[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 170 (Friday, September 2, 1994)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-21578]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: September 2, 1994]


_______________________________________________________________________

Part III





Environmental Protection Agency





_______________________________________________________________________



40 CFR Part 745



Lead; Requirements for Lead-Based Paint Activities; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 1994 / 
Proposed Rules  
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY


40 CFR Part 745

[OPPTS-62128; FRL-4633-9]

RIN 2070-AC64

 

Lead; Requirements for Lead-based Paint Activities

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing regulations governing lead-based paint 
activities to ensure that individuals engaged in such activities are 
properly trained; that training programs are accredited; and that 
contractors engaged in such activities are certified. This proposed 
rule would also establish standards for performing lead-based paint 
activities and require that all lead-based paint activities be 
performed by certified individuals. When promulgated, the rule would 
fulfil the mandate of section 402 (a)(1) of Title IV of the Toxic 
Substances Control Act (TSCA). Additionally, as part of this proposed 
rule, EPA has, in accordance with section 404(d) of TSCA, developed a 
proposed Model State Program. When promulgated, this program may be 
adopted by any State that seeks to administer and enforce a State 
program under Title IV of TSCA.

DATES: Written comments in response to this proposed rule must be 
received on or before November 1, 1994. At a later date, the Agency 
will announce the time and place of an informal hearing where oral 
comments will be heard.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments, in triplicate, identified by the 
docket number OPPTS-62128, by mail to: TSCA Public Docket Office 
(7407), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental 
Protection Agency, 401 M St., SW., Washington, DC 20460. For further 
information regarding the submission of comments containing 
confidential business information (CBI), see Unit IX. of this preamble.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information: Susan B. 
Hazen, Director, Environmental Assistance Division (7408), Office of 
Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M 
St., SW., Washington, DC 20460, Telephone: 202-554-1404. TDD: 202-554-
0551. For technical questions: Diane Sheridan (202) 260-0961.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Authority
    EPA is issuing this proposed rule under the authority of section 
402 and 404 of Title IV of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (15 
U.S.C. 2682 and 2684.). Section 402(a) of TSCA directs EPA to 
promulgate regulations governing lead-based paint activities. Section 
404(a) of TSCA requires that any State that seeks to administer and 
enforce the requirements established by the Agency under section 402 or 
406 of TSCA must submit to the Administrator of EPA, in such form as 
the Administrator shall require, a request for authorization of such a 
program. Section 406 of TSCA requires EPA to publish and from time-to-
time revise, a lead hazard information pamphlet and to publish 
regulations requiring the distribution of such pamphlet. The 
requirements of section 406 are being developed in a separate 
rulemaking.
II. Objective
    The objective of this regulation is to address the nation's need 
for a qualified and properly trained workforce to assist in the 
elimination of hazards associated with lead-based paint. Providing for 
this workforce will ensure that individuals and firms will conduct 
lead-based paint activities in a way that will safeguard the 
environment and protect human health, specifically, the health of 
building occupants (especially children under 6 years of age) and the 
workers themselves.
    To successfully confront the issues associated with lead-based 
paint hazards at the national level will require the involvement of 
many partners working together. In promulgating this regulation, EPA 
will be establishing the framework required to address lead-based paint 
hazards. This framework will ultimately provide support for and enhance 
activities currently conducted by public health officials.
    In addition to a support system for public health officials, a 
suitable infrastructure is needed for other mandates of TSCA Title IV. 
These mandates include the promulgation of regulations for the 
disclosure of lead-based paint hazards in real estate transactions, and 
the development of a pamphlet to educate the public on potential 
hazards associated with renovation and remodeling activities. 
Activities such as these increase public awareness of the hazards of 
lead-based paint, resulting in the need for a workable regulatory 
infrastructure to respond to the public's concerns.
    The Agency recognizes the nation's public health communities as 
powerful contributors in support of the program outlined in this 
proposed regulation. Through the collective efforts of public health 
communities to address childhood lead poisoning in areas such as blood-
lead screening and case management, and EPA, through the identification 
and control of lead-based paint hazards, the goal of preventing the 
poisoning of children from lead-based paint will be realized 
nationwide.
III. Background
    On October 28, 1992, the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard 
Reduction Act of 1992 (``Title X'') became law. The purposes of Title X 
include:
    1. To develop a national strategy to build the infrastructure 
necessary to eliminate lead-based paint hazards in all housing as 
expeditiously as possible.
    2. To reorient the national approach to the presence of lead-based 
paint in housing to implement, on a priority basis, a broad program to 
evaluate and reduce lead-based paint hazards in the Nation's housing 
stock.
    3. To encourage effective action to prevent childhood lead 
poisoning by establishing a workable framework for lead-based paint 
hazard evaluation and reduction and by ending the current confusion 
over reasonable standards of care.
    The Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 
amended TSCA by adding a new Title IV. Several sections of Title X 
direct EPA to promulgate regulations aimed at fulfilling the purposes 
of the Title X. These include TSCA section 402, Lead-Based Paint 
Activities Training and Certification, which directs EPA to promulgate 
a final regulation to govern the training and certification of 
individuals engaged in lead-based paint activities, the accreditation 
of training programs and standards for conducting lead-based paint 
activities; and section 404, Authorized State Programs, which provides 
that any State may seek to administer and enforce the requirements 
established by the Agency under sections 402 and 406. This proposed 
rule addresses both sections 402(a) and 404(d). Rules to address the 
requirements of other sections of TSCA Title IV (e.g. sections 403 and 
406), are being proposed separately.
    Independently, these other sections of TSCA Title IV will support 
the overriding objectives of Title X. For example, a required 
information dissemination program to inform the public of lead-based 
paint hazards in the home has been proposed under section 406. Section 
403 health-based standards will be developed and promulgated to provide 
the basis for identifying hazardous levels of lead in dust, soil, and 
paint. Studies to determine whether renovation and remodelling 
activities may pose a lead-based paint hazard, as well as studies to 
determine the efficiencies of various abatement technologies are also 
being conducted under section 402(c)(2).
    Given the interrelated nature of the various sections of TSCA Title 
IV, EPA has developed and proposed a subpart A to 40 CFR part 745 which 
would serve as a reference point for the terms and provisions common to 
each of the regulations to be promulgated under Title IV. Later in this 
preamble these other sections of Title IV and their relevance to 
today's proposal will be discussed in more detail.
    Before it began the development of this proposed rule, EPA 
informally met with a broad range of interested parties to solicit 
information on the subject of lead-based paint activities training, 
accreditation, certification, and standards. In addition, the Agency 
received written comments from dozens of individuals, firms, 
organizations and States, all of whom have provided their own 
perspective on Title X. Additionally, while the Agency continued to 
meet informally with interested groups and review written comments, the 
Society for Occupational and Environmental Health (SOEH) held a series 
of workshops with experts in the worker protection and training arena 
as participants. Following the workshops, SOEH drafted and submitted to 
the Agency its recommendations for effective worker protection during 
lead-based paint activities. The Agency has included the SOEH document 
and all other written comments, and written summaries of meetings in 
the public docket.
    The Agency is grateful to all who took the time to provide 
information, ideas, and suggestions. Over the last several months, the 
Agency has carefully reviewed and considered all of this input. While 
not all points of view were incorporated in the proposed rule, this 
proposal reflects many of the thoughts and viewpoints of these 
interested parties.

IV. Scope

A. Lead-Based Paint Activities

    This proposed regulation deals with the broad category of lead-
based paint activities. The term lead-based paint activities is defined 
by section 402(b) of TSCA to mean: (1) In the case of target housing -- 
risk assessment, inspection, and abatement; and (2) in the case of any 
public building constructed before 1978, commercial building, bridge, 
or other structure or superstructure -- identification of lead-based 
paint and materials containing lead-based paint, deleading, removal of 
lead from bridges, and demolition. For the purposes of this definition, 
the term ``deleading'' means activities conducted by a person who 
offers to eliminate lead-based paint or lead-based paint hazards or to 
plan such activities. Abatement, as defined in section 401 of TSCA, 
essentially means any set of measures designed to eliminate lead-based 
paint hazards permanently. The definition of abatement in the proposed 
rule is intended to include activities performed by those individuals, 
who by design or intent, perform lead abatement as defined by TSCA 
Title IV.
    It should be noted that this proposed regulation would not require 
any person to abate lead-based paint, or to inspect for the presence of 
lead-based paint. Rather, it would establish requirements and 
procedures applicable to individuals and firms responsible for making a 
determination of the presence of lead-based paint and/or lead-based 
paint hazards and identifying control strategies to address these 
hazards. If a decision is made to conduct an abatement, this regulation 
would provide standards and procedures for conducting the abatement.
    Congress, in Title X, has purposefully excluded renovation and 
remodeling activities from the regulation's definition of abatement. 
Section 402(c)(2) of TSCA requires the Agency to conduct a study to 
assist in determining the extent to which persons engaged in specific 
renovation and remodeling activities in target housing, pre-1978 public 
buildings, and commercial buildings are exposed to lead or create lead 
hazards in the conduct of such activities. Section 402(c)(2) requires 
that this study be completed by April 28, 1995. Based on the results of 
this study and other information collected, the regulation being 
proposed today must be amended by October 28, 1996, to apply only to 
certain renovation and remodeling activities that - according to the 
section 402(c)(2) study and in consultation with labor organizations, 
contractors, and experts in lead health effects create a lead-based 
paint hazard. As part of today's proposed rule, the Agency is 
soliciting any available data that might be helpful in defining the 
risks posed to workers and/or building occupants during typical 
renovation and remodeling activities. This information will assist the 
Agency in the required rule revision. EPA recommends that States that 
are currently developing legislation for a State lead program consider 
including legislative authority for the future regulation of renovation 
and remodeling activities within the scope of the revised EPA 
regulations.
    Although the scope of this proposed regulation covers abatement 
activities as a means of controlling lead-based paint hazards, the 
Agency does not wish to suggest that total abatement is the only option 
for controlling these hazards. A wide variety of effective hazard 
control measures can be utilized. In a particular dwelling, it is 
possible that a variety of control strategies (e.g., encapsulation, 
enclosure, component replacement) may need to be utilized to address 
all of the lead-based paint hazards identified by the risk assessor. 
Complete abatement is not always the best or most appropriate response 
to address lead-based paint hazards.

B. Homeowners

    Title IV of TSCA does not specifically address whether the 
regulatory requirements developed for lead abatement contractors under 
section 402 are also intended to apply to individual homeowners who 
conduct lead-based paint activities within their own dwelling units. 
The Agency has decided that its section 402 rules should apply to all 
individuals and firms conducting lead-based paint activities in target 
housing and other specifically identified categories of buildings and 
structures, except persons who perform lead-based paint activities at 
residences which they own, unless the residence is occupied by a person 
or persons other than the owner or the owner's immediate family while 
these activities are being conducted. If the property is occupied by an 
individual that is not the owner or the owner's immediate family, any 
lead-based paint activity, conducted at that time, must be conducted by 
a certified individual.
    The very title of section 1021 of the Residential Lead-Based Paint 
Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, indicates that the scope and focus of 
this section is on training and certification requirements for 
contractors, not homeowners. Section 1021 of the 1992 Act added a new 
Title IV to TSCA. The new Title IV includes both section 402 (``Lead-
Based Paint Activities Training and Certification'') and 404 
(``Authorized State Programs''). Significantly, section 1021 itself is 
entitled ``Contractor Training and Certification.''
    There is no express requirement in the statute that homeowners 
doing lead-based paint activities in their homes must be trained and 
certified. Nor is there any such indication in the legislative history. 
The section 402(a) requirement that all abatements in target housing be 
performed by certified contractors has been interpreted by EPA to mean 
that a homeowner who hires a contractor to do abatement in his home 
must hire a contractor who is certified. EPA does not interpret this 
requirement to mean that uncertified homeowners cannot do their own 
abatements. While EPA recognizes it might be possible to draw a 
different inference from the above-referenced certified contractor 
language of section 402(a) as it stands alone, the Agency believes that 
the Congressional focus on regulating contractor activity evidenced by 
the reference in section 1021's title to ``contractors'' as well as 
certain other language in sections 402(c)(3) and 406(b) requiring 
persons who perform renovation of target housing for compensation (e.g. 
``contractors'') to provide safety pamphlets to owners and occupants 
creates enough ambiguity with respect to Congressional intent that such 
an inference need not be drawn.
    For example, in section 402(c), as discussed earlier in this 
preamble, Congress recognized that more needed to be learned about the 
risks from renovation and remodelling activities before subjecting such 
activities to regulation. Following the completion, by April 1995, of a 
study of the risks created by renovation and remodelling activities, 
Congress has required EPA to revise the section 402(a) regulations to 
apply them to those renovation and remodeling activities which create 
lead hazards. In section 402(c), Congress told EPA what factors to 
consider ``[i]n determining which contractors are engaged in such 
activities'' and required that, if EPA determines that ``any category 
of contractor'' does not require certification, EPA shall publish an 
explanation. Again, because of the fact that the Statute specifically 
mentions ``contractors'' and not ``homeowners,'' it is EPA's 
interpretation of section 402(c)(3) that Congress' focus was on the 
need to regulate contractors doing renovation and remodeling 
activities, and not homeowners doing renovation and remodeling of their 
own homes.
    EPA assumes that in writing section 402(c), Congress did not direct 
that homeowners ultimately be regulated under section 402(a) because 
Congress never intended homeowners doing abatements in their own homes 
to be covered by section 402(a) in the first place. Indeed, homeowners 
working in their own homes are more likely to be engaged in the sort of 
activities described in the definition of ``interim controls,'' which 
activities require neither training nor certification.
    While EPA recognizes that the universe of potentially regulated 
entities is broader than just contractors and homeowners doing their 
own abatements, EPA has decided to exclude only the latter category of 
individuals from the scope of these regulations. EPA has chosen to 
draft this exclusion narrowly because it recognizes the potential 
health and environmental hazards that could result from improperly 
performed abatements and wants to minimize such hazards. However, EPA 
invites comment on the scope of this exclusion as drafted and 
specifically on whether other categories of individuals or groups (e.g. 
renters abating their own apartments or volunteer organizations that do 
renovation work) should also be excluded.
    EPA is, however, concerned about the potential exposures to lead 
which an untrained and uncertified homeowner may cause to himself/
herself and other family members as a result of work done. As a result 
of this concern, EPA strongly encourages States to consider whether 
they wish to use their own legal authority to regulate work done by the 
homeowner. For example, States may wish to consider the inclusion of 
standards for lead-based paint activities in appropriate building 
codes. This approach could mirror other State and local regulatory 
programs already used to control other work done in homes such as 
electrical and plumbing work.
    In addition to encouraging States to consider programs with the 
authority to regulate homeowners, EPA plans an aggressive awareness 
campaign directed at homeowners. This program will include not only the 
design and distribution of informational materials, but the Agency also 
intends to develop seminars to alert homeowners to the potential 
hazards associated with lead-based paint activities.

