The EPA's Don Lott said more LRRP cases will be filed in the coming months.

“There are a lot of cases in the pipeline and many others under review,” said Don Lott, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) associate director, waste and chemicals enforcement division, when he presented updates regarding enforcement of the EPA’s Lead Renovation Repair and Painting Rule (LRRP). The information was given to members of the Window and Door Manufacturers Association (WDMA) and the National Lumber and Building Material Dealers Association (NLBMDA) who gathered this week in Washington, D.C., for the associations’ joint legislative conference. The lead paint rule topped the agenda items in many of the meetings.

But it was in the Lead Rule Issues Panel that Lott outlined particular aspects of the rule including updates regarding enforcement.

“We have a consistent national approach to how we assess penalties, which gives an even playing field,” he said.

He added the EPA gives its regional offices general guidance each year on lead enforcement. “Because they [regional offices] deal with multiple lead rules we ask the regions to come up with an integrated strategy.”

While Lott said the EPA has several lead paint programs he did admit that because the LRRP rule is the newest most of its resources are directed here.

“Our main goal is making sure lead safe work practices are in effect,” he said.

Lott answered the question that he says the agency is asked most: Do we use the list of certified firms as a target list? “Absolutely not,” he said.

He said the agency performs two types of inspections: record review and on-site inspections.

Personally, I’d like to see more on-site inspections and I think we will see more of those,” he said.

The EPA has performed more than one thousand inspections to date, has issued more than 40 notices of non-compliance and more than 30 pre-settlement negotiations are ongoing. Additionally, two RRP complaints were filed—not settled–and according to Lott, “Many more will be issued over the next few months.”

“Of those one thousand, a lot of non-compliance is being found but it is a question of how bad it is … The majority of our tips reveal non-certified firms,” he said.

“We do need your help to identify those,” he added.

Look for more on the EPA’s lead rule in DWM’s March newscast, which will air next week on


  1. why have you not mentioned senate bill 2148?
    this would restore the opt out clause.
    the industry needs to call on this ASAP. Please get the word out

    the Lead Exposure Reduction Amendments Act of 2012 (S. 2148), would:
    • restore the “opt-out provision,” which would allow homeowners without small children or pregnant women residing in the home to decide whether to require RRP compliance;
    • suspend the RRP for homes without small children or pregnant women residing there, if EPA cannot approve one or more commercially available test kits that meet the regulation’s requirements;
    • prohibit EPA from expanding the RRP to commercial and public buildings until EPA conducts a study demonstrating the need for such an action;
    • provide a “de minimus” exemption for first-time paperwork violations and provide for an exemption for renovations after a natural disaster;
    • eliminate the requirement that recertification training be “hands on,” preventing remodelers from having to travel to training facilities out of their region.

  2. I am an instructor teaching the RRP Rule in Ft. Lauderdale. I don’t think it is a good idea to bring back the opt-out portion of the rule. It just opens the door up to abuse this rule. I do agree with you that the re-certification could do without hands-on.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *