lifetime of certification. In order to accomplish this goal without confusion among certified renovators and those striving to become certified, clarification in the draft of the*** EO 12866 Deliberative – Do Not, Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** December 31, 2015

Page 3 of 7 meaning of several terms, including “online tra ining,” “electronic (e-learning),” “trainers who teach an online course,” and “training providers that teach the refresher course,” would be appropriate. It is unclear in the amendment whether EPA intends to require a live instructor for the online presentations, or to allow a training provider who would simply direct trainees to a website where they take a course at their convenience perhaps without assistance from a live instructor being available, or something in between; EPA should clarify this. EPA RESPONSE 5: Unit II.A. of the preamble was updated to explain that e-learning is a web-based training that is not led by an instructor where the student can take the training at his or her own pace. COMMENT 6: It is important that RRP initial and refresher training focus on skills as well as retention of factual information. Skill training is not easily transferred through computer screens, as EPA acknowledges by retaining the requirement for hands-on training for alternating refresher certification courses. Therefore, it is important that EPA clarify which types of online training will be allowable and under what circumstances. EPA RESPONSE 6: EPA believes that the rule is clear about when students are eligible to take the e-learning refresher training without hands-on learning and when they must take the refresher training with hands-on learning. Under the final rule, EPA will allow renovators to take a refresher course without hands -on training once ev ery other certification which will be valid for three years. Once a renovator takes the refresher course without the hands-on training, their next refresher training must include hands-on training and will result in a five-year certification. COMMENT 7: EPA should provide, in the preamble, information about the success (effectiveness and usage) of the online versions of the initial renovator course in English and Spanish that are discussed on EPA’s website at: http://www.epa.gov/lead/training-courses

. This could include, for example, the numbers of individuals who have received RRP certification through e-learning versus face-to-face classes, what evaluation EPA has conducted of the effectiveness of online training, and, if it has conducted such evaluation, how the results have affected its decision to allow it for refresher training where hands-on is not required. EPA RESPONSE 7: Very few students have taken the e-learning training because the course cannot be performed completely online with students being required to perform the hands-on learning in a classroom. EPA has not conducted a formal evaluation of the effectiveness of the training, however, as discussed in the preamble, the Agency believes that renovators can sufficiently learn the RRP requirements via e-learning and that the benefits of having more renovators take the refresher training, leading to a higher number of certified renovators, will outweigh any disadvantages of the final rule. COMMENT 8: Online learning for the refreshers for a 3-year certification period may encompass various strategies including use of computerized platforms and instructional tools such as videos, audio recordings, photographs, and interactive exercises. For example, viewing by a trainee of a 4-hour video on Youtube (or a similarly functioning website), or*** EO 12866 Deliberative – Do Not, Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** December 31, 2015

Page 4 of 7 listening to a lecture or podcast through a training provider’s network for a fee, in itself do not constitute adequate online learning experiences or provide opportunity for assessment by an instructor of the trainee’s competency in using the material presented. EPA RESPONSE 8: Unit II.A. of the preamble was updated to explain that e-learning is a web-based training that is not led by an instructor where the student can take the training at his or her own pace. With regard to assessing a student’s performance, the e-learning course must include periodic knowledge checks equiva lent to the number and content of the knowledge checks contained in E PA's model course, and an exam at the end of the course that the student must pass in order to receive certification. EPA has modified the regulations at 745.225(e)(4) and (e)(5)(viii) to emphasize these requirements. COMMENT 9: Generally and traditionally, online learning is described as consisting of synchronous and asynchronous types, but other on line learning approaches may exist as well. Setting the issues of potential identity verificati on or fraud aside, EPA should consider the use of instructor-led online training settings with a date certain for delivery and reference on the certificate. Asynchronous training, by design, does not occur at the same time for all participants, so that citing a specific date on a certificate may be problematic. Although the use of a live instructor provides insight and feedback, and is available to answer questions through chat boxes, Question and Answer opportunities, or blogs to assess individuals’ performance, live instructors will come with an increased cost. EPA RESPONSE 9: Instructor-led online trainings are already allowed under the RRP program. The hands-on tr aining for this type of course must still be performed in person. With regard to the certificates, the course completion date on the certificate will be the date the student passes the course test which is taken at the end of the course. COMMENT 10: Another generic issue with online training is the difficulty associated with ongoing course changes and maintenance of the material and format presented that will eventually need to be changed over time. EPA should consider developing a model online curriculum for the 3-year refresher course that can be modified to include state and/or local requirements. This will keep changes to a minimum to minimize the difficulty when verifying which version of an online curriculum a student used and what the course content included. For example, this commenter realizes that, should federal or state lead-based paint and/or lead-based paint hazard standards change in the future, courses would have to be modified (one real purpose of refresher training) to reflect regulatory updates. This can be expensive when changing online presentations for training providers not having made significant investments in Information Technology support staff. Again, EPA’s experience with the online initial RRP training would be helpful in this regard. EPA RESPONSE 10: EPA has already developed a model e-learning course for the training that does not include hands-on learning. If the course needs to be modified due to future programmatic changes, the Agency will update the model course accordingly. COMMENT 11: The draft discusses areas of potential fraud by referencing criminal penalties. The draft is subject to different interpretations of fraud. EPA should clarify its intended scope*** EO 12866 Deliberative – Do Not, Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** December 31, 2015

Page 5 of 7 of fraud for the online training situation, and provide, in guidance, further options to reduce the potential for fraud or misrepresentation. EPA RESPONSE 11: The fraud which EPA discussed in the preamble would occur when someone has another person take the training for him or her. EPA believes that this is already clearly stated in the preamble. COMMENT 12: Specific comments: a. How will the instructor verify who is: i. Attending; lines 192-196 just says student will be present in 2 years. ii. Participating throughout the presentation. iii. Paying for, and getting, the certificate iv. Able to change the name or dates on the certificate? b. How will the instructor ensure that the language of the presentation is appropriate for each of the attendees? c. How will the instructor deal with multiple platforms, software versions, and varying internet speeds? d. Will online recertification training be available to the EPA-authorized states if they amend their agreement? e. If online recertification training is allowed by an EPA-authorized state, will that recertification be recognized as well: throughout the US? only in EPA-run states? only in other EPA-authorized states? nowhere else? f. Lines 201 – 202: Refresher training cannot produce more renovators than are already certified. Please check the wording. g. Lines 313 – 320: Is not the main purpose of scheduled training notification is to enable to monitor for quality? Please check the wording. h. Lines 333 – 336: Should not training providers be submitting students' names every 10 days, not 30? Please check the wording.