C. Building Types

    In defining lead-based paint activities, section 402(b) of TSCA 
categorized target housing singly, and public buildings, commercial 
buildings, and superstructures (e.g., bridges and watertowers) 
together. Lead-based paint activities conducted in target housing are 
identified in 402(b) as risk assessment, inspection, and abatement. For 
public buildings, commercial buildings, and superstructures, 402(b) 
defines lead-based paint activities as: the identification of lead-
based paint and materials containing lead-based paint; deleading; 
removal of lead from bridges; and demolition.
    The Agency is proposing to group public building and target housing 
activities together as one category, and to group commercial building 
and superstructure activities together as a second category.
    Target housing is defined in the proposed regulation and in section 
1004 of Title X to mean ``any housing constructed prior to 1978 except 
housing for the elderly or persons with disabilities (unless any child 
who is less than 6 years of age resides or is expected to reside in 
such housing for the elderly or persons with disabilities) or any 0-
bedroom dwelling.''
    Public buildings are not defined under Title X. EPA is proposing to 
define a public building as any building built before 1978, that is 
generally open to the public or occupied or visited by children. For 
example schools, daycare centers, museums, airports, hospitals, stores, 
convention centers, and federal and other government facilities are all 
considered to be public buildings. It should be noted that all federal 
facilities, regardless of whether they are target housing, public 
buildings, commercial building, or steel structures are specifically 
covered under this regulation, as directed by TSCA section 408.
    EPA is proposing to define a commercial building as any building 
used primarily for commercial or industrial activity, which is 
generally not open to the public, or occupied or visited by children, 
including but not limited to, warehouses, factories, storage 
facilities, aircraft hangers, garages, and wholesale distribution 
facilities. Under TSCA, section 402(b) the only example of a 
superstructure listed is a bridge, but drawing on the common meaning of 
superstructure, EPA is proposing to include other structures such as 
watertowers, aboveground storage tanks, oil refineries, utility and 
other structures.
    The Agency's determination to group target housing and public 
buildings together is based on two factors. One factor is that the 
potential for lead exposure in a public building setting, such as a 
museum, school, or daycare center, is similar to the potential for lead 
exposure to children in target housing, where families and children 
reside. Consequently, EPA is proposing standards for lead-based paint 
activities in public buildings that have the same degree of 
protectiveness as those for target housing.
    The second factor in EPA's decision to propose separate categories 
is due to differences in the structural design and building materials 
that are commonly used in target housing/public buildings and those 
used in commercial buildings/superstructures. For example, the 
structural design and building materials (e.g., wallboard, ceiling 
tiles, flooring materials, wooden doorways, and window frames) found in 
public buildings are often similar to those found in target housing. 
Commercial buildings and superstructures, on the other hand, typically 
are constructed of metal, such as structural steel.
    Work practices for the conduct of lead-based paint activities also 
differ for the aforementioned categories. The building materials in 
commercial buildings and superstructures require work practices for 
deleading activities that are very different than activities associated 
with lead abatement in target housing or public buildings. For example, 
the deleading of a watertower or industrial warehouse calls for 
sophisticated rigging and scaffolding equipment and the erection of 
containment structures. These methods are not applicable to the 
abatement of lead-based paint in target housing or public buildings.
    Given these differences, as well as information supplied by the 
professional community on deleading steel structures and commercial 
buildings, the Agency believes there is little crossover between 
workers practicing in the target housing/public buildings realm and 
those in the commercial building/steel structures realm. Rather, 
evidence suggests that individuals are either working in the abatement 
of target housing and public buildings, or in the deleading of 
commercial buildings and steel structures.
    In drafting this proposal, the Agency considered information 
provided by several professional groups whose members perform work in 
commercial buildings and superstructures. Based on this information, it 
appears that a broader range of tasks are practiced by fewer categories 
of individuals working these structures. Consequently only two 
accreditation disciplines (supervisor and worker) have been established 
for individuals working in commercial buildings and superstructures.
    Therefore, this proposal would establish the following 
certification disciplines: inspector technician, inspector/risk 
assessor, supervisor, planner/project designer, and worker for target 
housing and public buildings; and supervisor and worker for commercial 
buildings and superstructures.
    EPA is also proposing standards for lead-based paint activities in 
three separate categories of facilities. These categories include 
target housing, public buildings, and commercial buildings and 
superstructures. In target housing, the standards cover inspection, 
risk assessment, and lead abatement. The second set of standards, for 
public buildings, covers the identification of lead-based paint and 
lead-containing materials, risk assessment, abatement, and demolition. 
The final set of standards are for identification, deleading, and 
demolition in commercial buildings and superstructures.
    The Agency is requesting comment on its proposed definition of 
public buildings and its proposal to regulate them in a fashion similar 
to target housing. Specifically, the Agency is interested in comment on 
whether the universe of building types covered under the proposed 
definition of public buildings comprise the appropriate range of 
building types. Further, the Agency is interested in comment on an 
alternative strategy that would decrease the number of public building 
types that should be regulated in a fashion similar to target housing.

D. Section 403

    As part of the Lead-Based Paint Exposure Reduction Act, sections 
402 and 404 represent just two of the many mandates that EPA is working 
under to address the issue of lead exposure. Section 403 of TSCA is one 
of these other mandates. That section requires that the Agency shall 
``. . .promulgate regulations which shall identify. . .lead-based paint 
hazards, lead-contaminated dust, and lead-contaminated soil.'' The 
section 403 regulations will represent EPA's determination of those 
conditions that cause exposure to lead in paint, residential soil, and 
dust that would result in adverse human health effects. EPA expects the 
findings of this rule will be one of the most widely used tools to 
assist persons who will make the decisions on whether and how to reduce 
risk from lead-based paint, soil, and dust.
    Title IV established the same 18-month deadline for promulgation of 
the section 403 rule as for the rules under sections 402 and 404. At 
this time, the Agency is still developing its proposed regulation under 
section 403. While the 403 rule, when promulgated, will be important 
for the lead exposure reduction program, it must be emphasized that it 
is essentially a source of guidance for the decisionmaker.
    This is in contrast to today's proposed rule under sections 402 and 
404, which is an infrastructure and ``how to'' type of rule. When 
promulgated, today's proposal will develop an infrastructure of 
training, certification, and standards for individuals engaged in lead-
based paint activities. The 403 rule will identify conditions resulting 
in adverse human health effects which may be eliminated pursuant to the 
standards and requirements contained in the 402 and 404 rule.
    When promulgated, the section 403 rule will be an important part of 
the federal lead exposure reduction program. However, it should be 
noted that the absence of the proposed section 403 rule at this time 
does not, in the Agency's opinion, significantly impair the public's 
ability to meaningfully comment on today's proposal. This is because 
the identification at a later date in the section 403 rule levels of 
lead that would result in adverse human health effects, is not expected 
to have a significant impact on the development of the standards and 
requirements of this proposed regulation.
    For example, the procedures established in proposed 
Sec. 745.228(b)(4) of the regulatory text for the conduct of dust 
sampling as a part of a risk assessment in target housing are not 
expected to change as a function of the level established for lead-
contaminated dust under the section 403 rule. Similarly, the number of 
course hours needed to properly train a risk assessor would probably 
not change due to the establishment of a particular definition of 
``lead-based paint hazard'' under the section 403 regulation. In 
summary, the Agency believes that the standards and requirements 
proposed in the 402 and 404 rules can be evaluated independently of the 
definitions to be proposed in the future under section 403.
    Recently, the Agency published guidance on residential lead-based 
paint, lead-contaminated dust, and lead-contaminated soil. This 
guidance is intended to be used to prioritize primary prevention 
activities that address hazards from lead in and around residences. EPA 
expects that these hazards will be among those that will be identified 
when regulations are issued under section 403. The levels and 
conditions described in this guidance should be used by decisionmakers' 
to identify lead-based paint hazards, sources of lead exposure, and the 
need for control actions in residential environments where children may 
be present.

V. Accreditation of Training Programs

A. Introduction

    Section 402(a)(1) of Title IV of TSCA requires EPA to promulgate 
regulations governing lead-based paint activities to ensure, among 
other items, that training programs for individuals engaged in lead-
based paint activities are accredited. Section 402(a)(2) states that 
these accreditation regulations must contain specific requirements for 
the accreditation of lead-based paint activities training programs for 
workers, supervisors, inspectors and planners, and other individuals 
involved in lead-based paint activities. These requirements must 
include, at least: (1) Minimum requirements for the accreditation of 
training providers, (2) minimum training curriculum requirements, (3) 
minimum training hour requirements, (4) minimum hands-on training 
requirements, (5) minimum trainee competency and proficiency 
requirements, and (6) minimum requirements for training program quality 
control. Proposed Sec. 745.225, Minimum Requirements for the 
Accreditation of Training Programs, describes a Federal accreditation 
program that EPA believes meets these requirements. Once the final rule 
is promulgated, Sec. 745.225 may be used by States, as defined by 
section 3 of TSCA as a model for purposes of establishing their own 
accreditation and certification programs in the context of applying for 
authorization under section 404 of Title IV of TSCA. The procedures for 
State program authorization are addressed in subpart Q of the 
regulatory text.

B. Framework for Training

    Under the proposed Sec. 745.225(a), training programs may be 
accredited to offer courses for the following disciplines: Inspector 
technician, inspector/risk assessor, supervisor, planner/project 
designer, and worker for target housing and public buildings; and 
supervisor and worker for commercial buildings and superstructures.
    ``Discipline'' means a specific type or category of lead-based 
paint activity. For example, an ``inspector technician for target 
housing and public buildings'' would be a discipline.
    The course content, as well as the tasks associated with these job 
disciplines, are based principally on the definition of lead-based 
paint activities under TSCA, Title IV, as well as numerous comments the 
Agency received from practitioners in the field regarding the tasks 
associated with lead-based paint activities.
    The following represents the categories, and respective roles and 
responsibilities for each discipline as proposed in this regulation:
Target Housing and Public Buildings:
    Inspector technicians would be responsible for: (1) Conducting an 
inspection for lead-based paint in target housing and in public 
buildings; (2) completing an inspection report; and (3) taking post-
abatement soil and dust clearance samples.
    Inspector/risk assessors would be responsible for all of the same 
activities as the inspector technician, as well as: (1) Conducting a 
risk assessment and other lead hazard assessment activities (such as 
screening a residence for lead hazards) in target housing and in public 
buildings; (2) completing a risk assessment report; (3) interpreting 
the results of inspections, and assessments; (4) identifying hazard 
control strategies to reduce or eliminate lead exposures; and (5) 
conducting post-abatement soil and dust clearance sampling and 
evaluating the results.
    Workers would be responsible for: Conducting abatement activities 
in accordance with the procedures and requirements of the pre-abatement 
plan.
    Supervisors would be responsible for: (1) Ensuring that abatement 
activities are conducted in accordance with regulatory requirements; 
(2) in projects involving the abatement of less than 10 units, 
developing a written pre-abatement plan and an abatement report for 
each assigned unit; (3) maintaining accessibility at all times when 
abatement activities are being conducted; and (4) ensuring completion 
of all abatement activities according to the standards of this 
regulation.
    Planners/project designers would be responsible for: (1) Designing 
abatement projects for target housing buildings with 10 or more units, 
and all projects in public buildings; (2) preparation of a pre-
abatement plan for all designed projects.
Commercial Buildings and Steel Structures:
    Workers would be responsible for: Conducting deleading activities 
in accordance with the procedures and requirements of the deleading 
plan.
    Supervisors would be responsible for: (1) Ensuring that deleading 
activities are conducted in accordance with regulatory requirements; 
(2) developing a written deleading plan and a post-abatement report for 
each assigned abatement project; (3) maintaining accessibility at all 
times when deleading activities are being conducted; (4) ensuring 
completion of all deleading activities according to the standards of 
this regulation; (5) identifying lead-based paint; and (6) completing 
all other reports required under this regulation. In the statute, 
activities associated with the inspection and assessment of lead-based 
paint are clustered together, and the Agency originally envisioned that 
it would develop one job discipline to both inspect for the presence of 
lead-based paint and to evaluate or assess any lead hazards.
    In comments to the Agency, however, contractors performing work in 
large buildings (i.e., apartment complexes, schools, etc.) indicated 
that the costs associated with requirements mandating that individuals 
conducting inspections also be required to be trained to conduct risk 
assessments (as defined by the statute) were overly burdensome. Other 
commenters suggested utilizing individuals with less skill, education 
and training to simply collect the data needed by a ``risk assessor'' 
to evaluate lead hazards. Thus, in large settings the work could be 
done at a significantly lower cost while not compromising the quality 
of either the inspection or risk assessment. Based on these comments, 
the Agency is proposing the ``inspector technician'' discipline and the 
``inspector/risk assessor'' discipline.
    The establishment of two distinct disciplines -- one as an entry 
level position, the ``inspector technician,'' who would only conduct 
inspections; and another more advanced position, the ``inspector/risk 
assessor,'' who would conduct risk assessments, but who also could 
conduct inspections -- also will enable individuals to logically 
progress in their profession.
    To foster this progression, the Agency is proposing to structure 
the inspector technician course so that it may be taken as a distinct 
course, separate from the inspector/risk assessor course. Upon passage 
of the inspector technician course, an individual would be able to 
secure certification as an inspector technician. Once certified as an 
inspector technician, an individual would be able to gain the work 
experience necessary to take the inspector/risk assessor course and to 
become certified as an inspector/risk assessor.
    On the other hand, individuals that already possess the experience 
and/or education requirements to become certified as an inspector/risk 
assessor would take the inspector technician training course and the 
inspector/risk assessor training course together as one unit. Upon 
completion of the unit, individuals would become eligible for 
certification as an inspector/risk assessor.
    By structuring the two courses in this way, the Agency also has 
avoided unnecessary duplication in training courses which individuals 
seeking to advance their careers sometimes encounter when taking 
additional training for other certifications. The content of the 
proposed inspector/risk assessor course supplements the inspector 
technician course and would not repeat any of the material from the 
inspector technician course.
    Another example of this approach can be seen in the supervisor and 
planner/project designer training courses. An individual could become 
certified as a supervisor for target housing and public buildings or as 
a planner/project designer for target housing and public buildings. 
However, to become certified as a planner/project designer, an 
individual would take the supervisor course and the planner/project 
designer course as one unit. Individuals seeking certification as a 
supervisor would only take the supervisor course, but could take the 
segment on planning/project design at a later date if they chose to 
pursue certification as a planner/project designer. Once again, the 
planner/project designer course would supplement the supervisor course 
and would not repeat any of the material from the supervisor course.
    The Agency received comments from a number of interested parties in 
reference to the need to avoid duplicative training. In response, the 
Agency considered taking a modular approach by specifying a core 
curriculum that would be common to all the categories of individuals 
conducting lead-based paint activities. However, EPA's review of the 
training requirements indicates that the only knowledge and skill 
elements common to all the categories are: background information on 
lead, health effects, and regulatory background. Because these elements 
would only make up one-half day of training, the Agency believes it is 
not practical to break out these topics as a separate core curriculum. 
Consequently, the Agency has proposed separate courses for each 
discipline.
    However, the Agency invites specific comments on its chosen 
approach and suggestions for outlining a modular approach that could be 
practicably implemented. Currently, the regulation requires a minimum 
amount of classroom time for each course (e.g. the inspector technician 
course shall last a minimum of 24 hours).
    Although the Agency feels that the advantages of classroom training 
(opportunity for student teacher interaction, the ability of the 
training provider to update or customize the course material delivery 
at the time of the course) are significant, the Agency also is 
interested and requests comment on less traditional educational 
methods. These alternative methods could include the use of videotape 
or at-home study, for the delivery of the course material.
    One such alternative would allow individuals to study course 
materials at home, and then spend one or two days at a training program 
facility to receive hands-on instruction and to take the course exam. 
This alternative would help to reduce travel expenses, may lower 
tuition costs, and would reduce the time that a trainee would have to 
miss work. The Agency is concerned however that non-classroom oriented 
instructional methods may not provide training of a quality equivalent 
to classroom instruction. Comments on the impact of quality resulting 
from alternative training methods taking into account the requirement 
for hands-on training, course test, and third party exam, are 
specifically sought as a part of this proposal.

