Pros and Cons of Paint Chip Sampling

The July 15th EPA announcement had everyone looking for news on whether dust sampling and clearance testing were going to be added to the list of RRP requirements. There was intense interest in any changes or additions to exterior Vertical Containment, as well.

But unexpectedly, EPA threw a curve into the mix: Paint Chip Sampling to determine presence of lead in components to be disturbed in a renovation. Further, rather than requiring Certified Inspectors or Risk Assessors (as mandated by HUD, the default model for most things RRP), the EPA will allow Certified Renovators to do Chip Sampling like they are allowed to do with the two current, acceptable test kits. This ruling is stated to be in response to the criticism that current pre-testing methods produce too many false positives.

The good news about paint chip sampling:

1. Reliable testing with lab verification is good for contractors and homeowners. Addressing the reliability problem of the two accepted pre-testing methods (Lead Check® swabs and Esca-Tech’s D-Lead™ kit producing reliable positives below the acceptable false rate of 16%),  EPA is now allowing certified renovators to collect paint chip samples from painted components that will be disturbed by a renovation and submit those samples to an NLLAP- recognized entity for analysis.

EPA will modify the model certified-renovator training course to add the necessary information on sample collection, chain-of-custody, and laboratory submission procedures. In order to allow those who are already certified to learn of this option and acquire the necessary information and skills, the EPA will post the information developed for the renovator training course on its website.

EPA will also e-mail this information to certified renovation firms that provided an e-mail address on their certification applications. Lab verification provides third party, professional and defensible results eliminating the judgment errors possible with verification cards and colored chemicals comparisons.

2.  No long, involved training or additional certification. EPA believes that certified renovators who have already been trained in how to properly use a test kit will be able to learn how to properly collect a paint chip sample and submit it to an NLLAP-recognized entity from the material EPA posts on its website.

3. The cost is about the same – in materials. Collection kits run about the same as Lead Check or Esca-Tech alternatives. Pricing will find its level as this becomes more common

The bad news about paint chip sampling:

1. More record-keeping confusion. EPA will modify the recordkeeping requirements to accommodate this option and include information specific to paint chip sample collection, such as component and location tested, identity of the NLLAP entity analyzing the samples, and the sample results.

EPA is also modifying the record keeping requirements to include a certification by the certified renovator that, if paint chip samples were collected, that the samples were collected from the components in the locations specified, that the samples were submitted for analysis to the identified NLLAP-recognized entity, and that the sample results were as specified.

2. Increased time. The process to properly collect a sample takes time and precision. There are chain of custody documents, waiting for results, and proper notifications, etc.

3. Lab and mailing costs. While many labs quote analysis costs between $5 and $10 each sample, adding mailing (both ways) can add up to $10 for priority mail and a lot more for UPS and FedEx.

In what could be the most definitive result of allowing chip sampling by renovators, is the quieting of perhaps the last legitimate challenge to the RRP Rule. It would seem the EPA wants the challenges to stop (see last week’s article on the White House position) and to get RRP procedures practiced by contractors, instead of waiting to see if the next challenge is the one what will put an end to the inconvenience.