EPA RESPONSE 12: a. How will the instructor verify who is: i. Attending; lines 192-196 just says student will be present in 2 years. RESPONSE: It is up to the training provider to determine how to verify the identity of the student taking their training course. ii. Participating throughout the presentation. RESPONSE: The training provider must track each student's course log-ins, launches, progress, and completion of the course. In addition, the course must include periodic knowledge checks equivalent to the number a nd content of the knowledge checks contained in EPA's model course. EPA has modified the regu lations at 745.225(e)(4) and (e)(5)(viii) to emphasize these requirements. ii. Paying for, and getting, the certificate*** EO 12866 Deliberative – Do Not, Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** December 31, 2015

Page 6 of 7 RESPONSE: It is up to the training provider to determine how to collect money for the course and deliver the certificate. iv. Able to change the name or dates on the certificate? RESPONSE: It is up to the training provider to determine how to change the name on a certificate. With regard to dates, there is no need to change a date on the course completion certificate. Even in a situation where EPA extends the expiration date of certifications, as it did in April 2015 (80 FR 20444) the certificate does not need to be modified and reissued ( See EPA’s Frequent Questions database ). b. How will the instructor ensure that the language of the presentation is appropriate for each of the attendees? RESPONSE: It is up to the training provider to determine how to verify the language that is appropriate for a particular student.
c. How will the instructor deal wi th multiple platforms, software versions, and varying internet speeds? RESPONSE: It is up to the training provider to determine how to deal with these circumstances. d. Will online recertification training be available to the EPA-authorized states if they amend their agreement? RESPONSE: Yes, authorized states may also allow online training without hands-on learning. e. If online recertification training is allowed by an EPA-authorized state, will that recertificationbe recognized as well: throughout the US? only in EPA-run states? only in other EPAauthorized states? nowhere else? RESPONSE: A certification or recertification from an authorized state is recognized in that state and all EPA-administered states. Other authorized states may recognize the certification if they chose to do so. f. Lines 201 – 202: Refresher training cannot produce more renovators than are already certified. Please check the wording. RESPONSE: The wording has been edited for clarity. g. Lines 313 – 320: Is not the main purpose of scheduled training notification is to enable to monitor for quality? Please check the wording. RESPONSE: Pre-training notifications are used to enable EPA to monitor a training course. Because there is no live training with a course taught entirely online there is no need to require a pre-training notification. With regard to th e quality of the course, the Agency will review each training provider’s course before accrediting the trainer.*** EO 12866 Deliberative – Do Not, Cite, Quote or Release During the Review *** December 31, 2015

Page 7 of 7 h. Lines 333 – 336: Should not training providers be submitting students' names every 10 days, not 30? Please check the wording. RESPONSE: This paragraph was worded correctly. EPA is requiring the post-training notifications for this course one per month. It must be submitted by the 10 th day of the month covering the previous month.*** EO 12866 Review Draft – Deliberative – Do Not Quote, Cite, or Release During Review ***
RIN2070-AK02_EO12866_Lead_MinorAmendments_FRM_FRdocument_REDLINE_2015-12- 31.docx 

### Redline Draft reflecting edits made in response to interagency comments under EO 12866

Page 1 of 35 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P 1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 2 40 CFR Part 745 3 EPA-HQ-OPPT-2014-0304; FRL- XXXX
- XX 4 RIN 2070-AK02 5 Lead-based Paint Programs; Amendment to Jurisdiction-Specific Certification and 6 Accreditation Requirement s and Renovator Refresh er Training Requirements 7 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 8 ACTION: Final rule

. 9 SUMMARY: EPA is finalizing revisions to the Lead Renovation, Repa ir, and Painting 10 (RRP) rule, and the Lead-based Paint (LBP) Activities rule. The revisions are intended to 11 improve the day-to-day function of these pr ograms by reducing burdens to industry and 12 EPA, and by clarifying language for traini ng providers, while retaining the protections 13 provided by the original rules. First, EPA is modifying the requirement that the renovator 14 refresher training for individuals have a hands-on component. Second, the Agency is 15 removing jurisdiction-specific certification and accreditation requirements under the LBP 16 Activities program in States where EPA administers the program. Previously, this 17 program required that training providers, firm s and individuals seek certification in each 18 jurisdiction (e.g., a State) where the organi zation or person wanted to work. Third, EPA 19 is adding clarifying language to the requi rements for training providers under both the 20 RRP and LBP Activities programs. 21 DATES: This final rule is effective [ insert date of publication in the Federal Register ]. 22Page 2 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

ADDRESSES: The docket for this action, identifie d by docket identification (ID) 23 number HQ-OPPT-2014-0304, is available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the Office 24 of Pollution Prevention and Toxics Docket (OPPT Docket), Environmental Protection 25 Agency Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 26 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 27 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone 28 number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for 29 the OPPT Docket is (202) 566-0280. Please review the visitor instructions and additional 30
information about the docket available at http://www.epa.gov/dockets

. 31 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information contact : 32 Marc Edmonds, National Program Chemical s Division, Office of Pollution Prevention 33 and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 34 Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone num ber: 202-566-0758; email address: 35 edmonds.marc@epa.gov

. 36 For general information contact : The TSCA-Hotline , ABVI-Goodwill, 422 South 37 Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY 14620; telephone number: (202) 554-1404; email address: 38 TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov

. 39 SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 40 I. Executive Summary 41 A. Does this Action Apply to Me? 42 You may be potentially affected by this action if you operate a training program 43 required to be accredited under 40 CFR 745.225, if you are a firm or individual who must 44 be certified to conduct lead-based paint activities in accordance with 40 CFR 745.226, or 45 if you are an individual who must be certified to conduct re novation activities in 46Page 3 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

accordance with 40 CFR 745.90. This rule applie s only in States, territories, and tribal 47 areas that do not have authorized prog rams pursuant to 40 CFR 745.324. For further 48 information regarding the authorization status of States, territories, and Tribes, contact 49 the National Lead Information Center at 1-800-424-LEAD [5323]. 50 The following list of North American I ndustrial Classification System (NAICS) 51
codes is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a guide to help readers 52 determine whether this document applies to them. Potentially affected entities may 53
include: 54

• Building construction (NAICS code 236), e.g., single-family housing 55 construction, multi-family housing cons truction, residen tial remodelers. 56

• Specialty trade contractors (NAICS code 238), e.g., plumbing, heating, and air57 conditioning contractors, pain ting and wall covering contract ors, electrical contractors, 58 finish carpentry contractors, drywall and insulation contractors, siding contractors, tile 59 and terrazzo contractors, glass and glazing contractors. 60

• Real estate (NAICS code 531), e.g., lessors of residen tial buildings and 61 dwellings, residential property managers. 62 • Child day care services (NAICS code 624410). 63 • Elementary and secondary schools (N AICS code 611110), e.g., elementary 64 schools with kindergarten classrooms. 65 • Other technical and trade schools (NAICS code 611519), e.g., training 66 providers. 67 • Engineering services (NAICS code 541330) and building inspection services 68 (NAICS code 541350), e.g., dust sampling technicians. 69 • Lead abatement professionals (NAICS code 562910), e.g., firms and supervisors 70Page 4 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

engaged in lead-based paint activities. 71 B. What is the Agency's Authority for Taking this Action? 72 This final rule is being issued under the au thority of Sections 402(a) and 402(c)(3) 73 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), 15 U.S.C. 2682(a) and 2682(c)(3). 74 C. What Action is the Agency Taking? 75 EPA is making minor revisions to the RRP rule that published in the Federal 76 Register on April 22, 2008 (Ref. 1) and the Lead -based Paint Activities rule that 77 published in the Federal Register on August 29, 1996 (Ref. 2). EPA is modifying the 78 requirement that the renovator refreshe r training for individuals have a hands-on 79 component. The Agency is also removing ju risdictions under the LBP Activities program 80 in States where EPA administers the program. Previously, this program required that 81 training providers, firms and individuals seek certification in each jurisdiction (e.g., a 82 State) where the organization or person wa nted to work. In addition, EPA is adding 83 clarifying language to the requirements fo r training providers under both the RRP and 84 LBP Activities programs. 85 D. Why is the Agency Taking this Action? 86 The proposed revisions are intended to imp rove the day-to-day function of these 87 programs by reducing burdens to industry a nd the EPA and by clarifying language for 88 training providers, while retaining the benefits of the original rules. 89 E. What are the Estimated Incremental Impacts of this Action? 90 EPA has prepared an economic analysis (EA) of the potential incremental impacts 91 associated with this rulemaking (Ref. 3). This analysis, which is available in the docket, is 92
discussed in more detail in Unit III. T he following is a brief outline of the estimated 93 incremental impacts of this rulemaking. 94Page 5 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