C. Application Process

    Proposed Sec. 745.225(a) describes the process a training program 
must follow when applying for accreditation from an approving 
authority. ``Approving authority'' is defined in this proposed 
regulation to mean EPA or in the case of a State or Tribal program 
authorized by EPA under this proposal, the appropriate State agency or 
Tribal authority; an ``accredited training program'' means a training 
program that has been accredited by an approving authority to provide 
training for individuals engaged in lead-based paint activities.
    The procedures in proposed Sec. 745.225(a) would apply to all 
training programs seeking accreditation, regardless of when they began 
offering lead training. After the effective date of Sec. 745.225, only 
accredited training programs may offer lead-based paint activity 
training for individuals seeking certification under proposed 
Sec. 745.226.
    For a training program to be accredited, the program would have to 
submit an application and all of the documents and information listed 
in proposed Sec. 745.225(a)(2) to the approving authority. These 
documents would be used by the approving authority to determine if the 
training program meets the minimum requirements for accreditation of 
training programs listed in proposed Sec. 745.225(b). Training programs 
also would be required to maintain copies of all documents submitted 
with their application.
    Documents to be submitted as a part of the application would 
include a written statement signed by the training program manager that 
clearly demonstrates that the training program meets the requirements 
outlined in Sec. 745.225(b). The training manager would be responsible 
for ensuring that the training program complies with all requirements 
in proposed Sec. 745.225(b).
    The training manager must also certify that all of the program's 
principal instructor(s) and work practice instructor(s) meet the 
specified experience requirements and ensure satisfactory performance 
of the program instructors.
    Copies of the program's instructor/student manuals and the course 
agenda for each course must also be submitted with the application for 
accreditation. However, if the training program chooses to utilize EPA-
developed model course materials, they would not be required to submit 
these materials, but only to maintain them. This exclusion is not 
intended to favor the use of EPA-developed materials, but to minimize 
the documentation that a training program must submit, and thus to 
minimize the paperwork burden generated by the application process.
    Once the training program's application for accreditation is 
submitted, the approving authority would have 180 days to approve or 
disapprove the application. The approving authority may, at its 
discretion, work with training programs to address inadequacies in the 
request for accreditation. If a training program's application is 
disapproved, the program may reapply at any time. If a training 
program's application is approved, a certificate of accreditation would 
be sent to the applicant. A training program may offer basic full 
length training courses and refresher training courses in as many 
disciplines as it chooses, but would be required to seek accreditation 
for each discipline. However, a training program cannot apply for 
accreditation to teach a refresher course unless it is accredited to 
teach the full length basic course. A training program may apply for 
accreditation to teach both the full length basic training course and 
the refresher training courses simultaneously. Procedures to apply for 
accreditation to teach a refresher training course are discussed in 
unit V.F. of this preamble.

D. Minimum Requirements for the Accreditation of Training Programs

    For a training program to obtain accreditation for any of the 
courses, the program would have to demonstrate it meets the 
requirements detailed in proposed Sec. 745.225(b). The proposed 
requirements have been developed to ensure that all accredited training 
programs are offering similar high quality training courses, regardless 
of where the training programs are located.
    The training program would have to employ a qualified training 
manager, principal instructor(s), and work practice instructor(s) and 
would have the necessary facilities to teach both the lecture and 
hands-on portion of the course(s) for which the program would be 
seeking accreditation. Proposed Sec. 745.225(b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) 
lists the education and experience requirements that the Agency 
believes training managers, principal instructors, and work practice 
instructors would have to possess to ensure that training is conducted 
properly. Documents that would serve as a proof of these educational 
requirements are identified in proposed Sec. 745.225(b)(5). The Agency 
invites specific comment on the educational and work experience 
requirements it is proposing for training program managers and course 
instructors.
    The training manager is responsible for the overall quality of the 
training program from the qualifications of the instructors to the 
adequacy of the training facility. They are responsible for certifying, 
in the program application, that the program meets all of the 
accreditation requirements of this regulation, and for maintaining the 
program at that level.
    The principal instructor is responsible for the organization, 
delivery and oversight of all course materials. In this capacity the 
principal instructor has the flexibility to bring in experts (e.g. 
doctors or lawyers) to teach selected portions of the training course 
(e.g., health effects of lead or regulatory requirements). These 
experts, termed ``guest instructors,'' might not be professional 
trainers or practitioners in the lead-based paint activities arena, but 
must maintain specialized knowledge of a particular course topic.
    As a part of the educational requirements for training managers, 
and principal and work practice instructors, the Agency has proposed a 
40-hour train-the-trainer course. The Agency chose 40 hours based on 
comments it has received from a number of interested parties. On the 
other hand, several parties have expressed concern to the Agency that 
40 hours is an extensive period of time for a train-the-trainer course. 
Comments on this issue are invited, as well as the submission of 
supplemental information on the utility of a 40-hour course.
    Proposed Sec. 745.225(c) of the regulatory text lists the minimum 
curriculum requirements for each course. The minimum requirements are a 
list of topics that would be covered in each of the courses, as well as 
the specified skill areas where hands-on training would occur. There 
would be minimum curriculum requirements for inspector technicians, 
inspector/risk assessors, supervisors, planner/project designers, and 
workers in target housing and public buildings; and supervisors and 
workers in commercial buildings and superstructures. The training 
programs would also provide instruction in the standards in proposed 
Sec. 745.228 for conducting lead-based paint activities. The course 
topics that must include a hands-on exercise are noted in the proposed 
rule with an asterisk.
    Each training program's course would have to meet or exceed the 
appropriate minimum total training hour and hands-on training 
requirements as stated in proposed Sec. 745.225(b)(7) of the regulatory 
text. The hands-on training hours are included in the total number of 
training hours. The total training hours and hands-on training hour 
requirements were developed by the Agency based on its experience in 
developing other training programs for asbestos, pesticides, and radon. 
In defining the total training hour requirements, the Agency also 
considered information it has received from the EPA-sponsored Regional 
Lead Training Centers, private training providers, and other 
university-based training providers, labor organizations, and other 
interested parties. The Agency is requesting that individuals who have 
data that would support alternative minimum training hour requirements 
submit that information during the comment period for consideration.
    To ensure trainee competency and proficiency, the accredited 
training program would have to administer a course test at the end of 
the course and conduct a hands-on skills assessment. The hands-on 
skills assessment would be an evaluation of the effectiveness of the 
hands-on training which should test the ability of the trainees to 
demonstrate satisfactory performance of all the specified work 
practices and procedures described in proposed Sec. 745.225(c). Both 
the hands-on assessment and the course test would have to be 
successfully completed to pass the course.
    To ensure the quality of the training programs, programs would have 
to develop, implement, and maintain a quality control plan and submit 
the plan to the approving authority for consideration. The quality 
control plan should be developed so as to maintain and improve the 
quality of the training program over time. The plan would address 
procedures for periodic revision of training materials and the course 
test to reflect innovations in the field, and procedures to 
periodically review instructor competency.
    An example of why the provisions for quality control and periodic 
revision of course materials are important is seen in the inspector/
risk assessor course. The procedures outlined in proposed 
Sec. 745.228(b) and (e) of the regulatory text are critical for the 
conduct of risk assessments in target housing and public buildings. 
However, risk assessment, or determining the nature or severity of a 
lead-based paint hazard is an evolving field where technologies are 
advancing at rapid pace. The skills needed for assessing lead-based 
paint hazards would be addressed in the inspector/risk assessor course, 
so provisions for quality control and the periodic revision of course 
materials to include state-of-the-art advances are of the utmost 
importance to ensure professional competence.

E. Course Test

    Proposed Sec. 745.225(b)(8) outlines the requirements for the 
course test that would be administered by training programs at the 
completion of each course. The course test would be representative of 
the topics taught in the course. Although the Agency expects most 
training providers to develop and administer a written course test, EPA 
is requesting comment on the need to make special provisions for 
individuals who cannot read English, or who have a low reading 
comprehension. For example, training providers may want to develop a 
course test in a foreign language, or to administer the test orally.
    Regardless of how it is administered, training participants would 
be required to pass the course test by answering correctly at least 70 
percent of the test questions. Upon successfully passing the course 
test and the hands-on assessment, individuals would receive a course 
completion certificate. Passage of the course test and hands-on 
assessment would demonstrate that the trainee has been properly 
trained.

F. Minimum Requirements for the Accreditation of Refresher Training 
Programs

    Proposed Sec. 745.225(d) outlines the minimum requirements that 
would be required for the accreditation of refresher training programs. 
These requirements would ensure that all accredited training programs 
would offer similar high quality refresher training courses.
    Refresher training would address the following topics: An overview 
of key safety practices; an update on current laws and regulations 
(Federal, State, and local); and an update on new technologies. The 
course would be a minimum of 7 training hours and would include a 
course test to be administered at the end of the course.
    The minimum course requirements for a refresher training course 
would serve to update an individual's knowledge and skills so they can 
effectively and safely continue to practice in the field.
    In addition to its application, a training program seeking 
accreditation to teach a refresher course(s) would submit to the 
approving authority the materials to be used for the course. This 
information would be submitted for each discipline for which the 
program will be seeking accreditation. The approving authority would 
have 45 days to approve or disapprove the request for accreditation and 
to issue a certificate of accreditation. The approving authority may, 
at its discretion, work with training programs to address inadequacies 
identified in the request for accreditation. If a training program's 
application is disapproved, the program would be able to reapply at any 
time.
    A training program may offer refresher training courses in as many 
disciplines as it chooses, but would be required to seek accreditation 
for each discipline. However, a training program cannot apply for 
accreditation to teach a refresher course unless it is accredited to 
teach the full length basic course. A training program may apply for 
accreditation to teach both refresher training courses and full length 
basic training courses simultaneously. Procedures to apply for 
accreditation to teach a full length basic training course are 
discussed in paragraph C of this Unit in the preamble.

G. Re-accreditation of Training Programs

    To ensure that accredited training programs continue to offer high 
quality training, the Agency has proposed requirements at 
Sec. 745.225(e) for the re-accreditation of training programs. An 
accredited training program would have to be re-accredited every 3 
years by the approving authority. To qualify for this re-accreditation, 
an audit of the training program by the approving authority may be 
performed at the approving authority's discretion.
    The application for re-accreditation shall include a list of 
courses for which the training program is applying to teach and a 
description of any changes or updates to the training facility or 
equipment.
    In addition to the application, the training program manager would 
sign a statement certifying that: (1) The course materials meet the 
applicable curricula requirements in proposed Sec. 745.225(c); (2) the 
training manager, principal instructors, and work practice instructors 
meet the qualifications in proposed Sec. 745.225(b)(1), (b)(2), and 
(b)(3); (3) the training program complies at all times with all 
requirements in proposed Sec. 745.225(b); (4) the quality control 
program meets the requirements described in proposed 
Sec. 745.225(b)(11); and (5) that the recordkeeping requirements in 
proposed Sec. 745.225(h) are being followed.
    The training program would submit an application for re-
accreditation at least 180 days prior to expiration of its existing 
accreditation. If a training program does not submit its application 
for re-accreditation in time, EPA would not be able to guarantee that 
the application would be processed before the applicant's accreditation 
expires.

H. Suspension, Revocation, and Modification of Accredited Training 
Programs

    Proposed Sec. 745.225(f) contains the procedures that the approving 
authority would follow to suspend, revoke, or modify a training 
program's accreditation. The approving authority may, generally after 
notice and opportunity for a hearing, suspend, revoke, or modify a 
training program's accreditation if a training program or its training 
manager, or other supervisor has committed any of the acts identified 
in proposed Sec. 745.225(f).

I. Procedures for Suspension, Revocation, and Modification of Training 
Program Accreditation

    Proposed Sec. 745.225(g) of the regulatory text describes the 
procedures that the approving authority would follow if it decides to 
suspend, revoke, or modify the accreditation of a training program. 
These include procedures for notifying the program; for conducting the 
hearing, if requested; and for immediate action to suspend the 
accreditation of any program.

J. Training Program Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements

    Proposed Sec. 745.225(h) of the regulatory text outlines the 
recordkeeping and reporting requirements for accredited training 
programs. The recordkeeping requirements would ensure that the 
approving authority could obtain the information necessary to audit 
programs and ensure that approved training programs are in compliance 
with all applicable standards.
    The training program would maintain, and make available to the 
approving authority, if requested, all documents submitted to the 
approving authority as listed in proposed Sec. 745.225(a)(ii). In 
addition the training program would maintain all documents specified in 
proposed Sec. 745.225(b)(5) that demonstrate the qualifications of the 
training manager, principal instructors, and work practice instructors. 
Student files also would be maintained and would contain at a minimum, 
the results of the student's hands-on skills assessment and course 
test, and a copy of their course completion certificate. The training 
program would retain these records for a minimum of 3 years and 6 
months at the location and address specified on the training program 
accreditation application. Training programs would notify the approving 
authority 30 days prior to relocating its business or transferring the 
records.

