http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/rrpfactsheet2008.htm

After April 2010, the EPA will be taking lead abatement in remodeled houses a LOT more seriously...

And if you don't think so...just ignore the EPA...and suffer the consequences....

The sold as is houses will be a huge hazard for those young families who could afford the house but not the repairs.

The same argument holds.

It is tough to make affordable housing when rules and regulations keep driving up the cost of both new housing and repairs and renovation to old housing stock.

The EPAs main purpose is to justify the EPA.

Children's blood lead levels have been falling since lead was removed from gasoline.

Better is the enemy of good enough.

But some of us think there is a scientific basis for environmental regulations, and are aware there is a public process before new ones are implemented.

And EPA doesn't pull this stuff out of thin air. EPA's authority to assess environmental risk is circumscribed by law, and is highly influenced by both the President and Congress. Regulations that are put in place are often in response to specific acts passed by Congress directing EPA to develop and implement regulations. EPA has enough to do without trying to invent new regulations to mindlessly harass people with.

I agree that regulation is often imperfect, but that doesn't mean I condemn it whenever it occurs.

Funny, they pulled the most recent rules decreasing Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) in drinking water out of thin air.

It turns out they also caused lead leaching in older lead supply lines in Washington, DC.

The whole fiasco now require the Corpse of Engineers to add back organophoshate to the EPA compliant water to stop the problem created by complying with the new TDS standard.

The EPA failed to even consult with their 'in house' corrosion experts.

The EPA is free to ignore any comments made during the 'public comment' period, and let interested parties pursue them on court.

They screwed up asbestos removal, they screwed up TDS in water, what is there next screw up going to be? And how much will we pay for it?

When you make sweeping, general characterizations like "EPA's main purpose is to justify EPA, " or "They screwed up asbestos removal," I just don't find it particularly enlightening. I've worked in environmental engineering on both sides -- both public and private sector -- and I have a different view. My whole point in even responding in the first place was to simply assert that some people think there can be benefits to regulation and that not everyone thinks EPA is evil and incompetent.

And now I'm done.

The latest example is the Consumer product Safety information Act scheduled to take effect in February, 2010.

This law is intended to protect American nchildren(in part) from toys with dangerous finishes/materials. Something that is needed, to be sure.

Oops, seems they did NOT do their homework. The law will do what it is intended, but also has put the small toy/clothing/doll making companies(one person/small family) out of business.

Why? Because to make toys now, the toys/dolls/doll clothing/etc. will have to be tested---EVERY SEPARATE ITEM!!!!!!!!! At a minimum cost of $200+ PER ITEM.

That means all the guilds/clubs/individual groups who make wooden toys DONATED as well as sold, doll/clothing makers are effectively out of business.

Know what I get when talking to Senator's office personnel to complain???

"Gee, we did not expect that UNINTENDED consequence."

Yeah, that kind of protection really makes me confident in the Government.

Maybe if the parents actually parented and watched their children or invested in a can of paint?

That rule seems to only apply when lead paint is present and will be disturbed by the work. Rather sensible, actually.

The EPA has made the regulations so tight that it's virtually impossible for an old power plant to meet them. Much cheaper to build a new plant. Oh, but wait, you can't do that because most states won't allow new power plants to be built. (See CA's entirely self-induced power shortage.) The company can at least upgrade to increase efficiency and lower pollution, though, right? WRONG! In the EPA's infinite wisdom, while old power plants are grandfathered in, if you make any improvements at all, you have to cme completely up to the new regulations.

Yeah, the EPA rocks. Motivated by politics and the press....

It's kind of funny how they declared the lake I lived next to "cured" of arsenic after a dredging only to say "oops! I guess you all got poisoned for years after!" later--and t let the company off scott-free. Ah, much better to make largely senseless politically visible splashes instead!

You wanna help? Help the saw mills in the area of our build in nor cal that are shutting down because of a joint effort of the E.P.A. and forest service eliminating the thinning of our forests. Mechanical thinning produces employment in many areas. It keeps loggers, truckers, saw mill workers, landscapers, firewood businesses all busy while producing a healthy forest that limits fire danger. All positives that they have succesfully turned into negatives for their support of the big oil corporations. They have succesfully banned burning firewood in woodstoves hurting those who are dependent on it as a primary heating source because woodburning stoves pollute? Get real here. You wanna help? Get the E.P.A. outta our face so we can get on with jobs and energy efficient ways to heat our homes lessening the dependence on fossil fuels.