 Overall costs. This rule is estimated to result in cost savings of $1.8 million to 95 $3.4 million per year. 96

 Paperwork burdens. The rule affects information collection activities by training 97 providers that wish to offer onlinee-learning refresher training and is estimated to have an 98
incremental total estimated a nnual burden of 2,656 hours. Burden is defined at 5 CFR 99 1320.3(b). 100

 Small entity impacts. This rule does not have a significant impact on a 101
substantial number of small entities. 102

 Effects on State, local, and Tribal governments. This rule does not have an 103 intergovernmental mandate, any significant or unique effects on small governments, or 104 Federalism or Tribal implications. 105 II. Discussion of Comments on the Proposal and the Final Rule 106 This unit discusses the final rule, incl uding what was proposed and the public 107 comments received on the proposed rule. A separate document that summarizes the 108 comments received that were relevant to the proposal and EPA’s responses has been 109 prepared and is available in the doc ket for this rulemaking (Ref. 4). 110 A. Hands-on Training 111 To become certified as a renovator, a pe rson must successfully complete a renovator 112 course accredited by EPA or by a State, territo rial, or tribal program authorized by EPA. 113 To gain initial certification, individual renova tors must complete an 8-hour training 114 course. People who had taken an EPA, Depa rtment of Housing a nd Urban Development 115 (HUD), or EPA/HUD model renovation training c ourse could take the 4-hour refresher 116 renovator training in lieu of the 8-hour initial course. Trainings are taught either in a 117 classroom or via electronic learning (e-learning). E-learning is a web-based training that 118Page 6 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

is not lead by an instructor where the student can take the tr aining at his or her own pace. 119 Requirements specific to e-lear ning are found at 40 CFR 745.225. To maintain 120 certification, renovators must complete a renovator refresher course before their 121 certification expires. If the renovator does not complete the course within the required 122 timeframe, the individual must re take the initial 8-hour course to become certified again. 123 The 8-hour initial training includes hands-on t raining in testing for lead in paint, 124 methods for minimizing the creation of dust and lead-based paint hazards, interior and 125
exterior containment and cl eanup methods, and cleaning veri fication. Activities covered 126 include the use of EPA-recognized test kits , setting up barriers, covering furniture, ducts, 127 and carpeted floors with plastic , mopping floors, bagging waste, and determining that the 128 work area has been adequately cleaned. Each student performs these activities in front of 129 an instructor who determines if the student is proficient in each one. Students must be 130 deemed proficient in order to pass the class and become a certified renovator. The current 131 version of the renovator refresher course incl udes hands-on training in testing paint for 132 lead and cleaning verification. 133 On January 15, 2015, EPA proposed to elimin ate the hands-on requirement in the 134 renovator refresher course. Over 140 comment s on its proposal were received. Comments 135 both supported and opposed the proposed change. After carefully weighing the issues at 136 stake and considering the concerns raised by commenters, the Agency is promulgating a 137 modified version of the pr oposal. Specifically, EPA will allow renovators to take a 138 refresher course without hands-on training once every other certification. Once a 139 renovator takes the refresher course without the hands-on training, their next refresher 140 training must include hands-on training. The certification from the refresher course 141 without hands-on training will last for three years. Taking the course without hands-on 142Page 7 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

training is optional but once a renovator takes th e course, their next refresher course must 143 include hands-on training and be taken within three years of their previous certification. 144 The certification from taking a course with hands-on training will last for five years. 145 Many commenters stated that allowing the refresher course to be taught entirely 146 onlinevia e-learning would result in more trained contra ctors. One commenter stated the 147 onlinee-learning course would allow for wider adoption of the rule resulting in higher 148 compliance. Another commenter stated that this will benefit homeowners by having more 149 trained renovators in the field. On e commenter who is in favor of onlinee-learning 150 training stated that when he took his initial renovator training, he spent two days traveling 151 to and from the training and another day taking the class. OnlineE-learning training 152 would have saved this person travel costs and time away from work. EPA agrees that a 153 refresher training taught entirely online via e-learning would result in more renovators 154 taking the training. Without the hands-on re quirement, renovators se eking recertification 155 would be able to take the course entirely onlinevia e-learning without having to travel to 156 a training location to perform the hands-on activities. This change will make it easier for 157 renovators to take the refresher training , especially renovators who live far from a 158 training facility. Renovators will save time and travel costs by taking the course from a 159 single location, possibly their own home. Although the onlinee-learning training will only 160 be allowed for every other refresher training , EPA believes that the associated burden and 161 cost savings will lead to more renovators taking the refresher training and becoming 162 recertified. Having more renovators take the refresher training will lead to a higher 163 number of certified renovators, resulting in a workforce better able to perform 164 renovations in a lead-safe manner. 165 Many commenters believe that an in-class c ourse provides better training than an 166Page 8 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

onlinee-learning course. One commenter stated that students learn more when they can 167 interact with other students and share inform ation. Many commenters stated that students 168 learn better by performing hands-on activities. One commenter stated that it is important 169 for students to practice what they learn and get immediate feedback from instructors. 170 Another commenter stated that people who wo rk with their hands, such as renovators, 171 learn better from doing rather than watching . While EPA believes that renovators can 172 sufficiently learn the RRP requirements via onlinee-learning training, the Agency 173
understands the commenters’ concerns about st udents missing out on potential benefits of 174 hands-on training and interac tion with trainers and students when they take an onlinee175 learning course. These concerns are another reas on EPA shortened the certification 176 period for the renovator course that does not include hands-on training to three years and 177 required in-class training every other certifi cation. This way, renovators who may learn 178 more in a classroom setting will not be able to take the onlinee-learning course 179 perpetually without ever having classroom refre sher training. Further, they will have to 180 take the in-class training sooner, after onl y three years from when they completed the 181 onlinee-learning course. 182 Many commenters were concerned that tr aining providers would have difficulty 183 verifying the identity of the person taking the course. One commenter stated that it would 184 be difficult, if not impossible, to verify that the person taking the training is, in fact, the 185 individual who receives certific ation. Another commenter point ed out that a classroom186 based course reduces the potential for misrepr esentation and fraud that can take place in 187 an online learning situation. As one training provider explained, there are measures that it 188 takes to verify student identity in an onlinee-learning course but admitted that there is no 189 guarantee that the person taking the course is who they claim to be. Several commenters 190Page 9 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

suggested possible solutions, such as tracking IP addresses or taking a picture of the 191 student without notice to verify their identit y. These commenters’ suggestions, as well as 192 others, do not appear to be practical methods to verify student identity. EPA has already 193 employed more practical methods of verify ing student participation when accrediting a 194 training program to offer these refresher tr aining courses for renovation: each student is 195 assigned a unique identifier to launch and re-launch the course, each student completes 196 periodic knowledge checks equivalent to the num ber and content of those in EPA's model 197 course, and each student is te sted with at least 20 questions and scores at least 80% for 198 successful completion. EPA recognizes the possibility that someone could have another 199 person take the course for him or her; however, there are potential penalties for those who 200 do this. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1001, it is a criminal violation to knowingly and 201 willfully make a false or fraudulent statemen t in any matter within EPA’s jurisdiction. 202 Furthermore, if a renovator is tempted to ha ve someone else take the course for them, 203 they will know that they will have to take the course in pers on for their next certification, 204 ensuring that their identity can be verified, because the onlinee-learning course can only 205 be taken once every other certification. 206 EPA understands that there may be disadvantages to onlinee-learning training. 207 However, the Agency expects that the associat ed burden and cost savings of the rule will 208 lead to more renovators taking the refr esher training and becoming recertified . than 209 would have done so otherwise. The Agency believes the benefits of having more 210 renovators take the refresher training, lead ing to a higher number of certified renovators, 211 will outweigh any disadvantages of the final rule. 212 B. Jurisdictions 213 On June 9, 1999, 40 CFR part 745, subpart L, was amended to include a fee 214Page 10 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