K. Training and Other Regulatory Requirements Applicable to Lead-Based 
Paint Abatement Professionals Under the Resource Conservation and 
Recovery Act (RCRA)

    In addition to the training and recordkeeping requirements of this 
proposed rule, there are other regulations that may apply to 
individuals engaged in lead-based paint activities. Some lead-based 
paint activities may result in the generation of hazardous waste as 
defined under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). For 
convenience, this paragraph includes references to the Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) for applicable RCRA hazardous waste generator 
requirements (see 40 CFR part 262), as well as references to training 
and recordkeeping requirements. References to training and 
recordkeeping requirements are specified as needed in the following 
discussion.
    1. Training requirements. Individuals involved in projects that 
generate more than 100 kilograms/month of hazardous waste must be 
instructed in hazardous waste determination and management procedures 
relevant to their job descriptions.
    There are also RCRA training requirements cited in 40 CFR 265.16 
which are applicable to both large quantity generators of hazardous 
waste (more than 1,000 kilograms/month of hazardous waste are 
generated) and operators of the RCRA treatment, storage, and disposal 
facilities. Small quantity generators (more than 100 kilograms/month 
but less than 1,000 kilograms/month of hazardous waste are generated) 
must comply with the training requirements in 40 CFR 262.34(d). 
Individuals engaged in lead-based paint activities must be familiar 
with the requirements cited in 40 CFR 265.16(b), (c), and (d)(1) 
through (d)(4) and follow them when handling lead-based paint abatement 
waste.
    2. Maintaining training records. RCRA requires that training 
records cited in 40 CFR 265.16(d)(1) through (d)(4) be maintained by 
hazardous waste generators to show that a generator of hazardous waste 
who generates greater than 1,000 kilograms/month of hazardous waste 
(see 40 CFR 261.3 and 261.10 through 35) has completed the RCRA 
training requirements. The abatement workers' RCRA training records 
must be maintained on-site where abatement work will be performed.

VI. Certification of Individuals and Firms Engaged in Lead-Based 
Paint Activities

A. Introduction

    Section 402(a)(1) of Title IV of TSCA requires EPA to promulgate 
regulations to ensure, among other items, that contractors engaged 
inlead-based paint activities are certified. EPA interprets this 
requirement to apply to individuals, as well as firms, engaged in lead-
based paint activities.
    The term ``certified contractor,'' as defined in section 1004 of 
Title X, includes (1) a contractor, inspector or supervisor who has 
completed a training program certified by EPA and who has met any other 
requirements for certification established by EPA or who has been 
certified by any State through a program which has been found by EPA to 
be at least as protective as the Federal certification program; and (2) 
workers and designers who have fully met training requirements 
established by EPA or an approved State program.
    Accordingly, EPA has determined that an individual performing lead-
based paint activities as an inspector, supervisor, worker or designer 
is subject to regulations as a ``certified contractor'' pursuant to 
section 402. Although ``risk assessor'' was not expressly listed in the 
definition of ``certified contractor'' in section 1004 of Title X, the 
function of a risk assessor -- to prepare a risk assessment -- is 
defined as a lead-based paint activity under TSCA Title IV, section 
402(b). Consequently the Agency is proposing to define a risk assessor 
as a ``contractor'' in the same way that inspectors and supervisors are 
defined as contractors.
    At the same time the Agency recognizes that the term ``contractor'' 
may also be used to describe a firm or a company, rather than an 
individual. Consequently, the Agency is proposing regulations governing 
the activities of firms, as well as individuals engaged in lead-based 
paint activities.
    Proposed Sec. 745.226(f) of the regulatory text identifies the 
requirements firms would need to meet to obtain certification. Under 
these requirements a firm engaged in lead-based paint activities would 
submit to the approving authority a letter certifying that the firm 
will only employ certified employees to conduct lead-based paint 
activities and that the firm will adhere to the standards and 
recordkeeping requirements in proposed Sec. 745.228.
    To ensure that individuals are adequately trained and certified the 
Agency has developed two distinct training and certification programs. 
One of the programs has been designed for individuals engaged in lead-
based paint activities as workers and project planners/designers. The 
other program has been designed for individuals engaged in lead-based 
paint activities as inspectors, supervisors and risk assessors. These 
certification programs are discussed in detail in units VI.B. and C. of 
this preamble.
    Based on comments received during the development of this proposed 
rule, the Agency is proposing the use of a national certification exam 
to be included as a part of the certification process for inspector 
technicians, inspector/risk assessors and supervisors. The national 
exam is included in the certification requirements described in 
Sec. 745.226(b) for inspector technicians, inspector/risk assessors and 
supervisors.
    The Agency believes that the administration of a certification exam 
would significantly contribute to the Agency's efforts to ensure that 
individuals are adequately trained and would encourage a nationally 
consistent approach to the development of a trained and certified 
workforce. Options for the development of a national exam and the 
purpose of the exam are discussed in more detail later in units VI.D. 
and E. of this preamble.
    Proposed Sec. 745.226 of the regulatory text has also been 
developed as a model for States to use when establishing their own 
certification programs in the context of applying for authorization 
under section 404 of Title IV of TSCA.
    Although this proposed rule specifies certification requirements as 
well as standards for all individuals engaged in lead-based paint 
activities, it does not contain a requirement that particular 
activities be undertaken in any specific sequence. For example, there 
will be no requirement to conduct an inspection if, due to the 
availability of historical information, lead-based paint is presumed to 
exist and a decision to abate without an inspection has been made. 
Under such circumstances, the abatement may proceed using certified 
individuals without the conduct of a prior inspection.
    Only certified individuals may conduct the lead-based paint 
activities defined in this proposed regulation. If a homeowner decides 
to have an inspection (as defined by this proposed regulation) 
conducted, the individual providing the inspection service must be 
certified. However, any lead related work that does not meet the 
definition of a lead-based paint activity, as identified in section 
402(b)(1) and (2) and as defined by this regulation, need not be 
conducted by a certified individual. For instance, during a kitchen 
remodelling project a homeowner may decide to have the paint on only 
one wall in the kitchen tested for lead, by a non-certified individual 
or firm because such limited testing is not an ``inspection'' as that 
term is defined by the regulation. However, no individual or firm may 
perform or even offer to perform any lead-based activity, e.g. 
inspection, risk assessment, or abatement, as defined in this part, 
unless certified according to the procedures found at proposed 
Sec. 745.226.

B. Inspector Technician, Inspector/Risk Assessor, or Supervisor 
Certification

    Individuals wishing to become certified by the approving authority 
as an inspector technician, an inspector/risk assessor, or a supervisor 
would have to: (1) Successfully complete the appropriate training 
course offered by an accredited training program and secure a course 
completion certificate; (2) meet the appropriate experience and/or 
education requirements and; (3) pass the certification examination 
recognized by the approving authority.
    To be eligible to take the certification examination, an individual 
would first have to present the required training course completion 
certificate and documentation of the appropriate education/experience 
prerequisites to an official of the examination administering body. 
Documents that would be recognized as proof of these prerequisites are 
listed in proposed Sec. 745.226(b).
    Experience and/or education requirements are proposed in the 
regulatory text for inspector/risk assessors for target housing and 
public buildings, supervisors for target housing and public buildings, 
and supervisors for commercial buildings and superstructures. There are 
no experience and/or education requirements proposed for inspector 
technicians because the EPA believes that this would present an 
unnecessary barrier to entry into this field.
    Many interested parties commented that the work experience and 
educational qualifications of inspector/risk assessors and supervisors 
should be substitutable. Therefore, the Agency, in proposing education/
experience requirements, took into account its experience in developing 
training programs in the past (e.g., asbestos) and comments provided by 
a number of interested parties, such as the Regional Lead Training 
Centers, labor organizations, advocacy organizations, and trade 
organizations. Based on information received, the experience and 
education requirements for inspector/risk assessors and supervisors 
were developed by the Agency in an effort to allow individuals to 
substitute qualifying experience for education and visa versa. These 
requirements were developed to avoid excluding individuals whose 
experience might warrant qualification to become certified but who 
would not qualify on the basis of the education requirements alone. 
Proposed Sec. 745.226(b)(1) of the regulatorytext describes the 
education/experience requirements for inspector/risk assessors and 
supervisors.
    The Agency specifically requests comment on the education and/or 
experience requirements it is proposing for inspector/risk assessors 
and supervisors, and its decision not to propose any education and/or 
experience requirements for inspector technicians. It also is seeking 
comment on the administration of a national certification examination 
as discussed in units VI.D. and E. of this preamble.

C. Worker and Planner/Project Designer Certification

    Individuals wishing to become certified as workers in target 
housing and public buildings or commercial buildings and 
superstructures or planner/project designers in target housing and 
public buildings would have to successfully complete and receive a 
course completion certificate in the appropriate discipline from an 
accredited training program. There are no experience and/or education 
prerequisites for workers or planner/project designers, nor would these 
job disciplines be required to take a national certification 
examination. This decision is based on EPA's understanding of the 
definition of ``certified contractor'' in section 1004 of Title X, 
which only requires training as a precondition to certification for 
workers and planner/project designers.
    The training course completion certificate issued to a worker or 
planner/project designer would serve as an interim training certificate 
for 6 months. Within 6 months the individual would submit a valid copy 
of their course completion certificate to the approving authority. The 
approving authority would then issue a final certification to each 
worker and project designer. This certification would be valid for 3 
years. An individual would have to be re-certified by the approving 
authority before the certification expires. Training programs may wish 
to assist trainees in notifying the approving authority of their 
eligibility for certification.

D. Certification Examination

    Proposed Sec. 745.226(b) of the regulatory text describes the 
certification requirements for inspector technicians, inspector/risk 
assessors, and supervisors. Under these requirements, an individual 
would successfully complete the appropriate training course and secure 
the course completion certificate, and meet the appropriate education/
experience requirements. After obtaining a course completion 
certificate and meeting these requirements, an individual would be 
ready to take the certification examination.
    The certification examination is a key component of the Agency's 
certification program, especially for inspector technicians, inspector/
risk assessors, and supervisors. While there would be a required test 
at the end of each training course, the certification examination would 
serve as a neutral or third party examination of the applicant's 
proficiency in the appropriate training discipline. A neutral or third 
party would administer the examination in such a way that the validity 
and security of the examination are maintained. The examination would 
serve to ensure that each individual who will be certified under this 
program would have a common level of knowledge and understanding in 
their particular discipline. It is the Agency's belief that 
administration of a neutral or third party examination would encourage 
States to enter into reciprocal certification arrangements with other 
States nationwide.
    The examination itself would not be developed as part of this 
proposed regulation, but would be developed separately under the 
auspices of EPA, according to guidelines discussed in paragraph E of 
this Unit in the preamble.
    It is anticipated that the approving authority may not always be 
able to offer the certification examination immediately after an 
individual has received their course completion certificate. To allow 
individuals to begin work, the course completion certificate would also 
serve as an interim certification until evidence of successfully 
passing the next available certification examination is provided. This 
interim certification would be valid for up to 6 months. If an 
individual did not pass the certification examination and receive their 
certificate within this 6-month period, the individual would have to 
retake the appropriate course before reapplying for certification from 
the approving authority.
    After passing the certification examination and meeting the 
education/experience prerequisites, an individual would be issued a 
certificate by the approving authority. This certification would be 
valid for 3 years. There would be separate certification examinations 
offered for each discipline.
    EPA is examining various options for the development and 
administration of the certification examination. One option is for EPA 
or a State to work with a competent independent organization to develop 
and/or administer the certification examinations based on the 
guidelines discussed below. A second option is to have authorized State 
programs develop and administer their own certification examinations 
according to the Certification Examination Guidelines. A third option 
is for EPA to develop and/or administer the certification examinations. 
Comment is invited on these options and on the feasibility of an 
independent organization administering the examination. The goal of the 
certification examination process is to give each State the flexibility 
it desires in fashioning its certification program, while at the same 
time ensuring a consistent national level of competence in the lead-
based paint activities workforce.

E. Certification Examination Criterion

    The following are criterion that, although not a part of this 
proposed rule, EPA expects will be followed when developing the 
certification examination:
    1. Subject matter experts (SMEs) will be consulted throughout the 
development and early evaluation process.
    2. This consultation will be done using oral interviews and written 
questionnaires devised by the SMEs in concert with testing development 
professionals. A job or task analysis will be performed for each 
discipline. This analysis will be used in the development of the 
initial test questions and the overall development of the topical 
format of the examinations, including the amount or percentage of 
questions for each topic covered on a particular examination.
    3. A readability analysis of the test questions will be performed. 
Based on this evaluation, changes will be made as necessary in the 
construction of the test questions.
    4. Complete psychometric evaluation techniques will be utilized in 
the initial construction of the tests.
    5. A cut score workshop will be conducted to review each question 
in the item bank (or test bank). The SME's shall be used to evaluate 
each question. They would establish a level of difficulty for each 
question, as well as the percentage of each topic to be covered on the 
test. Based on their knowledge of the industry, the SMEs will provide 
an estimate of the number of candidates who would successfully complete 
each question. Once these items have been established, an appropriate, 
industry accepted procedure will be used to set a minimum passing (or 
``cut'') score for each examination.
    6. Continuous psychometric evaluation of the test questions will be 
used. The test questions will be periodically revised and updated 
through the collection of statistics regarding the performance of 
candidates on each question.
    EPA recognizes that States may wish to impose additional testing 
requirements on candidates. This practice is acceptable as long as the 
test questions used by a State do not duplicate the topics covered in 
the standardized certification examination, but rather are specific to 
State laws, regulations, and work practice requirements.

