Comment submitted by R. Epperson

Document ID: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0049-1145
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Received Date: May 15 2010, at 12:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Date Posted: May 17 2010, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: May 6 2010, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Due Date: July 6 2010, at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
Tracking Number: 80aee282
View Document:  View as format xml

View Comment

I have a certified abatement co.. we just we recieved training for the rrp rule. FRom our experience with abatement which in our terms window replacement door replacement or any part of the property remuved that tests positive for lead we consider it abatement. With proper procedures taken and dust wipe samples and lab testing we still have failed clearances sometimes. the swiffer mop is not the answer. I strongly urge your implemation of this amendment. It would definitely take some liability off the contractor and leave a much more secure feeling about the finished job. this action would requre a much thourough cleaning. make our children safe

Related Comments

    View All
Total: 150
Comment submitted by B. Cunha
Public Submission    Posted: 05/07/2010     ID: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0049-1138

Jul 06,2010 11:59 PM ET
Anonymous public comment
Public Submission    Posted: 05/07/2010     ID: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0049-1139

Jul 06,2010 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by Paul Nygren, Minnesota Lead Testers
Public Submission    Posted: 05/07/2010     ID: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0049-1140

Jul 06,2010 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by Craig Knott, Houseworks Unlimited, Inc.
Public Submission    Posted: 05/14/2010     ID: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0049-1143

Jul 06,2010 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by Eric (no surname provided)
Public Submission    Posted: 05/14/2010     ID: EPA-HQ-OPPT-2005-0049-1144

Jul 06,2010 11:59 PM ET