schedule for training programs seeking EPA accreditation and for individuals and firms 215 seeking EPA certification (Ref. 5). These fees were established as directed by TSCA 216 section 402(a)(3), which requires EPA to recove r the cost of administering and enforcing 217 the LBP Activities requirements in States wit hout authorized programs. The fee schedule 218 created a multi-jurisdiction registration fee which applies to individuals, firms and 219 training programs that provide training or perform lead-based paint activities in more 220 than one State administered by the EPA program. This fee is applied per discipline for 221 each additional EPA-administered Stat e in which the applicant seeks 222 certification/recertificatio n or accreditation/reaccred itation. An EPA-administered 223 jurisdiction is either an individual State w ithout an authorized program or all Tribes 224 without authorized programs in a given EPA Region. 225 The multi-state jurisdiction fee of $35 was based on the estimated burdens 226 required for Agency clerical, technical, and ma nagerial staff to perform tasks associated 227 with adding jurisdictions to a certification or accreditation. Tasks include entering the 228 information into a database, approving or disapproving th e application and generating 229 and mailing a certificate to the applicant. After years of implementing the LBP Activities 230 Program, the Agency believes that separate certifications for each EPA-administered 231 State jurisdiction are not necessary. In partic ular, EPA does not believe it is necessary for 232 the Agency to certify or accredit the same a pplicant multiple times; certification in one 233 EPA-administered State jurisdiction should be sufficient to perform work in any other 234 EPA-administered State. Accordingly, the Agency is eliminating the requirement for 235 separate certifications in each EPA-adminis tered State jurisdiction in the LBP Activities 236 Program. Regulated entities will no longer have to send an application and fees to EPA 237 for the purpose of adding additional EPA-administered State jurisdictions to their 238Page 11 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

certification or accreditation. Now when a regula ted entity applies to EPA and receives 239 certification in the LBP Activities Program, they will be able to work in any EPA240 administered State. 241 EPA received many comments on its propos al to remove jurisdictions from the 242 LBP Activities Program. Most comments were in support of eliminating jurisdictions. 243 Commenters who opposed the proposed remova l were confused about what EPA was 244 proposing, believing that the Agency was goin g to change the requirements for States to 245 become authorized to implement the LBP Activities Program. The Agency is not 246 changing the State authorization requireme nts, nor did it propose to do so. EPA is 247 promulgating the revisions as proposed by e liminating jurisdictions in the LBP Activities 248 Program administered by EPA. 249 Now that jurisdictions in EPA’s LBP Activities Program have been removed, 250 firms, individuals and training providers will receive one certificate that will allow them 251 to work in all EPA-administered States instead of one certificate per State. Certificates 252 issued before this final rule are still valid until their expiration and regulated entities will 253
not need their certificates replaced because of this rule. In addition, a previous 254 certification in a single EPA-administered jurisdiction allows firms, individuals and 255 training providers to perform lead-based paint activities in all EPA-administered 256 jurisdictions until the expiration of that certification. 257 C. Clarification Regarding Training Provider Application Requirements 258 EPA is clarifying the application regula tions for accredited training providers 259 under the RRP rule (Ref. 1) and LBP Activitie s rule (Ref. 2). It was brought to the 260 Agency’s attention that the regulations did not specifically state what constituted a 261 violation of the regulations at 40 CFR 745.225. For example, some other regulatory 262Page 12 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

provisions, such as 40 CFR 745.87, specifically li st various activities that are considered 263 a violation of TSCA. Accordingly, the Ag ency proposed to add clarifying language 264 explaining that training providers must follow the requirements in that section. EPA 265 believes that accredited training providers already understand this, but EPA proposed to 266 add the clarifying language to ensure understanding of the requirements – similar to what 267 has been done in other regulations. This clarifying language does not change any 268 requirements for accredited training providers. 269 The Agency received few comments on the clarification. Most of the comments 270 expressed general support for the proposed ch ange. One commenter said that the current 271 requirements are specific and the clarificati on is not necessary. EPA disagrees with this 272 comment. The language in 40 CFR 745.225 did not specifically say that a failure to 273 follow the requirements of that section was a violation. While it is likely that many 274 training providers already understand that, EP A believes it is important to make it clear in 275 the regulations in order to eliminate any c onfusion about what constitutes a violation. 276 Therefore, EPA is finalizing the changes as proposed by adding the clarifying language to 277
40 CFR 745.225. 278 D. Correction to Training Notification Requirements 279 The regulatory text of the final RRP rule in 2008 (Ref. 1) inadvertently omitted a 280 requirement for accredited providers of renovatio n training to provide notification to EPA 281 after each training course the provider deliv ers. The provision was designed to supply 282 important information regarding certified renovators for EPA’s compliance monitoring 283 efforts. In 2009, EPA issued a rule (Ref. 6) to correct this omission by amending 40 CFR 284 745.225(c)(14) to require post-c ourse notifications from accr edited providers of renovator 285 or dust sampling technician training. The 2009 rule also included conforming changes 286Page 13 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

to 40 CFR 745.225(c)(14)(iii) to include the co rrect name of the sample post-course 287
notification form and to make it clear that all methods of post-c ourse notification are 288 available to both renovation training providers and LBP Activities training providers. As 289 amended, 40 CFR 745.225(c)(14) required renova tion training providers to notify EPA 290 no later than 10 business days following cour se completion. Although EPA identified this 291 requirement in its cost estimates in 2008, th e regulatory provision was subsequently 292 overwritten by another rulemaki ng. Specifically, in a 2011 rule (Ref. 7), the regulatory 293 language inadvertently removed the regu latory text that was added to 40 CFR 294 745.225(c)(14)(i) by the 2009 rule. In January 2015, EPA proposed to add the same 295 language back to 40 CFR 745.225(c)(14)(i) that was included in the 2009 rule. 296 EPA received several comments about the correction to the notification 297 regulations. Two commenters said they ha d no objection to the correction. Another 298 commenter said simply that he supported the proposed change. No commenters opposed 299 making the correction. EPA is promulgating the revision as proposed. 300 E. Notifications for OnlineE-learning Trainers 301 As explained in the preamble to the pr oposed rule, EPA considered modifying the 302 requirements regarding online training notifica tions by requiring training providers that 303
teach the onlinee-learning refresher course to submit notifications via the internet. For 304 years, training providers have had the option of submitting notifications electronically via 305 EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX). The CDX system is designed to streamline the 306 notification process for training providers and EPA alike, and to perform basic 307 validations of electronic submissions that reduce common errors in notifications 308 otherwise submitted on paper. Submitting notification via the internet reduces the burden 309 on the training providers and the Agency, as well as saving taxpayer dollars. 310Page 14 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

The Agency requested comment on whether it should require training providers to 311
submit online notifications for the refresher course that does not include hands-on 312 training. EPA received one comment submitte d by a training provider who supported the 313 requirement. No commenters opposed the chan ge. Based on the benefits of online 314 notifications, EPA is promulgating a requirement that training providers that teach the 315 renovator refresher course without hands-on training must submit their post-training 316 notifications via the internet. Most, if not a ll, of the refresher courses without hands-on 317 training will be taught online via e-learning since there will be no need for students to 318 take the course in person. EPA believes that trainers who teach an onlinee-learning 319 course clearly have the technical knowledge and ability to submit their post-training 320 notifications via the internet and it is th erefore appropriate to promulgate this 321 requirement. As stated later in this unit, these trainers will not have to submit pre-training 322 notifications; therefore, this requirement only applies to post-training notifications. 323 EPA also requested comment on how it should modify the notification 324 requirements to accommodate training taught entirely onlinevia e-learning . Training 325 providers submit both a pre-training and post-training notification for each course that 326 they teach. Now that the renovator refresher training can be taught entirely online via e327 learning , there will be no classroom session for which to notify EPA for the onlinee328 learning class. Consequently, pre-training notifications will not be required for such 329 courses. Because the training provider will still need to send to EPA the names of the 330 students who completed the onlinee-learning course, post-training notifications are still 331 required. 332 EPA received several comments regarding how it should modify the post-training 333 notification requirements. One commenter said that EPA should be notified as soon as the 334Page 15 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

student completes the course. Another commenter stated that post-training notifications 335 should be sent quarterly, or at most monthl y. EPA believes that submitting notifications 336 at the time the student finishes the course would be too burdensome for training 337 providers. Furthermore, it is not necessary for student information to be submitted the 338 same day the course is completed. On th e other hand, with quarterly notifications, 339 information for some students would not be submitted to EPA for almost three months 340 after the training was completed. There are times when EPA uses the information from 341 notifications to verify whether a certain pe rson is a certified renovator. A delay of three 342
months increases the likelihood of this inform ation not being available when the Agency 343 needs it. As a compromise, and as one of the commenters suggested, the Agency is 344 requiring the notifications to be sub mitted every month. Specifically, for renovator 345 refresher courses without hands -on training, training providers must submit post-training 346 notifications to EPA anytime from the first to tenth day of the month that includes the 347 required information on students who comple ted the course in the previous month. 348 The Agency is requiring training provi ders that teach the refresher training 349 entirely online via e-learning to include the expiration of th e renovator’s certification in 350 the post-training notification. Now that renovator certifications can be either three or five 351 years, it is important to have the expiration date on the notification so EPA can tell when 352 the renovator’s certification expires and whether he or she took the course that is taught 353 entirely online via e-learning . The Agency is also requiring course completion certificates 354 for all renovator courses to include the expira tion of the certification. Because of the two 355 different certification timeframes, it is important for the certificate to clearly state when 356 the certification expires. This information ma y be of help to various parties including 357 homeowners and training providers. Homeowners may want to verify that the certified 358Page 16 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

renovators working in their homes are curren tly certified. Training providers who teach 359 the refresher training are required to verify whether the student is eligible to take the 360 refresher training which would be difficu lt to do without knowing when the renovator’s 361 certification expires. 362 F. Grandfathering 363 In the 2008 RRP rule (Ref. 1), EPA created a grandfather provision that allowed 364 renovators who have taken an EPA, Depar tment of Housing and Urban Development 365 (HUD), or EPA/HUD model renovation training course, to take the 4-hour refresher 366 renovator training in lieu of the 8-hour initia l course to receive thei r initial cer tification. 367 In a subsequent rulemaking, the regulations we re changed (Ref. 7) to allow renovators to 368 take advantage of the provision only if they had taken the prerequi site course before 369 October 4, 2011. Now that the Agency is allowing a refresher course that does not have a 370 hands-on requirement, the grandfather provision would have allowed a student to receive 371 initial renovator certification by taking an onlinee-learning refresher course that does not 372 have hands-on training. EPA received severa l comments about the grandfather provision. 373 Commenters were concerned that, under the propo sal, renovators would be able to take 374 the refresher course without hands-on trai ning as their initial renovator training. 375 EPA believes that it is important for renova tors to have hands-on training when 376 they receive their initial certification. To address commenters’ concerns, EPA will ensure 377 that all renovators have hands-on training when they get their initial certification, by 378 requiring renovators who take advantage of the grandfather provision to take a refresher 379 training that includes hands-on training. Therefo re, only renovators that have received 380 their initial certification under the RRP program may take the renovator refresher course 381 that does not include hands-on training. 382Page 17 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

III. Economic Analysis 383 EPA’s economic analysis of the potential costs and savings associated with this 384 action (Ref. 3), is available in the docket and is briefly summarized in this Unit. 385 The rule amendments do not preempt regula tions by states, territories, or tribal 386 governments that have their own authorized lead programs, so these estimates only 387 reflect changes in EPA-administered jurisdictions. 388 Over 500,000 renovators have been traine d and certified under the federal RRP 389 program since renovator training became mandatory in 2010. Since a large number of 390 renovators received their initial certification in the first year of the program, there will be 391 some initial cyclicalit y in the annual number of renovato rs recertified. However, this 392 cyclicality will decrease over time as trained re novators exit the industry and are replaced 393 by new entrants. EPA’s analysis makes the simplifying assumptions that under the 394 existing regulation (where all refresher training is valid for five years) there will be a 395 steady state average of 100,000 renovators per year with expiring certifications, and 396 30,000 renovators per year will leave the industr y and be replaced by new entrants who 397 must take the initial training course. So an average of 70,000 renovators per year would 398
take the refresher course in the baseline. 399 In the baseline, both initial and refresher renovator training must have a hands-on 400 component, and renovator certification and rece rtification are both valid for five years. 401 EPA considered several options for revisi ng the hands-on requirement for renovator 402 refresher training. The options differed in terms of the length of time for which 403 recertification based on refresher training without a hands-on component would be valid, 404 as well as the number of training cycles in which hands-on refresher training would have 405 to be taken (i.e., every other time, every third time, or never). The options that EPA 406Page 18 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

analyzed are summarized in Table 1. The final rule reflects the refresher training 407 requirements in Option 4(c). 408 Table 1. Options for Renovator Refresher Training Analyzed in the Economic Analysis

Option Period for which recertification is valid

based on refresher training with a hands-on component Period for which recertification is valid based on refresher training without a hands-on component Number of training cycles in which hands-on refresher

training must be taken

Existing rule 5 years Not allowed 1 Option 1 5 years 5 years 0 Option 2 5 years 5 years 2 Option 3(a) 5 years 2 years 0 Option 3(b) 5 years 3 years 0 Option 4(a) 5 years 2 years 2 Option 4(b) 5 years 2 years 3 Option 4(c) 5 years 3 years 2 Option 4(d) 5 years 3 years 3 The final rule is Option 4(c). 409 Allowing refresher training to be ta ught without the hands-on component will 410 reduce costs for training providers because they will no longer have to purchase the 411 supplies required for hands-on training. As a result, the average cost per student of 412 providing such a course is expected to be $45 less than the baseline cost. Some or all of 413 these savings may be passed on to the students in the form of lower tuition. 414 Refresher training without a hands-on component can be taken entirely online via 415 e-learning . Most training providers currently offering the classroom portion of a 416 renovator training course online charge the same tuition whether the class is taken in 417 person or online, suggesting that the costs of providing onlinee-learning and in-person 418 training are similar. But renovators taking a course entirely onlinevia e-learning will 419 avoid the time and associated expenses needed to travel to a training site, at an average 420 savings of $144 per person. 421 Due to the cost savings, as many as 400 training providers might offer refresher 422 training via onlinee-learning if the hands-on requirement is revised, and many renovators 423Page 19 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