F. Certification Based on Prior Training

    EPA is aware that when the regulation becomes effective, there will 
be many individuals who have, over the past several years, already 
received training and have been working in the lead-based paint 
abatement field. While many of these individuals may not believe that 
any additional training will be necessary, the Agency has a 
responsibility to ensure that individuals engaged in lead-based paint 
activities are properly trained. The Agency does not, however, wish to 
unnecessarily burden individuals, some of whom already have years of 
experience in this field.
    Recognizing this situation, the Agency has proposed at 
Sec. 745.226(d) a procedure for certifying some of these individuals 
under a reduced set of requirements. Anyone who has received lead-based 
paint activities training between October 1, 1990, and the effective 
date of the rule may be eligible for certification under these proposed 
procedures. To become eligible for certification based on prior 
training, all individuals would have to show proof of training received 
after October 1, 1990, and that such training included a curricula 
similar to the requirements in Sec. 745.225(c).
    Inspector/risk assessors, and supervisors would also have to 
document that they meet the education and/or experience requirements 
listed in proposed Sec. 745.226(b)(1). These individuals would also 
have to successfully complete a refresher training course and pass the 
national certification examination for the appropriate discipline.
    Workers and planner/project designers seeking certification under 
these procedures would have to successfully complete a refresher 
training course.
    In considering grandfathering, the Agency invites comment on what 
criteria should be used to compare prior training with the training 
described in proposed Sec. 745.225(c). The Agency believes that some 
evaluation of the adequacy of previous training will be necessary to 
ensure that individuals are properly trained.
    The Agency has chosen the date of October 1, 1990, as the proposed 
cutoff for prior training because this is the date the Department of 
Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) ``Interim Guidelines for Hazard 
Identification and Abatement of Lead-Based Paint in Public and Indian 
Housing'' were issued. These guidelines were the most comprehensive and 
accurate information on lead-based paint inspection and abatement 
issued up to that time. EPA believes that after October 1, 1990, the 
HUD guidelines were widely distributed to training programs and that 
many individuals received training based on these guidelines. The 
Agency requests specific comment on using the HUD Guidelines as a 
rationale and the October 1, 1990 date as the cutoff point for allowing 
certification based on prior training.
    As of July 1994, 3,245 copies of the guidelines and 231 copies of 
EPA's lead inspector training course, based substantially on the HUD 
Guidelines, have been sold. Additionally, as of September 1993, 306 
copies of EPA's model lead abatement training course for supervisors 
and contractors, also substantially based on the HUD guidelines, had 
been sold. All of these materials were sold to the general public 
through the HUD contractor-operated distribution center, HUD User.
    Since the establishment of EPA-supported Regional Lead Training 
Centers (RLTC) in March 1992, the Centers have trained approximately 
2,000 individuals in the Supervisor/Contractor Course (Ref. 8) and 
approximately 2,200 individuals have received training in the RLTC's 
lead inspector training course (Ref. 9). The RLTCs use EPA's model 
courses as the basis for their training classes. Again, EPA's model 
courses draw substantially from the HUD Guidelines.
    Under the proposed rules, individuals would have up to 6 months 
after the effective date of proposed Sec. 745.225 to apply for 
certification under these prior training procedures. After that date, 
all individuals wishing to obtain certification would do so under the 
process outlined in proposed Sec. 745.226(b) and (c) of the regulatory 
text. The Agency recognizes that 6 months after Sec. 745.225 becomes 
effective may not seem like an adequate amount of time to apply for 
certification under the reduced set of requirements detailed in 
proposed Sec. 745.226(d). However, when it is considered that proposed 
Sec. 745.225 does not become effective until 2 years and 6 months after 
the rule (in its entirety) is issued or ``effective,'' the Agency 
believes that individuals will have plenty of time to prepare to apply 
for certification under the procedures in Sec. 745.226(d). The Agency 
requests comment on the procedures it is proposing for a prior 
certification.

G. Re-certification

    The Agency is aware that the lead-based paint activities field is 
evolving quickly in both inspection and abatement technology. Given 
this, under the proposed rule, refresher training would be required 
every 3 years. This requirement would be enforced by mandating that all 
certified individuals be recertified every 3 years. The Agency has 
chosen 3 years as the amount of time for re-certification for several 
reasons. EPA believes re-certification of individuals every 1 or 2 
years would be too burdensome. But, it also believes that waiting 
longer than 3 years would not allow individuals to receive timely 
updates on innovations and technological advances in the lead 
inspection and abatement field or on new regulatory requirements.
    To become re-certified, an individual would successfully complete 
an accredited 1-day refresher training course specific to the 
discipline in which the individual seeks to be recertified through an 
accredited training program; pass the refresher course test, and submit 
a refresher course completion certificate to the approving authority.

H. Suspension, Revocation, and Modification of Certification of 
Individuals Engaged in Lead-Based Paint Activities

    Pursuant to section 402(a) of TSCA, the approving authority would 
be able to, after notice and opportunity for a hearing, suspend, 
revoke, or modify an individual's certification if an individual has 
committed any one of the acts listed in Sec. 745.226(g) of the proposed 
regulatory text. In addition, the approving authority would be able to 
suspend, revoke, or modify the certification of individuals who have 
been subject to a final order imposing a civil penalty or a criminal 
conviction for engaging in a prohibited act under section 15 or section 
409 of TSCA.
    Furthermore, any individual who either: (1) Obtained certification 
through fraudulent representation or means, or (2) obtained 
certification from a training program that is not accredited to offer 
training is not considered certified for purposes of TSCA Title IV. It 
would be considered a violation of TSCA, as well as any other 
applicable provision of law, for any such individual to conduct any 
lead-based paint activities requiring certification.

I. Certification of Firms Engaged in Lead-Based Paint Activities

    Proposed Sec. 745.226(f) of the regulatory text outlines procedures 
for the certification of firms. All firms acting as contractors or 
conducting lead-based paint activities would have to be certified by 
the approving authority. To become certified, a firm would submit a 
letter to the approving authority certifying that the firm will only 
employ certified employees to conduct lead-based paint activities and 
that the firm will follow the standards and recordkeeping requirements 
in proposed Sec. 745.228.
    The Agency believes the certification of firms is necessary to 
ensure the use of a certified workforce and compliance with 
recordkeeping requirements. A certified firm would present the 
approving authority with a more manageable point of contact for 
administration and enforcement, as opposed to the Agency attempting to 
monitor the activities of every worker involved in lead-based paint 
activities. Additionally, the provisions for the identification of 
qualified firms would provide a source of information for the public to 
identify firms qualified to conduct lead-based paint activities in 
target housing, public and commercial buildings, and superstructures. 
Additionally, the required certification mechanism would also provide 
the Agency with a mechanism for notifying contractors of new 
technologies and regulatory requirements in an effective and timely 
manner. A certified firm would follow the recordkeeping standards 
outlined in Sec. 745.228 of the proposed regulatory text.

J. Suspension, Revocation, and Modification of Certification of Firms 
Engaged in Lead-Based Paint Activities

    The approving authority would be able to, after notice and 
opportunity for hearing, suspend, revoke, or modify a firm's 
certificate if a firm has committed any of the acts listed in 
Sec. 745.226(h) of the proposed regulatory text. In addition, the 
approving authority may suspend, revoke, or modify the certification of 
firms that have been subject to a final order imposing a civil penalty 
or a criminal conviction for engaging in a prohibited act under section 
15 or section 409 of TSCA.
    Furthermore any firm which either: (1) Obtained certification 
through fraudulent representation or means, or (2) fails to obtain a 
certificate from the approving Authority is not certified for purposes 
of TSCA Title IV. It shall be considered a violation of TSCA as well as 
any other applicable provision of law, for any such firm to conduct any 
lead-based paint activities requiring certification.

K. Procedures for Suspension, Revocation, or Modification of 
Certification of Individuals or Firms

    Proposed Sec. 745.226(h) outlines the procedures to be followed if 
the approving authority decides to suspend, revoke or modify the 
certification of any individual or firm. These include procedures for 
the notification of the individual or firm; the conduct of the hearing, 
if requested; and the procedures for immediate action to suspend the 
certification of any individual or firm.

VII. Standards for Conducting Lead-Based Paint Activities

A. Introduction

    Section 402(b) of TSCA requires EPA to develop training and 
certification requirements for individuals and contractors engaged in 
lead-based paint activities. The statute also states that such 
regulations shall contain standards for performing lead-based paint 
activities, taking into account reliability, effectiveness, and safety.
    In this proposed rule, EPA has divided the standards for lead-based 
paint activities into three separate categories with lead 
identification and control disciplines specified for each category. 
These categories include target housing, public buildings, and 
commercial buildings and superstructures. In target housing, the 
standards cover inspection, risk assessment, and lead abatement. The 
second set of standards, for public buildings, covers the 
identification of lead-based paint and lead-containing materials, risk 
assessment, abatement, and demolition. The final set of standards are 
for identification, deleading, and demolition in commercial buildings 
and superstructures.
    Although this proposed rule specifies certification requirements as 
well as standards for all individuals engaged in lead-based paint 
activities, it does not contain a requirement that particular 
activities be undertaken in any specific sequence. There will be no 
requirement to conduct an inspection if, due to the availability of 
historical information, lead-based paint is presumed to exist and a 
decision to abate without an inspection has been made. Under such 
circumstances, the abatement may proceed using certified individuals 
without the conduct of a prior inspection.

B. Background Documents

    The statutory timeframe for developing final standards for 
conducting lead-based paint activities under section 402(a) did not 
allow sufficient time to conduct extensive new studies and develop 
entirely new standards for the broad range of lead-based paint 
activities as defined in this proposed rule. However, the Agency was 
able to draw on a body of existing information and research in the 
development of these standards. In addition, during the development of 
this proposal, the Agency received written input from a broad range of 
individuals and groups who are currently working in the fields that 
conduct lead-based paint activities.
    One example of such resource material is the Interim HUD Lead-Based 
Paint Guidelines. The Guidelines, published in 1990, is a comprehensive 
document that covers all aspects of lead-based paint inspection and 
abatement activities. The Guidelines provided an invaluable starting 
point for the development of EPA's inspection, risk assessment, and 
abatement standards. The Guidelines are the only nationally recognized 
blueprint for conducting safe and effective abatement in target 
housing. While State and regional requirements exist for methodologies 
for some lead-based paint activities, no other set of guidelines has 
been used as extensively as the HUD Guidelines.
    Section 1017 of Title X requires that HUD issue new guidelines for 
risk assessment, inspection, interim controls, and abatement. These 
guidelines will be entitled Guidelines for the Evaluation and Reduction 
of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing. Leading experts in the field of 
lead-based paint inspection, risk assessment, and abatement have been 
consulted by HUD in developing these new guidelines, including lead-
based paint abatement trainers and abatement professionals, as well as 
government officials from the National Institute of Occupational Safety 
and Health (NIOSH), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 
(CDCP), EPA and HUD.
    Since the development of the revised guidelines paralleled the 
development of this proposed rule, the Agency was able to consult with 
HUD throughout the rule development process in an attempt to achieve 
consistency between the two documents. The Agency will, when it is 
available, include a copy of the new HUD guidelines in the public 
docket for this proposed rule.

C. Inspection for Target Housing

    The objective of an inspection is to determine, and then report, 
the existence of lead-based paint in residential dwellings through a 
surface-by-surface investigation. The data collection and reporting 
standards specified in Sec. 745.228(a) must be followed when conducting 
an inspection. Because the data collection and reporting standards are 
crucial to the accuracy of an inspection, an inspection may only be 
conducted by an individual certified as either an inspector technician 
or an inspector/risk assessor. An inspection is, by definition, 
intended to provide a comprehensive inventory of all lead-based paint 
in a dwelling unit. Consistent with this definition, the inspection 
report will provide a detailed evaluation of the presence of lead in 
all paint within the unit.
    EPA is proposing to define a unit as a room, or connected group of 
rooms, used or intended to be used by a single tenant or owner. Section 
745.228(a)(2)(ii) of the proposed regulatory text states that component 
surfaces with distinct painting histories in every unit must be tested. 
This effectively means that every unique component within a room that 
has a painted surface that has been deemed to have such a painting 
history by the inspector technician or inspector/risk assessor, would 
have to be tested.
    The requirement that every unique painted surface be tested is 
consistent with the Title X definition of an inspection involving a 
``surface-by-surface investigation.'' An inspection is intended to 
provide detailed information on the presence of lead in all paint in a 
dwelling unit, and the procedures in this proposed standard are 
intended to provide a framework to obtain this information.
    The inspection standards reflect the Agency's preliminary decision 
not to provide detailed instruction on how to perform specific lead-
based paint identification tasks, for instance, taking a paint chip 
sample or operating an XRF instrument, but instead to assure that 
analysis information is obtained and maintained as part of the 
recordkeeping requirements. Because the actual methods and techniques 
used to determine the presence of lead-based paint (the test methods) 
are constantly evolving, and improvements in technology are expected to 
continue, the standards contained in this proposed rule do not specify 
the technology to be utilized for analysis, but do require documented 
methodologies which incorporate adequate quality control procedures.
    Examples of analytical technologies capable of lead-based paint 
testing include field portable XRF and, laboratory analysis of paint 
chip samples by atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) and inductively 
coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP). EPA does not intend, 
in this regulation, to specify in detail the procedures for the 
analysis of paint for lead content. The new HUD guidelines, provide 
comprehensive guidance on both XRF sampling, and laboratory analytical 
methods, and the procedures in the guidelines should be followed when 
conducting lead-based paint testing. The Agency is considering the need 
for promulgating detailed regulatory requirements for lead-based paint 
testing and requests comment on the need for such an enforceable 
testing regulation.
    The proposed standards do require that any environmental laboratory 
analysis to determine the lead content in paint, dust, and soil, be 
done by only those laboratories recognized by the Agency as being 
capable of performing these activities.
    X-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectroscopy is widely used as a field 
inspection devise. The accumulated experience in use of XRF instruments 
has provided anecdotal evidence that they are subject to unexplained 
variances in performance. To date, there has been little comprehensive 
evaluation of the performance of XRFs under actual field conditions. 
Because of the questions raised concerning XRFs performance, EPA is 
conducting a field study of lead-based paint measurement technology. 
Results of this study will be used to shape lead-based paint testing 
guidelines which will be reflected in the new HUD guidelines and 
disseminated as guidance.
    While methodologies for determining the presence of lead-based 
paint may vary, the inspection standards would require that the 
inspector technician or inspector/risk assessor prepare an inspection 
report that would detail the findings of their inspection and the 
methods used during the inspection. The inspector technician or 
inspector/risk assessor would have to adhere to the reporting 
requirements listed in proposed Sec. 745.228(a)(6) of the regulatory 
text. Accurate completion of the report would be the enforceable 
component of the inspection standards.
    The inspection report would serve as a guide for the inspector 
technician or inspector/risk assessor to ensure that all of the 
necessary information will be obtained during an inspection. An example 
of an inspection report can be found in the HUD guidelines.
    An inspection report would have to be completed for each unit 
inspected. Upon completion of the testing, an inspection report would 
be written and would include all information required in 
Sec. 745.228(a)(6) of the proposed regulatory text. The inspection 
report would be retained by the owner of the residence or building and 
the certified firm that conducted the inspection for a period of 3 
years. Section 1018 of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard 
Reduction Act of 1992 requires that by October 1994, the Agency and HUD 
develop a regulation for the disclosure of lead-based paint hazards in 
target housing which will be offered for sale or lease. The inspection 
report would be subject to the disclosure and recordkeeping 
requirements of the section 1018 regulation.

