# 1 

# Smith, Peterj

From: Smith, Peterj

Sent: Friday, September 26, 2014 10:44 AM

To: Danielle Jones - OMB/OIRA (Danielle_Y_Jones@omb.eop.gov)

Cc: Hofmann, Angela; Edmonds, Marc; Mottley, T anya; Gilbreath, Jan; Anderson, Steve

Subject: (CORRECTED) EO 12866/13563 Interagency Review : RIN 2070-AK02 - Introductory Briefing

Materials for EPA's Minor Amendments to LBP Program Regulations NPRM

Attachments: EO12866_RIN2070-AK02_Lead-MinorAmendments_IntroBriefing_2014-09-29.pdf

Categories: TSCA 411 Docket



# Colleagues,

I am resending with the correct RIN identified in the subject line of my previous message. I regret the error and

apologize for any related confusion.

From: Smith, Peterj

Sent: Friday, September 26, 2014 10:41 AM

To: Danielle Jones

‐ OMB/OIRA (Danielle_Y_Jones@omb.eop.gov)

Cc: Hofmann, Angela; Edmonds, Marc; Mottley, Tanya; Gilbreath, Jan; Anderson, Steve

Subject: EO 12866/13563 Interagency Review: RIN 2070

‐ AJ22

‐ Introductory Briefing Materials for EPA's Minor

Amendments to LBP Program Regulations NPRM

Hi Danielle,

Attached are the materials for September 29th introductory briefing for interagency reviewers. Would you please

distribute the attached as appropriate?

Thank you!

_____________________________________________________________________________________ Peter J. Smith | US EPA | Office of Chemical Safety and Pollu tion Prevention | Regulatory Coordination Staff

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW | Washington, DC 20460 | phone: 202/564-0262 | e-mail: smith.peterj@epa.gov



# ***************************************************************************************************

NOTICE: Section 411 of the Toxic Substances Control Act established special docketing requirements for draft regulations

subject to an interagency review. Under the law, EPA must include in the rulemaking docket: (1) the draft of any proposed

rule under TSCA Title IV and all supporting documents that were submitted to OMB for an interagency review process;

(2) all written comments received by EPA from all of the reviewing agencies regarding those documents; and, (3) EPA’s

written responses thereto. Similar requirements also apply at the final rule stage. If you have any questions about this

requirement, please contact Angela Hofmann (564

‐ 0258) or Peter Smith (564

‐ 0262) for more information.

REMINDER: If this electronic communication explains, justifies, or documents an official action or decision, it may be

subject to federal records requirements. Please evaluate the contents of this message before deleting it.