will take their training onlinevia e-learning . But some renovators w ill still chose to take 424 their training in person even when they are eligible for an onlinee-learning class. EPA 425 considered three different scenarios for how renovators might respond if the hands-on 426 requirement is modified, assuming that 50% , 75%, or 90% of renovators would choose to 427 take their training online if they are allowed to do so. This means that at least 10%, 25%, 428 or 50% of renovators would choose to take all of their training in person under each 429 option. And under Options 2 and 4, renovators who chose to take training without a 430 hands-on component would have to take hands-on training in a subsequent training cycle. 431 So under these options, the number of renovato rs being trained in person in any given 432 year exceeds 10%, 25%, or 50% of the total num ber of renovators trained that year. Table 433 2 lists the annual number of renovators tr ained under each option. To simplify the 434 analysis, renovators are assumed to take training without a hands-on component onlinevia 435 e-learning , although the rule would also allow such training to be taken in person. The 436 range in the results for each option reflects the different scenarios for the number of 437 renovators electing to take onlinee-learning training. 438

439 Table 2. Average Annual Number of Renovators Trained by Option Option New renovators taking initial

training Renovators taking in-person refresher training Renovators taking online-only refresher training Total renovators taking refresher training Existing rule 30,000 70,000 0 70,000 Option 1 30,000 7,000 to 35,000 35,000 to 63,000 70,000 Option 2 30,000 33,000 to 49,000 21,000 to 37,000 70,000 Option 3(a) 30,000 7,000 to 35,000 88,000 to 158,000 123,000 to 165,000 Option 3(b) 30,000 7,000 to 35,000 58,000 to 105,000 93,000 to 112,000 Option 4(a) 30,000 50,000 to 59,000 27,000 to 49,000 86,000 to 100,000 Option 4(b) 30,000 39,000 to 53,000 43,000 to 78,000 96,000 to 117,000 Option 4(c) 30,000 43,000 to 55,000 25,000 to 44,000 80,000 to 88,000 Option 4(d) 30,000 31,000 to 48,000 36,000 to 65,000 84,000 to 96,000 The final rule is Option 4(c). 440 The rule amendments also change the notification requirements for training 441Page 20 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

courses. Post-training notifica tions will have to include the expiration date for each 442 renovator’s certification, but it take s a negligible effort for the training provider to submit 443 this information. Training providers will not be required to submit pre-notifications for 444 onlinee-learning courses that have no in-person com ponent, which will reduce the total 445 number of submissions by between 4,000 and 7,0 00 per year. The amendments also allow 446 training providers to submit pos t-notifications once a month for onlinee-learning courses 447 that have no in-person component, instead of no later than ten business days following 448 course completion. Such mont hly notifications would have to be submitted though EPA’s 449 CDX system, but approximately 92% of notifications are already submitted via CDX. 450 Assuming that 400 training providers offer onlinee-learning refresher training, up to 451 4,800 post-training notificati ons could be submitted for onlinee-learning training each 452 year. This is a reduction compared to the numbe r of post-training notifications that would 453 be submitted if the amendments did not allow monthly reporting for onlinee-learning 454 training, and it is partially offset by a reduction in the number of post-training 455 notifications for in-person classes. 456 And the rule removes the $35 multi-jurisdiction registration fee that individuals, 457 firms, and training providers currently pay wh en they apply to perform lead-based paint 458 activities or provide training for that program in additional EPA-administered 459 jurisdictions. In a typical year, these entities apply to work in a total of 431 additional 460 jurisdictions. 461 The rule requires training providers to include the expiration date of the 462 renovator’s certification in the post-training notification, but the time required to do this 463 is negligible. The rule also clarifies the requirements for the time-frame to submit post464 training notifications for in-person training courses. The burden and cost of this activity 465Page 21 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

were already accounted for in previous ec onomic analyses and ICRs for the lead 466 program, and are not repeated here in order to avoid double-counting these costs. Another 467 revision adds clarifying language explaining that training providers must follow the 468 regulations. This does not affect the estimate d cost of compliance because it does not 469 change any requirements for accredited training providers. 470 Table 3 presents the total cost savings of the rule options, including modifying the 471 notification requirements for training providers, and removing the multi-jurisdiction fee. 472 The final rule, which is Option 4(c), is estima ted to result in cost savings of $1.8 million 473 to $3.4 million per year (in 2014 dollars). The ru le reduces the cost of providing and 474 taking refresher training enough that complianc e costs decrease even though reducing the 475 certification period to 3 years for renovators ta king refresher training without a hands-on 476 component is projected to increase the to tal number of renovators trained per year. 477

478 Table 3. Total Annualized Cost Savings of Minor Amendments Rule Option Description of Modifications to Refresher Training Recertification Requirements Total Cost Savings ($ million per year) Option 1 Training without hands-on valid for 5 years $8.2 to $12.4 Option 2 Training without hands-on component valid for 5 years. Hands-on training required every other recertification period. $3.9 to $7.0 Option 3(a) Training without hands-on valid for 2 years. $1.8 to $3.4 Option 3(b) Training without hands-on valid for 3 years. $4.5 to $8.2Option 4(a) Training without hands-on valid for 2 years. Handson training required every 2 cycles. $0.5 to $1.0Option 4(b) Training without hands-on valid for 2 years. Handson training required every 3 cycles. $0.9 to $1.6 Option 4(c) – Final Rule Training without hands-on valid for 3 years. Hands-on training required every 2 cycles. $1.8 to $3.4Option 4(d) Training without hands-on valid for 3 years. Handson training required every 3 cycles. $2.7 to $5.0Cost savings for all options reflect revisions to the renovator refresher training requirements, changes to the preand post-training notifications, and the removal of the multi-jurisdiction registration fee. Recertification based on refresher training with a hands-on component is valid for 5 years under all of the options. IV. References 479Page 22 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

The following is a listing of the documents that are specifically referenced in this 480
document. The docket includes these documents and other information considered by 481 EPA, including documents that are referenced within the documents that are included in 482 the docket, even if the referenced document is not physically located in the docket. For 483 assistance in locating these other documents, please consult the technical person listed 484
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

. 485 1. Lead; Renovation, Repair, and Painting Program; Final Rule. Federal Register 486 (73 FR 21692, April 22, 2008) (FRL-8355-7). 487 2. Lead; Requirements for Lead-Based Paint Activities in Target Housing and 488 Child-Occupied Facilities; Final Rule. Federal Register (61 FR 45778, August 29, 1996) 489 (FRL-5389-9). 490 3. EPA. Economic Analysis for the Lead-Based Paint Program Minor 491 Amendments Final Rule (Ec onomic Analysis). October 2015. 492 4. EPA. Response to Public Comments; L ead-based Paint Programs; Amendment 493 to Jurisdiction-Specific Certification a nd Accreditation Requirements and Renovator 494 Refresher Training Requirem ents Rulemaking. October 2015. 495 5. Lead; Fees for Accreditation of Traini ng Programs and Certification of Lead496 based Paint Activities Contractors; Final Rule. Federal Register (64 FR 31091, June 9, 497 1999) (FRL-6058-6). 498 6. Lead; Minor Amendments to the Re novation, Repair, and Painting Program; 499
Final Rule. Federal Register (74 FR 34257, July 15, 2009) (FRL-8422-7). 500 7. Lead; Clearance and Clearance Testing Requirements for the Renovation, 501 Repair, and Painting Program; Final Rule. Federal Register (76 FR 47918, August 5, 502 2011) (FRL-8881-8). 503Page 23 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