D. Risk Assessment for Target Housing

    The Federal government's commonly held definition of risk 
assessment defines the health effects of exposure to hazardous 
materials to individuals or populations by conducting a hazard 
identification, a dose-response assessment, an exposure assessment, and 
a risk characterization (Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: 
Managing the Process, National Academy Press) (Ref. 1). This form of 
risk assessment focuses on a quantitative analysis of risk to human 
health and does not recommend options for the management of the risk. 
Risk assessment as defined by TSCA Title IV, differs from this 
traditional concept in that the inspector/risk assessor is relied upon 
to not only identify lead-based paint hazards, but to also recommend 
options for the management of these hazards.
    Section 401(16) of TSCA provides that the objective of a risk 
assessment is to determine, and then report the existence, nature, 
severity, and location of lead-based paint hazards in residential 
dwellings through an on-site investigation. This definition is based on 
the risk assessment protocols developed by HUD and the Housing 
Authority Risk Retention Group (HUD/HARRG) as mandated by amendments to 
the Housing and Community Development Act of 1987, the Lead-Based Paint 
Poisoning Prevention Act (Pub. L. 100-242).
    Under the proposed rule, a risk assessment, including the risk 
assessment report, may only be conducted by an individual certified as 
an inspector/risk assessor. However, an inspector technician may, 
assist a certified inspector/risk assessor by taking paint, soil, and 
dust samples.
    The Agency views the role of the inspector/risk assessor as pivotal 
in reducing risks associated with lead-based paint. The certified 
inspector/risk assessor will be a trained specialist equipped with the 
requisite professional credentials needed to evaluate risks associated 
with lead-based paint. The Agency envisions that a certified inspector/
risk assessor would be qualified to make a competent, and rational 
assessment of the location and severity of lead-based paint hazards. 
The procedures outlined in proposed Sec. 745.228(b) of the regulatory 
text provide a framework for the collection of risk assessment data. 
These procedures were developed on the premise that the background and 
required training of a professional inspector/risk assessor would 
enable the inspector/risk assessor to identify risks associated with 
lead-based paint hazards and to develop options for actions to 
eliminate hazards. The required training would, through the 
accreditation process outlined in this regulation, include the best 
scientific information available on characterizing hazardous levels of 
lead in paint, soil, and dust.
    As stated earlier in this preamble, the Agency is currently 
developing criteria pursuant to section 403 of TSCA for the 
identification of lead hazards in soil, dust, and paint to facilitate 
the risk assessment decision making process. When promulgated, the 
determinations made under the section 403 regulation, and associated 
guidance, will be widely disseminated by the Agency, and will be a 
required element of the training course curricula under this 
regulation.
    The standards in this regulation are intended to apply to 
individual residential dwelling units, whether in multi-unit 
residential dwelling or in single-family housing. The procedures for 
determining which units are to be assessed within a multiunit dwelling 
are not included in these standards. This decision should be made by 
the building owner or housing authority in consultation with the 
inspector/risk assessor.
    The first step of a risk assessment is to have the risk assessor 
survey the unit or dwelling to evaluate its overall condition. In 
buildings built after 1960 in relatively good condition where the 
probability of finding lead-based paint hazards is low, a comprehensive 
risk assessment may be unnecessary. To avoid the cost of conducting a 
comprehensive risk assessment, an owner of these dwellings may wish to 
have the risk assessor conduct a lead hazard screen before initiating 
the complete risk assessment. According to the HUD guidelines, such a 
screen employs more limited sampling and more sensitive hazard 
identification criteria. In general a screen involves determining 
overall paint condition in a unit, taking limited dust samples from 
floors and exterior window sills, and soil samples from bare soil. A 
detailed discussion of how to conduct a screen and the criteria used to 
evaluate the results of a screen can be found in the HUD guidelines. If 
a unit fails this screen, EPA recommends that a risk assessment, as 
described in proposed Sec. 745.228(b)(2) through (b)(9) of the 
regulatory text, be conducted. Failure of the screen indicates that 
lead hazards may be present and that a more thorough risk assessment is 
warranted to definitively identify the lead hazards within the unit.
    At this point the risk assessor would review any background 
information as described in proposed Sec. 745.228(b)(2). This data will 
contain useful information regarding the physical characteristics of 
the unit and residential use patterns within the unit. This information 
includes the age of the building or if there are children under age 6 
living in the unit, as well as information on any known lead-related 
health problems of any occupant of the dwelling unit. Further, the risk 
assessor would obtain any other available information that would 
characterize occupant use patterns that may generate or contribute to 
lead-based paint hazards. Examples of this information could include 
family hobbies that involve lead, the location of a commonly used 
entryway or commonly opened windows. The inspector/risk assessor should 
also obtain, if available, any previous test results or inspections 
regarding lead-based paint or other assessments for lead-related 
hazards. This information may prove valuable in determining the 
presence of lead-based paint without having to re-sample areas of the 
unit. However, the inspector/risk assessor must evaluate the quality 
and the reliability of any previous test results. Past inspections may 
not conform to current standards of care, possibly resulting in an 
incorrect determination of the location of lead-based paint.
    The next step in a risk assessment is to conduct a closer visual 
inspection of the condition of the painted surfaces within the unit. 
Any paint found to be deteriorated should be tested by an inspector 
technician or the inspector/risk assessor according to the procedures 
found in the inspection portion of the proposed standards. The 
inspector/risk assessor should also test any surfaces that they 
determine may be a source of lead dust or lead-based chips. These 
include friction and impact surfaces such as door and window frames, or 
painted surfaces accessible to children such as window sills or stair 
treads.
    Dust samples should be collected within each selected unit 
according in parts of the living area where children are most likely to 
come into contact with dust. These areas include bedrooms, family 
rooms, and kitchens. In general, any area that children frequent in the 
dwelling should be evaluated for lead-contaminated dust. The HUD 
guidelines as well as the currently available EPA model inspector 
course provide detailed guidance and instruction in the collection of 
dust samples in residential dwellings.
    Finally, randomly selected soil samples should be collected by an 
inspector technician or inspector/risk assessor and analyzed in order 
to adequately characterize the lead concentrations in exterior play 
areas, areas containing bare soil, and along the dripline or foundation 
area of a unit.
    All dust, soil, and where appropriate, paint samples should be sent 
to a laboratory that is fully recognized by EPA as being capable of 
performing these activities.
    As with an inspection, the data collected as part of a risk 
assessment would be documented in an assessment report. Proposed 
Sec. 745.228(b)(8) of the regulatory text describes all items required 
to be included in the risk assessment report.
    Pursuant to section 401(16) of TSCA, a risk assessment may include 
``other activity as may be appropriate.'' Based on this language, the 
Agency is proposing that the risk assessment report should, as a final 
step, identify lead hazard control strategies to address all identified 
lead-based paint hazards. A justification for each hazard control 
strategy identified must also be provided. The inspector/risk assessor 
should also prioritize each of the hazard control actions based on the 
immediacy of the hazard, and recommend a schedule to the building owner 
for addressing hazards. Clearly the most hazardous conditions (e.g. 
badly deteriorated lead-based paint) within a unit should be addressed 
as soon as possible, and before other control actions are taken.
    The risk assessment report is to be maintained by the owner of the 
residence or building, as well as the certified individual or firm that 
conducted the assessment for at least three years. This information 
would also be subject to the disclosure and recordkeeping requirements 
of the regulation developed under section 1018 of Title X.

E. Abatement for Target Housing

    Abatement is defined by section 401(1) of TSCA as ``any set of 
measures designed to permanently eliminate lead-based paint hazards.'' 
The term, as defined, includes the removal of lead-based paint and 
lead-contaminated dust, the permanent containment or encapsulation of 
lead-based paint, the replacement of lead-painted surfaces or fixtures, 
and the removal or covering of lead-contaminated soil. In addition, it 
includes all preparation, cleanup, disposal, and post-abatement 
clearance testing activities associated with such measures. By 
definition, abatement is limited to those activities that are designed 
to permanently eliminate lead-based paint hazards.
    Abatement does not include renovation and remodeling, or 
landscaping activities, whose primary intent is not to permanently 
eliminate lead-based paint hazards, but is instead to repair, restore, 
or remodel a given structure or dwelling, even though these activities 
may incidently result in a reduction in lead-based paint hazards.
    For the purposes of this regulation, the Agency will presume 
abatement to occur in the following circumstances:
    (1) Projects for which there is a written contract stating that an 
individual or firm will be conducting activities on or in a dwelling 
unit that will permanently eliminate lead-based paint hazards;
    (2) Projects involving the permanent elimination of lead-based 
paint or lead-contaminated soil conducted by firms or individuals 
certified in accordance with this regulation; or
    (3) Projects involving the permanent elimination of a lead-based 
paint hazard or lead-contaminated soil conducted by firms or 
individuals who, through their company name, promotional literature, or 
otherwise, advertise or hold themselves out to be lead abatement 
professionals. The definition of abatement includes the phrase 
``permanent containment or encapsulation.'' Encapsulation is defined as 
a process that makes lead-based paint inaccessible, by providing a 
barrier between the lead-based paint and the environment. This barrier 
is formed using a liquid applied coating or an adhesively bonded 
material. The primary means of attachment for an encapsulant is bonding 
of the product to the surface either by itself or through the use of an 
adhesive.
    The Agency recognizes the fact that all encapsulant's will degrade 
over time, so therefore, no encapsulant is truly permanent. 
Nevertheless, the Agency would consider an encapsulant to be 
``permanent'' within the meaning of TSCA Title IV if the encapsulant is 
periodically monitored and maintained over the lifetime of the surface. 
The Agency is soliciting comment on the proposed requirement for the 
periodic monitoring of encapsulants.
    The permanent containment of lead-based paint would be achieved 
through the use of a mechanical enclosure system. The enclosure should 
be a rigid, durable barrier that is mechanically attached to the 
building component, with all edges and seams sealed with caulk or other 
sealant to provide a dust-tight system.
    As defined in this proposal, an abatement would have to be 
conducted by persons certified by the appropriate approving authority 
as a worker or supervisor. Every abatement project would require a 
supervisor assigned to it who has been certified by the appropriate 
approving authority. The supervisor, if not on-site, would have to be 
available by phone and able to physically be present at the work-site 
within 2 hours. This supervisor, as well as the certified firm they 
work for, would be responsible for ensuring that all abatement 
activities in target housing are completed according to the standards 
outlined in this proposed rule.
    Regarding project designer/planners, the Agency is including in 
proposed Sec. 745.228(c)(7) of the regulatory text, a requirement that 
they prepare a written pre-abatement plan for projects involving the 
abatement of 10 or more units, since the size of these operations may 
require a level of expertise not required in single-family, or smaller 
multi-unit projects. The Agency is requesting comment on the proposed 
requirement that a project designer/planner must be utilized to design 
abatement projects for units numbering 10 or more. The Agency has also 
considered this size distinction in development of its Interim Final 
Regulations to amend the Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act's 
(AHERA) Asbestos Model Accreditation Plan to include public buildings.
    A pre-abatement plan is to be completed by the supervisor or 
project designer/planner as appropriate for the size of the work 
project. This plan would follow the standards for worker, environmental 
and occupant protection as outlined in this proposed rule. Because 
there may be a potential conflict of interest between those who conduct 
the inspection/risk assessment and those who actually do the abatement, 
it is recommended that the plan contain a statement that the persons or 
firm engaged in the inspection and/or risk assessment of a unit should 
not perform lead abatement activities in that same unit. This type of 
conflict may arise if inspector/risk assessors are in a position to 
receive a financial benefit by recommending that an abatement be 
conducted.
    To protect the health of building occupants, the rule as proposed 
would require that an occupancy protection plan be developed by the 
supervisor or planner/project designer. This plan should address what 
measures would be taken during the abatement to protect the building 
occupants, and what method of verification would be utilized to 
document this protection. In development of the plan, certain factors 
should be taken into consideration, for example, the length of 
abatement, remaining access to facilities and exits, and total area 
involved. In plans which require the relocation of occupants, samples 
would be collected, analyzed, and clearance levels met according to 
proposed Sec. 745.228(c)(9) before re-occupancy.
    An abatement project typically involves one or more of the 
following techniques: Building component replacement, the use of 
physical enclosure systems, or on-site or off-site paint removal from 
building components. It is the responsibility of the abatement 
supervisor, with possible input from the risk assessor, to determine 
the most appropriate course of action to eliminate identified lead 
hazards.
    Section 745.228(c)(6) of the proposed rule would require that the 
supervisor of an abatement job submit a pre-abatement notification to 
EPA or the approving authority, for their information, prior to the 
commencement of the abatement. In the case of an authorized State 
program, States may develop their own notification procedures as part 
of the State program. This requirement has been included to assist with 
targeting enforcement efforts.
    The Agency wants to protect against lead abatement related risks to 
workers, the environment, and any individuals who may remain in a unit 
during abatement. The Agency believes that the Occupational Safety and 
Health Administration's (OSHA) May 4, 1994 Interim Final Rule, Lead 
Exposure in Construction, will adequately protect all workers engaged 
in lead-based paint abatement. The Agency is currently working closely 
with OSHA to ensure that workers employed by State and local 
governments, and therefore not covered by the OSHA regulation, will be 
covered under this proposed regulation in States without OSHA-approved 
State plans.
    In its interim rule, OSHA reduced the permissible exposure limit 
(PEL) from 200 g/m3 as an 8-hour time weighted average 
(TWA) to an 8-hour TWA of 50 g/m3. The OSHA interim rule 
also includes a list of three categories of tasks that are commonly 
known to produce exposures above the PEL. The performance of the tasks 
within these categories automatically triggers basic protective 
provisions that mandate the use of particular types of respiratory 
protection unless air monitoring is conducted to determine that 
protection is not required.
    Although not currently part of this proposed regulation, the Agency 
is considering prohibiting certain work practices, due to the potential 
risk of lead contamination posed by these practices to workers and/or 
the environment. The following work practices are being considered for 
prohibition during the abatement of lead-based paint in target housing:
    i. Open flame burning of painted surfaces.
    ii. Dry scraping or sanding of painted surfaces.
    iii. The use of heat guns on painted surfaces for abatement without 
proper protection.
    These practices have been singled out because of the potential risk 
of exposure to lead-contaminated dust and toxic fumes. The Agency is 
seeking comments and/or data related to exposure to lead-contaminated 
dust and fumes from these or other abatement work practices.
    Following the completion of an abatement, post-abatement soil and 
dust clearance testing would have to be conducted by a certified 
inspector technician or an inspector/risk assessor according to the 
procedures in proposed Sec. 745.228(c)(9) for dust sampling, and 
proposed Sec. 745.086(c)(10) for soil sampling. Exterior dust and soil 
clearance levels would also have to be evaluated after the lead-based 
paint abatement of exterior walls.
    The inspector/risk assessor would evaluate the results of the 
clearance testing to determine if the clearance levels have been met. 
It is also recommended that there be no economic relationship between 
the inspector technician or inspector/risk assessor and persons engaged 
in abatement due to conflict-of-interest concerns. The Agency is 
interested in comments on the burden of requiring that the clearance 
determination being made by the inspector/risk assessor, as opposed to 
the abatement supervisor.
    The inspector/risk assessor should compare the residual lead dust 
level (as determined by the laboratory analysis) from each dust sample 
with the clearance levels for lead in dust on floors, window sills, 
window wells, and exterior surfaces, as established in the HUD 
Guidelines for the Evaluation and Controls of Lead-Based Paint Hazards 
in Housing. The Agency may in the future establish clearance levels 
pursuant to section 403 of TSCA, and if so, then these levels will be 
applicable.
    If a unit fails clearance testing, the unit will be recleaned 
followed by repeating clearance procedures. In addition, the hazard 
control strategy may need to be reexamined and appropriately adjusted 
or improved if clearance levels continually fail to meet prescribed 
levels.
    The potential for soil contamination, following exterior lead-based 
paint abatement activities, is also a concern of the Agency. The 
proposed approach to dealing with this problem is the comparison of 
pre- and post-abatement soil lead levels to determine what soil lead 
level should be achieved for clearance following an abatement. The 
testing protocol for soil in proposed Sec. 745.228(c)(10) includes the 
sampling of soil from the dripline and foundation areas as well as any 
children's play areas. To determine if post-abatement soil lead levels 
(using the above-mentioned sampling methods) have increased at a 
statically significant level, the Agency is proposing that a 
statistical analysis, such as a paired student T-test be used. If the 
soil lead levels increase at the 95 percent confidence limit, then the 
soil must be remediated back to the pre-abatement lead level, or the 
soil must be abated following the standards in proposed 
Sec. 745.228(j). If there is no significant increase at the 95 percent 
confidence limit, then no remediation or abatement is necessary.
    Reports and recordkeeping play an essential role in tracking and 
monitoring the effectiveness and safety of lead-based paint hazard 
abatement in target housing. The certified supervisor is responsible 
for completing the abatement report as described in proposed 
Sec. 745.228(c)(12).
    Records would be maintained by the building owner and the persons 
conducting the abatement activity for at least 3 years. These records 
will be subject to the disclosure and recordkeeping requirements 
promulgated under section 1018 of Title X.
    The proposed soil abatement procedures in Sec. 745.228(j) of the 
regulatory text would require the removal of soil to a depth determined 
by the inspector/risk assessor and replacement of contaminated soil 
with non-contaminated soil. If contaminated soil is to be replaced with 
non-contaminated soil, the inspector/risk assessor will determine the 
source of soil that is to be used as a replacement. Since most soil has 
naturally occurring background levels of lead, replacement soil should 
contain levels that are not hazardous to human health or the 
environment. The Agency feels that the inspector/risk assessor has the 
experience necessary to chose an appropriate source of replacement 
soil.
    As an alternative to removal and possible replacement, the 
contaminated soil shall be permanently covered. Examples of a permanent 
covering include pavement or concrete. Grass or other landscaping 
material are not considered permanent covering.
    A written abatement report would also be prepared by the supervisor 
or planner/project designer, (depending on the size of the project) 
that provides a written description of the abatement and presents the 
results of the clearance testing. The abatement report would also be 
subject to the disclosure and recordkeeping requirements of the 
regulation developed under section 1018 of Title X.