***************************************************************************************************ProposedRuleforLead‐basedPaintProgram;AmendmentstoJurisdiction‐SpecificCertificationandAccreditationRequirementsandRenovatorRefresherTrainingRequirements(RIN2070‐AK02)September29,2014EO12866Deliberative– Donotcite,quote,orreleaseSUMMARY OF THEPROPOSEDRULE•EPAisproposingfourminorrevisionstotheLeadRenovation,Repair,andPaintingProgram(RRP)rule(April22,2008),andtheLead‐basedPaintActivitiesrule(August29,1996).EPAisproposingto:•Eliminatetherequirementthattherenovatorrefreshertraininghaveahands‐oncomponent.•Removejurisdiction‐specificcertificationandaccreditationrequirementsundertheLead‐basedPaintActivitiesprogram.•Currentlytrainingproviders,firmsandindividualsmustseekcertificationineachjurisdiction(e.g.,astate)wheretheorganizationorpersonwantstowork.•AddclarifyinglanguagetotherequirementsfortrainingprovidersunderboththeRRPandLead‐basedPaintActivitiesprograms.•Correctthetrainingnotificationrequirements.EO12866Deliberative– Donotcite,quote,orrelease|2|BACKGROUND ON THERRPRULE•Therulerequiresfirmsandrenovatorstobecertified.•Renovatorsmusttakean8‐hourtraining.•Grandfatheringprovisionallowedsomerenovatorstoqualifyfora4‐hourtraininginlieuofthelongertraining.•Over500,000renovatorshavebeencertifiedsofar.•Over200,000certificationsexpireinthebeginningofJuly2015.•Renovatorsmusttakethe4‐hourrefreshertrainingbeforetheircertificationexpires.EO12866Deliberative– Donotcite,quote,orrelease|3|HANDS‐ONREQUIREMENT FORRRPREFRESHERTRAINING•Therenovatorrefreshertrainingrequireshands‐onlearningthatcannotbedoneonline.•Currentlywiththeinitiale‐learningcourse,studentstaketheclassroomportiononlineandthentraveltoatrainingfacilitytocompletethehands‐onskillsets.•Twocommentersona2010proposedrulethoughtthatthehands‐onrequirementforrefreshertrainingmaybeunnecessary.•Therequirementlimitstheavailabilityoftherefreshertrainingandincreasescoststoconductthetraining.•Enoughinformationcouldprobablybeconveyedinane‐learningsettingtowarrantdispensingwiththehands‐onrequirement.•Inthepreambletothe2011finalrule,EPAsaidthatitwould,atsomepoint,considerwhetherhands‐ontrainingisstillnecessaryandappropriatefortherenovatorrefreshercourse.EO12866Deliberative– Donotcite,quote,orrelease|4|HANDS‐ONREQUIREMENT FORRRPREFRESHERTRAINING•AtthetimetheRPPRulebecameeffectiveitwasimportanttohavehands‐ontraininginthe4‐hourrefreshercoursebecausecertainrenovatorswereeligibletotakeonlytherefreshercoursetoreceivetheirinitialcertification(i.e.,renovatorswhoqualifiedunderthegrandfatheringprovision,andwhothereforehadnotbeenintroducedtonewskillsrequiredforRRP).•AfterOctober4,2011,however,renovatorscouldnolongertaketherefreshercoursetogaininitialcertificationeveniftheywerepreviouslyeligibletotaketherefreshercourseinlieuoftheinitialcourse.•Fromthatdateforward,allrenovatorstakingtherefreshercoursewillalreadyhavereceivedhands‐ontrainingaspartoftheirinitialrenovatorcertification(i.e.,aninitialorrefreshercourse).•Nowthatrenovatorswilltaketherefreshercourseonlyafterbeinginitiallycertifiedinawaythatincludeshands‐ontraining,EPAbelievesitislessimportantfortherefreshercoursetoincludehands‐ontraining.EO12866Deliberative– Donotcite,quote,orrelease|5|HANDS‐ONREQUIREMENT FORRRPREFRESHERTRAININGRationaleforremovingtherequirement:•Hands‐ontrainingintherefreshercourseisnolongernecessary.•Providingrefreshertrainingonlinewillbelessexpensiveandresultinlowertuition.•On‐linecourseswouldgiverenovatorseasieraccesstotrainingssavingthemtimeandmoneyresultinginmorerenovatorstakingthetraining.•Highernumberofrenovatorstakingtherefreshercourseresultsinhighercapacityofcertifiedrenovators.•Allstudentstakingtherefreshertrainingwillhavealreadyhadhands‐ontraininginthecriticalskillsets;therefore,EPAbelievesthatonlinerefreshertrainingwillbesufficient.EO12866Deliberative– Donotcite,quote,orrelease|6|HANDS‐ONREQUIREMENT FORRRPREFRESHERTRAININGTiming•Morethan200,000renovatorsmustbere‐trainedbyJuly1st,2015.•Toprovideenoughtimefortrainingproviderstogetaccreditedand200,000renovatorstotakethetraining,thefinalruleneedstobesignedbyMarch2015.EO12866Deliberative– Donotcite,quote,orrelease|7|ELIMINATINGABATEMENTPROGRAMJURISDICTIONS•Undertheabatementprogram,firms,trainingprovidersandindividualsmustapplyforandbecertifiedoraccreditedineachjurisdiction(i.e.,state,tribeorterritorywhereEPArunstheabatementprogram)wheretheywork.•Separatejurisdictionsfortheabatementprogramwerecreatedintheoriginalfeerulefinalizedin1999.Thejurisdictionfeeof$35wasdesignedtorecoverEPA’scostsforactivitiesassociatedwithissuingacertificationoraccreditationinajurisdiction.