8. EPA. Information Collection Request (ICR) for TSCA sections 402 and 404 504 Training, Certification, Accreditation and St andards for Lead-Based Paint Activities and 505 Renovation, Repair, and Painting. EPA ICR No. 2502.02 and OMB No. 2070-0192. 506 October 2015. 507 V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 508 A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive Order 13563: 509 Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review 510 This action is a significant regulatory action that was submitted to the Office of 511 Management and Budget (OMB) for review under Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 512 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), and any changes 513 made in response to OMB recommenda tions are documented in the docket. 514 EPA prepared an economic analysis of th e potential cost savings associated with 515 this action (Ref. 3), which is available in the docket and is briefly summarized in Unit III. 516 B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 517 The information collection requirements in this rule have been submitted to OMB 518 for review and approval under the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq . The ICR document 519 prepared by EPA has been assigned EPA ICR No. 2502.02 and the OMB Control No. 520 2070-0192 (Ref. 8). The ICR document provides a detailed presentati on of the estimated 521 burden and costs predicted as a result of this action. You can find a copy of the ICR in the 522 docket for this rule, and it is briefly summarized here. The information collection 523 requirements are not enforceable until OMB approves them. 524 Respondents/affected entities: The rule affects information collection activities by 525 training providers that wish to offer onlinee-learning refresher training. 526 Respondent’s obligation to respond: Although training providers have the option of 527Page 24 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

choosing whether to offer such training, once an entity chooses to do so, the information 528 collection activities contained in this rule become mandatory. 529 Estimated number of respondents: 400. 530 Frequency of response: 1, on occasion. 531 Total estimated burden: 2,656 hours (per year). Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). 532 Total estimated burden cost: $113.942 (per year), includes $0 annualized capital or 533 operation & maintenance costs. 534 Change in approved burden: The total burden in OMB’s inventory for the existing, 535 approved ICR for the lead paint pr ogram is 3,312,524 hours (OMB Control No. 2070- 536 0155, EPA ICR No. 1715.13). With the additi on of the 2,656 hours related to this rule 537 amendments (which qualifies as a program change), the total annual burden for the lead 538 paint program is estimated to be 3,315,180 hours. 539 An agency may not conduct or sponsor, a nd a person is not required to respond to, 540 a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The 541 OMB control numbers for the EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9. 542 When OMB approves this ICR, the Agency will announce that approval in the Federal 543 Register and publish a technical amendment to 40 CFR part 9 to display the OMB 544 control number for the approved information collection activities contained in this final 545
rule. 546 C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 547 I certify that this action will not ha ve a significant economic impact on a 548
substantial number of small en tities under the RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. In making this 549 determination, the impact of c oncern is any significant adverse economic impact on small 550 entities. An agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on 551Page 25 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no net 552 burden or otherwise has a positive economic e ffect on the small entities subject to the 553
rule. 554 Eliminating multi-jurisdiction registration fees saves money for entities that wish 555 to perform LBP activities in multiple jurisdictions. The rule also allows training providers 556 (many of which are small businesses) additiona l flexibility in how they offer training. 557 OnlineE-learning training is already allowed for th e classroom component of both initial 558 and refresher training, and training providers can choose whether or not to offer it. The 559 amended rule still allows training providers to choose what type of training to offer 560 because they can continue to offer refresher training with a hands-on component, begin 561 offering onlinee-learning training without the hands-on component, or offer both types of 562 training. 563 Training providers that volunt arily choose to start offering onlinee-learning 564 refresher training without a hands-on com ponent would incur costs for some activities 565 (e.g., applying for a new accreditation) but they would reduce other expenses (e.g., 566 supplies for the hands-on training). See the Economic Analysis (Ref. 3) for additional 567 information on the potential costs and savings of these activities. Because there is no 568 requirement mandating that tr aining providers offer an onlinee-learning refresher course, 569 training providers will not choose to offer onlinee-learning training unless the savings 570 from doing so exceed the costs, or if they can recover their costs through tuition charges, 571 increased volume of business, or other means. The rule requires training providers to 572 include the expiration date of the renova tor’s certification in the post-training 573 notification, but the time required to do this is negligible. D. Unfunded Mandates Reform 574 Act (UMRA) 575Page 26 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

This action does not contain an unf unded mandate of $100 million or more as 576 described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect 577 small governments. The rule amendments do not preempt regulations by states, 578 territories, or tribal governments that have their own authorized lead programs, so those 579 jurisdictions are not required to change their programs. 580 E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 581 This action does not have federalism impli cations as specified in Executive Order 582 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). It will not ha ve substantial direct effects on the 583 states, on the relationship between the nati onal government and the states, or on the 584 distribution of power and responsibilities am ong the various levels of government. 585 F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 586
Governments 587 This action does not have tribal implica tions as specified in Executive Order 588 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The rule amendments do not preempt 589 regulations by tribal governments that have their own authorized lead programs, so those 590 jurisdictions are not required to adopt thes e amendments. Tribal governments can serve 591 as training providers, and those trai ning providers that choose to offer onlinee-learning 592 refresher renovator training would incur costs for some activities (such as applying for a 593 new accreditation) but they would reduce othe r expenses (such as supplies for the hands594 on training). However, there is no requirement mandating that training providers offer an 595 onlinee-learning refresher course. So training pr oviders will not choose to offer onlinee596 learning training unless the savings of doing so exceed the costs, or if they can recover 597 their costs through tuition charges or other means. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not 598 apply to this action. 599Page 27 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Child ren from Environmental Health Risks and 600 Safety Risks 601 This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 602 1997) because it is not an economically sign ificant regulatory action as defined by 603 Executive Order 12866, and because EPA interp rets Executive Order 13045 as applying 604 only to those regulatory actions that concern h ealth or safety risks, such that the analysis 605 required under section 5-501 of the Executive Order has the potential to influence the 606 regulation. This action does not establish an environmental standard intended to mitigate 607 health or safety risks. Furthermore, the requi rements in the lead program will continue to 608 protect children, since renovators will still be required to take an 8 hour initial training 609 that includes a hands-on component; they will stil l have to take regula r refresher training; 610 the refresher training will have to include a hands-on component every other training 611 cycle; refresher training without a hands-on component will only be valid for three years; 612 and renovators will still have to comply with the work practice requirements for 613 renovation, repair or pain ting activities that disturb lead-based paint. 614 H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerni ng Regulations That Significantly Affect 615 Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 616 This action is not a significant energy action as defined in Executive Order 13211 617 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001), because it is not likel y to have a significant adverse effect 618 on the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Fu rther, this rule is not likely to have any 619 adverse energy effects because it does not require any action related to the supply, 620 distribution, or use of energy. 621 I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) 622 This rule does not involve technical sta ndards and is therefore not subject to 623Page 28 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

considerations under section 12(d) of NTTAA, 15 U.S.C. 272 note. 624 J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority 625 Populations and Low-Income Populations 626 EPA has determined that this action w ill not have dispropor tionately high and 627 adverse human health or environmental eff ects on minority or low-income populations as 628 specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). This action does 629 not directly affect the level of protection pr ovided to human health or the environment. 630 The rule removes multi-jurisdiction fees for the LBP Activities program, revises the 631 hands-on requirement for refr esher renovator training, and changes the notification 632 requirements for training providers. However, renovators will still be required to take an 633 8 hour initial training that includes a hands- on component; they will still have to take 634 regular refresher training; the refresher training will have to include a hands-on 635 component every other training cycle; refresher training without a hands-on component 636 will only be valid for three years; and renovato rs will still have to comply with the work 637 practice requirements for renovati on, repair or painting activitie s that disturb lead-based 638 paint. 639 K. Congressional Review Act (CRA) 640 This action is subject to the CRA, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., and EPA will submit a 641 rule report to each House of the Congress a nd to the Comptroller General of the United 642 States. This action is not a “major ru le” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 643Page 29 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 745 644 Environmental protection, Lea d, Lead-based paint, Renovation. 645