F. Management of Waste From Target Housing Lead Abatement Activity

    The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) establishes a 
comprehensive Federal program to regulate the handling of solid wastes 
under 42 U.S.C. sections 6901-6992k. RCRA Subtitle C creates a cradle-
to-grave regulatory structure for the treatment, storage, and disposal 
of hazardous waste (42 U.S.C. sections 6921-6939b). RCRA Subtitle D 
governs the disposal of nonhazardous solid waste (42 U.S.C. sections 
6941-6969a). The RCRA regulatory structure requires generators to 
determine whether their solid wastes are hazardous wastes regulated 
under RCRA Subtitle C. EPA has promulgated a rule under RCRA which sets 
forth criteria for determining whether certain solid wastes or debris 
are hazardous wastes. One of the characteristics of hazardous wastes is 
toxicity. To determine if a solid waste is a toxicity characteristic 
hazardous waste, it should be tested for its toxicity characteristic 
pursuant to 40 CFR 261.24. The Toxicity Characteristic (TC) regulatory 
limit for lead is 5 parts per million in the leachate from the test 
protocol.
    When abating lead paint, different types of solid waste are 
generated which may be subject to RCRA hazardous waste regulations. EPA 
is concerned that the application of RCRA hazardous waste regulations 
to these wastes may unnecessarily hamper lead abatement. The Agency 
wishes to minimize potential regulatory impediments thus facilitating 
lead paint abatement in residences where children and other individuals 
may be at risk. EPA is currently evaluating options for modifying RCRA 
regulations so that lead abatement proceeds expeditiously while 
ensuring safe and effective management and disposal of abatement 
wastes. Under a separate rulemaking, EPA plans to issue a proposal 
addressing lead abatement wastes.

G. Identification of Lead-Based Paint in Public Buildings

    Sections 745.228 (a)(1) through (a)(7)(i) of the regulatory text 
proposes standards that would be used for the identification of lead-
based paint in public buildings. Because children make up a significant 
number of the occupants in target housing and public buildings, which 
include day-care centers, schools, museums, and churches, these 
standards are the same as those proposed for target housing. A second 
reason for utilizing the same standards is the similarity of building 
and structural components in target housing and public buildings. 
Although many public buildings contain structural steel components, 
such as steel frames, these are covered for fire protection and 
cosmetic reasons with materials that are similar to those used in 
target housing. Given the similarity of materials presenting exposure 
risks to occupants, EPA believes that persons seeking to identify lead-
based paint in public buildings can use the same inspection methods 
(such as XRF analysis) as those used in target housing.
    Under proposed Sec. 745.228 (d)(2), all information collected from 
the identification of lead-based paint would have to be maintained by 
the owner of the public building tested for a period of not less than 3 
years.

H. Risk Assessment for Public Buildings

    In addition to the structural similarities between public buildings 
and target housing, a high probability exists in certain public 
buildings (e.g., day care centers and schools), as in target housing, 
that children will be present and potentially exposed to lead-based 
paint hazards. Although, TSCA Title IV does not expressly require EPA 
to establish a risk assessment standard for public buildings, the 
Agency has decided for public health reasons to propose such a standard 
in this regulation. The Agency believes that regulating the conduct of 
a risk assessment in public buildings is implied in the definition of 
``deleading'' in section 402(b), which includes planning of lead 
elimination activities. The Agency believes that without a proper risk 
assessment, there is no assurance that effective abatements can be 
conducted in public buildings.
    The objective of a risk assessment is to determine the existence, 
nature, severity, and location of lead-based paint hazards and identify 
appropriate hazard reduction steps. Given the structural similarities 
between target housing and public buildings, this proposed regulation 
provides similar protocols to those required for conducting risk 
assessments in target housing. The Agency is specifically requesting 
comment on this proposed approach.
    Under proposed Sec. 745.228(e)(2), records would have to be 
maintained by the building owner and persons conducting the abatement 
and all information collected must be maintained by the owner of the 
building tested for a period of not less than 3 years.

I. Abatement in Public Buildings

    The proposed standards in Sec. 745.228(c)(1) through (c)(9)(iv)(D) 
and (c)(11) through (c)(16) of the regulatory text would also be 
applicable to abatement in public buildings as defined by this proposed 
rule. Section 402(b) of TSCA identifies abatement-like activities 
associated with public buildings using the term ``deleading.'' Because 
both terms are defined in Title IV in terms of the ``elimination'' of 
lead-based paint hazards, for purposes of this proposed regulation, the 
Agency is treating the two terms, ``abatement'' and ``deleading,'' as 
if they were synonymous. The Agency believes that abatement activities 
in public buildings and methods of measuring protection for their 
workers, occupants, and the environment should be similar to those for 
target housing.
    Under proposed Sec. 745.228(f)(2), records would have to be 
maintained by the building owner and persons conducting the abatement 
and all information collected must be maintained by the owner of the 
building tested for a period of not less than 3 years.
    Management of waste from lead-based paint abatement activities in 
public buildings, including schools and day-care centers, is another 
area of concern to EPA. Wastes generated from lead-based paint 
activities (e.g., abatement and deleading) are currently, depending 
upon the results of the TC analysis, covered by RCRA hazardous waste 
regulations. As discussed in unit VIII.F. of this preamble, EPA is 
evaluating options for modifying existing RCRA regulations to eliminate 
potential impediments to lead abatement, while ensuring safe and 
effective management and disposal of such wastes.

J. Demolition in Public and Commercial Buildings and Superstructures

    Under Sec. 745.228(g)(1), the certified supervisor would be 
required to collect any historical information on the uses of lead-
based paint in a building or superstructure that would be demolished. 
The proposed standards for demolition are applicable only when the 
deleading of components prior to destruction of the facility occurs. If 
deleading is conducted as a part of the demolition activity, the 
standards under Sec. 745.228(i)(1) through (7) are applicable.
    Additionally, the conduct of lead-based paint activities would 
require a hazardous waste determination pursuant to 40 CFR 262.11 prior 
to demolition. All demolition waste would be treated in accordance with 
RCRA.

K. Identification of Lead-Based Paint in Commercial Buildings and 
Superstructures

    The proposed standards in Sec. 745.228(h)(1) through (h)(4) of the 
regulatory text describe the standards for the identification of lead-
based paint on steel superstructures and commercial buildings.
    Based on information received from professional organizations that 
are involved in steel structure deleading activities, EPA believes: (1) 
That maintenance and painting records are available more often in a 
commercial setting than in target housing or public buildings; (2) that 
processes for lead identification in commercial buildings would be more 
similar to those used in superstructures than to those used in target 
housing because unenclosed metal components are a primary architectural 
feature of commercial buildings such as warehouses; and (3) the purpose 
of identifying lead is inherently different in commercial and 
superstructure settings from that in target housing settings. Unlike 
target housing, the purpose of identifying lead hazards in commercial 
and superstructure settings is not to remove the lead-based paint 
because it may pose a hazard to occupants. Instead, the purpose is to 
identify a potential hazard to workers doing building or structural 
maintenance, and the environment.
    Paint (lead paint included) removed from components in commercial 
buildings and superstructures, is generally removed as part of routine 
maintenance on those components. The supervisor should determine if 
lead-based paint exists prior to starting work to minimize exposures to 
workers. Given the toxicity of lead, sampling to determine the presence 
of lead-based paint is commonly practiced prior to maintenance work on 
superstructures and in commercial settings.
    These identification practices include obtaining relevant, 
available historical information on the use of lead-based paint for a 
structure or building. Previous project specifications or inspection 
reports may provide the necessary information. If the use of lead-based 
paint cannot be conclusively ruled-out, limited sampling would be 
conducted by a certified supervisor according to proposed 
Sec. 745.228(h)(2).
    Since the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) ban on the use of 
lead-based paint on bridges in 1980, many States have required the use 
of lead substitutes for primary coatings on bridges. Given this 
requirement, the frequency with which bridges are repainted raises some 
fundamental questions about recordkeeping requirements. The Agency is 
proposing that all information collected from the identification of 
lead-based paint on steel structures such as bridges, would be 
maintained by the owner of the structure tested until such a time that 
the structure, or portion of the structure is to be repainted. This 
proposed requirement is based on the variable frequency with which 
steel structures are generally repainted and maintained. The Agency is 
requesting comment on this requirement to maintain records.

L. Deleading of Lead-Based Paint in Commercial Buildings and 
Superstructures

    The proposed standards for deleading of commercial buildings and 
superstructures are found in Sec. 745.228(i)(1) through (i)(8) of the 
regulatory text. Given the similarities between superstructures and 
commercial buildings described earlier, the Agency believes that 
deleading activities and methods of ensuring the protection of workers, 
occupants and/or individuals within the vicinity, and the environment 
should also be similar to those used for superstructures.
    A deleading plan would have to be completed by a certified 
supervisor prior to initiating deleading activities. This plan would 
address worker protection, as well as environmental protection issues.
    The Agency is concerned about the risk to workers and the 
environment due to deleading activities in commercial buildings and 
steel structures. As with all other abatement and deleading activities, 
the Agency is relying on the May 4, 1994 Interim Final OSHA rule, Lead 
Exposure in Construction. For a more complete discussion of these 
standards see the OSHA requirements at 29 CFR part 1926.
    The Agency is also considering prohibiting open flame burning of 
painted surfaces; the dry scraping or sanding of painted surfaces; and 
the use of heat guns on painted surfaces for deleading on 
superstructures and commercial buildings because of the potential risk 
of lead contamination to workers and/or the environment posed by these 
practices. The Agency is interested in comments on whether it should 
prohibit these practices.
    Waste generated when abating commercial buildings and 
superstructures may be subject to RCRA Subtitle C hazardous waste 
regulations and should be handled accordingly.
    Recordkeeping requirements for deleading in commercial buildings or 
on superstructures with lead-based paint are proposed in 
Sec. 745.228(i)(6). The report described in Sec. 745.228(i)(6) shall be 
maintained by the owner or oversight agency until such a time that the 
structure, or portion of the structure is to be repainted.
    The removal of lead-based paint in commercial buildings and 
superstructures, could potentially affect water quality through two 
routes. The first route is by non-point source contamination, e.g., 
lead-contaminated dust that is deposited as a result of deleading 
activities is transported overland to waterbodies through stormwater 
runoff. The second route is by point source discharge, e.g., a direct 
deposition of lead-based paint or dust to a waterbody, or from 
channelized stormwater runoff.
    Non-point source contamination may be controlled through compliance 
with RCRA (40 CFR 3004(d) and 268.35(a)), which includes settled dust 
and debris from deleading activities. RCRA 40 CFR 268.35(a) prohibits 
the land disposal of waste which exceed the toxic characteristic 
regulatory limit for lead. In addition, guidance issued by EPA pursuant 
to the Coastal Zone Act Re-authorization Amendments (CZARA) section 
6217(g) identifies a management measure for the operation and 
maintenance of roads, highways, and bridges in coastal States to 
incorporate requirements for pollution prevention procedures to reduce 
pollutant loadings to surface waters.
    Removal of lead-containing materials from steel bridges has 
resulted in inadvertent discharges of lead compounds that exceeded 
State water quality criteria, and showed the potential for long-term 
environmental impacts based on sediment sampling (``Long Term 
Environmental Evaluation of Paint Residue and Blast Cleaning Abrasives 
from the Middle River Bridge Repainting Project,'' California State 
Department of Transportation, 1982). Existing federal regulations on 
steel structural projects are being applied on a site-specific basis. 
However, differences between States' water quality standards and 
subsequent implementation of those standards indicates a need for a 
consistent water quality policy with respect to discharges of lead into 
waterways during removal of lead-containing materials from steel 
structures. This is of particular importance due to the number of 
contractors who work in multiple State jurisdictions, as well as the 
occurrence of bridge structures which span interstate waters.
    Under the Clean Water Act's (CWA) National Pollution Discharge 
Elimination System (NPDES) program and interpretive case law, paint 
removal devices used on bridges/superstructures, such as wet and dry 
abrasive blasters, high pressure waterjet blasters, and sponge-jet 
blasters, may constitute point sources. Therefore, the CWA mandates 
that NPDES permit applications must be submitted to either EPA or 
States approved to administer the NPDES program prior to any discharge 
[40 CFR 122.21(c)]. Of course, if there is no discharge or potential 
discharge to waters of the U.S., no NPDES permit is required. 
Individual sources are required to obtain permits, but EPA believes 
that general permits may be an appropriate mechanism to cover bridge 
stripping and painting discharges. According to 40 CFR 122.28 
(a)(2)(ii), the sources covered in a general permit must involve the 
same types of operations, discharge the same types of wastes, require 
the same operating conditions, require similar monitoring, and be more 
appropriately controlled under a general permit than under individual 
permits. General permits reduce the administrative burden on both the 
permitting agency and the permittee.
    EPA requests comment on the best technologies available to avoid or 
eliminate releases of lead to the air, land, or water, and studies 
showing the amounts of releases that occur with those technologies. EPA 
can then suggest operating conditions or discharge limits which may be 
appropriate for general permits.

