Well, 8-5 today will be at the RRP Lead course. Sounds like a fun day (note sarcasm here).
The whole thing is so open ended that a contractor has no idea if he is protected at all.This is such a big big issue, the government wants us contractors to help with it, but there is too many loop holes for people to hold you responsible years after.Right now as it sets, it not worth it unless the government is going to protect the contractor better.My biggest worry is this is going to become a bunch of rules that certain types of customers try to use as an excuse not to pay a contractor. Even if you try to comply, there is enough open areas for a lawyer to drive a barge through if a homeowner wants to try.
Thanks for this report. I think they WAY underestimate it. I also have read over some of the procedure's, and I think there are more realistic ways to accomplish the task safely, with less bureaucracy.I do think they underestimate the cost (5-8% of a typical job, whatever that is) of following the rules.
I can see some litigious SOB in the future claim a contractor was careless and polluted the ground around his house with lead. Perhaps it would be wise to take soil samples both before and after the work and have them tested. This would protect both contractor and HO by giving them clear evidence of pre-existing condition and of any change.but there is too many loop holes for people to hold you responsible years after.