646 Dated: ________________ 647

648

____________________________________ 649 Gina McCarthy 650 Administrator. 651

652Page 30 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

Therefore, 40 CFR chapter I is amended as follows: 653 PART 745--[AMENDED] 654 1. The authority citation for part 745 continues to read as follows: 655 Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605, 2607, 2681-2692 and 42 U.S.C. 4852d. 656 2. In § 745.90 657 a. revise paragraph (a)(2) 658 b. revise paragraph (a)(4) 659 The addition and revisions read as follows: 660 §745.90 Renovator certification and dust sampling technician certification. 661 (a) * * * 662 (2) Individuals who have successfully comple ted an accredited abatement worker or 663 supervisor course, or indi viduals who successfully completed an EPA, HUD, or 664 EPA/HUD model renovation training course before October 4, 2011 may take an 665 accredited refresher renovator training course that includes hands-on training in lieu of 666 the initial renovator training course to become a certified renovator. 667

***** 668 (4) To maintain renovator certification or dust sampling technician certification, an 669 individual must complete a renovator or dus t sampling technician refresher course 670 accredited by EPA under §745.225 or by a State or Tribal program that is authorized 671 under subpart Q of this part within 5 years of the date the individua l completed the initial 672 course described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section. If the individual does not complete a 673 refresher course within this time, the individual must re-take the initial course to become 674 certified again. Individuals who complete a renovator course accredited by EPA or an 675 EPA authorized program on or before March 31, 2010, must complete a renovator 676Page 31 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

refresher course accredited by EPA or an EPA authorized program on or before March 677 31, 2016, to maintain renovator certification. Individuals who completed a renovator 678 course accredited by EPA or an EPA au thorized program between April 1, 2010 and 679 March 31, 2011, will have one year added to their original 5-year certification. 680 Individuals who take a renovator refresher cour se that does not include hands-on training 681 will be certified for 3 years from the date they complete the training. Individuals who 682 take a refresher training course that includes hands-on training will be certified for 5 683 years. Individuals who take the renovator re fresher without hands-on training must, for 684 their next refresher course, take a refresher course that includes hands-on training to 685 maintain renovator certification. 686

***** 687 3. In § 745.225: 688 a. Add new paragraph (a)(4). 689 b. Revise the introductory text of paragraphs (c), (d), and (e). 690 c. Add new paragraph (c)(8)(vii) 691 d. Revise paragraph (c)(13)(i) 692 e. Revise paragraphs (c)(14)(i) and (e)(2) , and (3) , (4) and (5)(viii)

. 693 f. Add new paragraph (c)(14)(ii)(D)(7) 694 The addition and revisions read as follows: 695 § 745.225 Accreditation of training programs: target housing and child-occupied 696 facilities. 697 (a) * * * 698 (4) Accredited training programs, trai ning program managers, and principal 699 instructors must comply with all of the re quirements of this section including approved 700Page 32 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

terms of the application and all of the requirements and limitations specified in any 701 accreditation documents issued to training programs. 702

***** 703 (c) Requirements for the accreditation of training programs. A training program 704 accredited by EPA to offer lead-based paint ac tivities courses, renovato r courses, or dust 705 sampling technician courses must meet the following requirements: 706

***** 707 (8) * * * 708 (viii) For renovator course completion certificates, the expiration date of 709
certification. 710

***** 711 (13) * * * 712 (i) The training manager must provide EP A with notification of all renovator, dust 713 sampling technician, or lead-based paint activities courses offered except for any 714 renovator course without hands- on training delivered via electr onic learning. The original 715 notification must be received by EPA at least 7 business days prior to the start date of any 716 renovator, dust sampling technician, or lead-based paint activities course. 717

***** 718 (14) * * * 719 (i) The training manager must provide EPA notification after the completion of 720 any renovator, dust sampling, or lead-based pa int activities course. Th is notification must 721 be received by EPA no later than 10 business days following course completion. 722 Notifications for any e-learning renovator refre sher course that does not include hands-on 723 training must be submitted via the Central Data Exchange no later than the 10 th day of the 724Page 33 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

month and include all students tr ained in the previous month. 725 (ii) * * * 726 (D) * * * 727 ( 7 ) For renovator refresher courses, th e expiration date of certification. 728

***** 729 (d) Minimum training curriculum requirements. A training program accredited by 730 EPA to offer lead-based paint courses in the specific disciplines listed in this paragraph 731 (d) must ensure that its courses of study include, at a minimum, the following course 732 topics. 733

***** 734 (e) Requirements for the accreditation of refresher training programs. A training 735 program may seek accreditation to offer refresher training courses in any of the following 736 disciplines: Inspector, risk assessor, supe rvisor, project designer, abatement worker, 737 renovator, and dust sampling technician. A trai ning program accredited by EPA to offer 738 refresher training must meet the following minimum requirements: 739 (4) A training program may apply for accreditation of a refresher course 740 concurrently with its application for accredita tion of the corresponding training course as 741 described in paragraph (b) of this section. If so, EPA shall use the approval procedure 742 described in paragraph (b) of this s ection. In addition, the minimum requirements 743 contained in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(5), (c)(6)(viii) and (c)(7) through (c)(14), and 744 (e)(1),through (e)(3) of this section shall also apply. 745 (5) * * * 746 (viii) The requirements in paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(5), (c)(6)(viii) and (c)(7) 747 through (c)(14) of this section apply to refresher training providers. 748Page 34 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

749

***** 750 (2) Refresher courses for inspector, ri sk assessor, supervisor, and abatement 751 worker must last a minimum of 8 training hour s. Refresher courses for project designer, 752 renovator, and dust sampling technician mu st last a minimum of 4 training hours. 753 Refresher courses for all disciplines except re novator and project designer must include a 754 hands-on component. Renovators must take a refresher course that includes hands-on 755 training at least every other recertification. 756 (3) Except for renovator and project desi gner courses, for all other courses 757 offered, the training program shall conduct a hands-on assessm ent. With the exception of 758 project designer courses, the training pr ogram shall conduct a course test at the 759 completion of the course . Renovators must take a refreshe r course that includes hands-on 760 training at least every other recertification. 761

***** 762 4. In § 745.238: 763 a. Remove paragraph (c)(3). 764 b. Redesignate paragraphs (c)(4) and (5) as (c)(3) and (4). 765 c. Revise the headings for paragraphs (d)(1) and (2). 766 d. Revise paragraph (e)(2). 767 The amendments read as follows: 768 § 745.238 Fees for accreditation and certification of lead-based paint activities. 769

***** 770 (d) * * * 771 (1) Certification and re-certification *** 772Page 35 of 35 [RIN 2070-AK02] ***Internal Final Agency Review Draft – Deliberative - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release***

(2) Accreditation and re-accreditation. ** * 773

***** 774 (e) * * * 775 (2) Submit application and payment in the amount specified in paragraph (c)(3) of 776 this section in accordance with the instru ctions provided with the application package. 777

***** 778