•Theproposedchangewouldeliminatethe$35fee.•Unliketheabatementprogram,theRRPprogramdoesnotrequireseparatecertificationoraccreditationineachjurisdiction.•Asinglefederalcertificationoraccreditationallowsthosecertifiedoraccreditedtoworkineveryfederaljurisdiction.•AfteryearsofimplementingtheabatementandRRPprograms,theAgencybelievesthatjurisdictionsarenotneeded.•InApril2014,thecertificationofindividualswasconsolidatedintotworegions.Currently,firmsarecertifiedbyheadquarterswithoutregionalapprovalofjurisdictions.EO12866Deliberative– Donotcite,quote,orrelease|8|ELIMINATINGABATEMENTPROGRAMJURISDICTIONSRationaleforremovingjurisdictions:•Wouldlowerburdenandcostsforapplicantsbecausetheywouldsendfewerapplicationsandpaylessinfees.•Wouldstreamlineapplicationprocessing•Regionswouldnothavetoapprovejurisdictions•EPAwouldnolongerprocessamendmentsaddingjurisdictionswithassociatedpaymentsEO12866Deliberative– Donotcite,quote,orrelease|9|CLARIFYINGTRAININGPROVIDERREQUIREMENTS•EPAisclarifyingtheregulationsforaccreditedtrainingprovidersundertheRRPruleandLead‐basedPaintActivitiesRegulations.ItwasbroughttotheAgency’sattentionthattheregulationsdidnotspecificallystatewhatconstitutedaviolationoftheregulationsat40CFR745.225.•Someotherregulatoryprovisions,suchas40CFR745.87,specificallylistvariousactivitiesthatareconsideredaviolationofTSCA.Accordingly,theAgencyisproposingtoaddastatementexplainingthattrainingprovidersmustfollowtherequirementsinthatsection.•EPAbelievesthataccreditedtrainingprovidersalreadyunderstandthis,butEPAisproposingtoaddtheclarifyinglanguagetoensureunderstandingoftherequirements– similartowhathasbeendoneinotherregulations.•Thisclarifyinglanguagedoesnotchangeanyrequirementsforaccreditedtrainingproviders.•Rationaleforclarifyingtheregulations:•Thetrainingproviderregulationswillbemoreconsistentwithotherleadprogramregulations.•Thechangewillensurethattrainingprovidersunderstandwhatconstitutesaviolation.EO12866Deliberative– Donotcite,quote,orrelease|10|CORRECTION TOTRAININGNOTIFICATIONREQUIREMENTS•Theregulationsofthe2008RRPruleinadvertentlyomittedarequirementfortrainingproviderstosendanotificationtoEPAaftereachtraining.•NotificationsprovideEPAwithinformationaboutwhotookthetraining.•Theomissionwascorrectedina2009rulemaking.•Ina2011rulemakingsomeoftheregulatorytextwasinadvertentlyremoved.•Theproposalwilladdbackthetextthatwasremovedin2011.EO12866Deliberative– Donotcite,quote,orrelease|11|IMPACTS OF THEPROPOSEDRULE•Removingthehands‐onrequirementisalsoexpectedtomakeonlinerenovatorrefreshertrainingmoreattractivetorenovators.•Estimatedtoreducethetuitionforrefreshertrainingcoursesbyanaverageof$37.•Estimatedtosaveanadditional$165byavoidingthetimeandassociatedexpensesneededtotraveltoatrainingsite.•Removingthehands‐onrequirementforrenovatorrefreshertrainingisestimatedtosaveover$9millionperyear.•Removingthe$35jurisdictionfeewillresultintotalestimatedcostsavingsofapproximately$15,000peryeartoentitiesthatapplyforadditionaljurisdictions.•Theclarifyinglanguagefortrainingprovidersdoesnotchangeanyrequirementsandthereforedoesnotimpactcosts.•Correctingthetrainingnotificationrequirementdoesnotincreasecostsandburdensfortrainersbecausethecostswerealreadyaccountedforinthe2009rule.EO12866Deliberative– Donotcite,quote,orrelease|12|IMPACTS OF THEPROPOSEDRULECategory DescriptionCosts The annualized cost savings ofthis proposed rule are estimated atapproximately $9.6 million per year using a 3% discount rate and $9.8 millionper year using a 7% discount rate.Small Entity Impacts The proposed rule will not havea significant impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities. This proposed rule would relieve regulatory burden for affectedsmall entities, and would not have a direct negative impact on any smallentities.Effects on State, Local,and Tribal GovernmentsThis proposed rule would not have a significant intergovernmental mandate,significant or unique effects on small governments, or have Federalismimplications.EO12866Deliberative– Donotcite,quote,orrelease|13|Thechartprovidesabriefoutlineofthecostsandimpactsoftheproposal.DOCKETREQUIREMENT FORINTERAGENCYCOMMENTS•EPAlooksforwardtoreceivingyourcommentsviaOMB! Asyoupreparewrittencomments,youshouldknow:•TSCATitleIV,underwhichEPA’sleadpaintprogramisauthorized,establishedspecialrulemakingrequirementsthatapplytoallrelatedproposedandfinalrules(15U.S.C.2691)•Amongotherthings,EPAmustincludeintherulemakingdocket:•ThedraftruleandallsupportingdocumentsthatweresubmittedtoOMBforinteragencyreview•AllwrittencommentsreceivedbyEPAfromreviewingagenciesregardingthosedocuments•EPA’swrittenresponses.EO12866Deliberative– Donotcite,quote,orrelease|14|