M. Applicability of RCRA to Lead-Based Paint Wastes from Public and 
Commercial Buildings and Superstructures

    Waste generated by the lead-based paint abatement contractors when 
removing lead paint from public and commercial buildings and 
superstructures may be subject to RCRA Subtitle C hazardous waste 
regulations. The Toxicity Characteristic (TC) regulatory limit for lead 
is 5 parts per million in a leachate derived by utilizing the Toxic 
Characteristic Leaching Protocol (TCLP). The lead-based paint waste 
generator must determine if the waste generated is hazardous by either 
testing a representative sample of the waste in accordance with 40 CFR 
part 261 subpart C, or an equivalent method approved pursuant to 40 CFR 
260.21, or by applying knowledge of the hazard characteristic of the 
waste in light of the materials or process used. If the representative 
test sample exceeds the TC regulatory limit, the waste must be managed 
as a RCRA hazardous waste, and the contractor would be a hazardous 
waste generator and must, therefore, comply with 40 CFR part 262 
requirements. In addition, the training requirements for generators of 
lead-based paint waste as discussed in this preamble are applicable.
    EPA has different requirements for generators of different 
quantities of hazardous waste. For example, the regulations 
conditionally exempt small quantity generators of 100 kg or less 
hazardous waste per calendar month, but it is very unlikely that waste 
generated during the deleading or abatement work on larger buildings 
and superstructures would generate less than 100 kg. Therefore, many of 
these contractors would be classified as ordinary generators and 
therefore would be subject to 40 CFR parts 262 through 266, 268, and 
270 requirements.
    If the lead-based paint waste is determined to be a hazardous waste 
and is captured, it could be managed on-site, most likely through 
storage or treatment. This can be technically more challenging and may 
require a hazardous waste treatment permit pursuant to 40 CFR part 270. 
One notable exception is the generator. Under this exception, a 
generator may treat lead-contaminated waste or lead-contaminated debris 
in containers or tanks in compliance with part 265, subparts I and J, 
and within the accumulation time limit of 90 days as specified in 40 
CFR 262.34 (see 51 FR 10168, March 24, 1986). On August 18, 1992, EPA 
promulgated the Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) for hazardous debris 
(57 FR 37194). In that rulemaking, hazardous debris is defined as solid 
waste with particle size 60 mm or larger. Therefore, paint chips, paint 
dust, and sludge's would not be considered hazardous debris. As part of 
that rulemaking, the Agency promulgated standards for a new hazardous 
waste management unit known as a containment building (40 CFR parts 264 
and 265, Subpart DD), which may also be used to treat waste at the 
generator facility without a permit, provided the waste is not held 
longer than 90 days.
    If hazardous debris is captured, hazardous debris treatment 
technologies that may be used include abrasive blasting, grinding or 
planing, vibratory finishing, high pressure steam, or water spraying to 
meet the performance standard referred to as the ``clean debris 
surface.'' Other treatment technologies include macroencapsulation or 
sealing (surfacial treatment) or microencapsulation (solidifying with 
portland cement or lime). Microencapsulation could be done in tanks or 
containers. Hazardous debris is subject to compliance under the LDR 
treatment standards. Many States are currently authorized to implement 
LDR requirements pertaining to lead-based paint activities under the 
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984.

N. Applicability of RCRA to Lead-Contaminated Soil Near Public and 
Commercial Buildings and Superstructures

    It is possible that, when performing lead-based paint activities 
(e.g., HEPA vacuum removal or sand blasting of lead paint) on public 
and commercial buildings, lead paint chips or lead dust hazardous under 
the TCLP would be released and would either fall on the soil underneath 
or blown down wind before reaching the ground. This constitutes 
``illegal disposal'' of characteristic hazardous waste and is 
prohibited under RCRA sections 3004 and 3008. Therefore, individuals 
engaged in lead-based paint activities must take appropriate 
precautions to contain lead dust releases during sand blasting or when 
conducting activities that could potentially release significant 
quantities of paint dust leading to its deposition on the soil near 
public and commercial buildings or superstructures.
    If the lead-based paint that is being removed exhibits the 
characteristic of toxicity for lead when conducting the abatement or 
deleading, it would be necessary to take steps to prevent deposition on 
land by capturing lead-contaminated dust and debris. If the abatement 
of deleading work resulting in land contamination is done without a 
RCRA TSD permit, then this deposition would be inferred as ``illegal 
disposal.'' When conducting lead-based paint activities, therefore, it 
would be necessary to take steps to minimize ``illegal disposal'' by 
capturing lead paint dust.
    There are two issues of concern for the Agency with regard to the 
enforcement of RCRA provisions for illegal disposal. These issues 
involve the possible impacts on worker protection and how compliance 
can be achieved given existing abatement and deleading technologies. 
Comments are requested on achievable methods to protect both the 
environment and workers in light of existing abatement and deleading 
technology.

VIII. State Programs

A. Introduction

    This unit is comprised of two parts: (1) Procedures for States and 
Indian Tribes to follow in order to obtain authorization from EPA to 
administer and enforce a lead-based paint activities program, and (2) a 
model program that will serve as an archetype for these State and 
Tribal programs.
    Section 404(a) of Title IV of TSCA provides that any State which 
seeks to administer and enforce the standards, regulations, or other 
requirements established under section 402 or 406 may submit an 
application to the Administrator for approval of such program. Section 
404(b) states that the Administrator may approve such an application 
only after finding that the State program is at least as protective of 
human health and the environment as the Federal program established 
according to the mandate of section 402 or 406 of TSCA and that it 
provides adequate enforcement. The procedures for submitting a State 
application are found in proposed Sec. 745.325 of the regulatory text 
and are discussed in more detail below.
    Section 404(d), directs the Agency to promulgate a model State 
program which may be adopted by any State which seeks to administer and 
enforce such a program. Given that section 404(a) requires that an 
authorized State program be at least as protective as the Federal 
program, the Agency expects that a State program seeking authorization, 
would resemble, in significant respects, the Federal program, and 
further, that the regulations found at proposed Secs. 745.225 through 
745.237 would serve as an appropriate model for such a State program. 
Therefore, the Agency is at this time proposing these regulations as 
the model program for the regulations developed under section 402(a) of 
TSCA. The regulations for section 406 of TSCA can be found at 40 CFR 
745 subpart E.
    Proposed Sec. 745.225 of the regulatory text contains procedures 
for the accreditation of training programs for lead-based paint 
activities. Proposed Sec. 745.226 would establish procedures for the 
certification of individuals engaged in lead-based paint activities, 
and proposed Sec. 745.228 would establish standards for conducting 
these activities.

B. Submission of State Application

    Any State which seeks to administer and enforce the requirements of 
this proposed regulation or the regulation developed under section 406 
of TSCA would have to submit an application to the Administrator 
according to the procedures contained in proposed Sec. 745.325. No 
other political subdivision (e.g. cities, towns, counties, etc.) other 
than States, as defined by section 3 of TSCA, and Indian Tribes, are 
eligible for authorization under this program. Following notice and an 
opportunity for a public hearing, EPA would approve a State application 
within 180 days, if EPA finds that the State program is at least as 
protective of human health and the environment as the Federal program, 
and it provides adequate enforcement.
    Before developing an application for authorization, a State would 
publicly disseminate a notice of intent to seek such authorization and 
provide an opportunity for public hearing. A State application would 
contain a copy of the regulations and/or legislation establishing the 
State program, the name of the State agency that will administer and 
enforce the program, as well as information on the resources that the 
State intends to devote to the program, and an assurance that the State 
has or will have the legal authority necessary to carry out the 
program.
    Pursuant to section 404(a) of TSCA, at the time of submitting such 
an application, the State may also certify to the Administrator that 
the State program meets the requirements of section 404(b)(1) and 
404(b)(2) of TSCA. If this certification, or certificate of compliance, 
is contained in a State's application, the State program shall be 
deemed to be authorized by EPA, until such time as the Administrator 
withdraws the authorization. This certification would take the form of 
a letter from the Governor or Attorney General to the Administrator, 
and would include detailed written justification for concluding that 
the State's program is at least as protective as the Federal program. 
If the application does not contain such certification, the State 
program would be considered authorized only after the Administrator 
approves the State application.
    EPA invites States to submit their authorization applications at 
any time after the effective date of the rule.
    1. EPA approval. Within 180 days following submission of the 
application, the Administrator would approve or disapprove the 
application.
    In the case of a State that provides a certificate of compliance, 
the program would be immediately deemed approved. In the case of a 
State application which does not contain a certification of compliance, 
the Administrator would approve a State program only if, after notice 
and after opportunity for public hearing, the Administrator finds that:
    i. The State program is at least as protective of human health and 
the environment as the Federal program contained in Secs. 745.225 
through 745.237 of the proposed regulatory text, or in subpart E 
``Residential Property Renovation,'' has been proposed in the Federal 
Register separately from this regulation.
    ii. The State program provides adequate enforcement.
    The Agency would notify the State in writing of the Administrator's 
decision. Upon authorization of a State program it would be unlawful, 
for any person to violate or fail or refuse to comply with any 
requirements of such program.
    The decision criteria above give the Agency reasonably broad 
latitude in approving or disapproving State programs. Specifically, EPA 
interprets the standard ``. . .at least as protective as. . .'' to mean 
that a State program need not be identical to, or administered and 
enforced in a manner identical to, the Federal program. The Agency 
expects to receive applications for State programs that will differ in 
some respects from the Federal program. The Agency will make every 
attempt to accommodate these differences while following the statutory 
requirement of ensuring that every State program be at least as 
protective as the Federal program.
    Upon notification of authorization, the designated State agency 
within that State would be considered the approving authority for 
purposes of training program accreditation, certification of 
individuals, and enforcement of this program.
    If a State does not have a State program authorized under this 
section and in effect by the date which is 2 years after promulgation 
of this proposed regulation, the Administrator would, by such date, 
establish the Federal program under subpart Q, or subpart E, as 
appropriate.
    The Agency has received a number of comments from State 
representatives presenting concerns related to their potential 
inability to introduce legislation and promulgate regulations for an 
entire training, certification, and accreditation program that would 
cover target housing, public and commercial buildings, and 
superstructures within the TSCA Title IV timelines. The Agency 
understands these concerns and is committed to devising a program that 
would promote State adoption of the program.
    If a State does not have an approved program within 2 years, the 
Agency would be required to establish a Federal program in that State. 
However, it was the intent of Congress, and is the policy of the Agency 
to encourage States to administer and enforce this program at the State 
level. The Agency is seeking comment on how to best achieve this goal 
within the 2-year time frame mandated by TSCA while ensuring that all 
lead-based paint activities will be adequately regulated.
    Additionally, the Agency has received comment that there may be a 
need for Federal enforcement programs to be in place even before State 
programs are enacted and authorized. It has been noted to the Agency 
that there may be the potential for egregious or widespread releases of 
lead-containing materials by ``unregulated'' abatement actions during 
the interim before State programs become effective. The Agency is 
confident that such situations can be effectively addressed through the 
application of a combination of existing Federal, State and local 
statutes and regulations. However, the Agency seeks comment on whether 
some or all of the requirements of the Federal program should be made 
immediately effective following promulgation of the final rule, pending 
authorization of State programs.
    2. Withdrawal of authorization. As required by section 404(c) of 
TSCA, if a State is not administering and enforcing its authorized 
program in compliance with the standards, regulations, and other 
requirements of Title IV of TSCA, including section 404(b)(1) and 
(b)(2), the Agency would so notify the State and, if corrective action 
is not completed within a reasonable time, not to exceed 180 days, the 
Administrator would withdraw authorization of such program and 
establish a Federal program pursuant to Title IV of TSCA. Procedures 
for withdrawal of authorization can be found at proposed 
Sec. 745.325(h) of the regulatory text.

C. Model State Program

    Section 404(d) of TSCA, directs the Agency to promulgate a model 
State program which may be adopted by any State which seeks to 
administer and enforce a lead-based paint activities program. Given 
that section 404(a) requires that an authorized State program be at 
least as protective as the Federal program, the Agency expects that a 
State program seeking authorization, would resemble, in significant 
respects, the Federal program. Therefore, the entire Federal program 
for lead-based paint activities found at proposed Secs. 745.225 through 
745.237 is being proposed as the Model State Program.
    Section 745.225 of the proposed regulatory text contains procedures 
and minimum requirements for the accreditation of lead-based paint 
activities training programs for workers, supervisors, inspectors and 
planners, and other individuals involved in lead-based paint 
activities. These requirements include: (1) Minimum requirements for 
the accreditation of training providers, (2) minimum training 
curriculum requirements, (3) minimum training hour requirements, (4) 
minimum hands-on training requirements, (5) minimum trainee competency 
and proficiency requirements, and (6) minimum requirements for training 
program quality control.
    Proposed Sec. 745.226 contains procedures and requirements for the 
certification of individuals engaged in the following activities: 
target housing and public building inspector technicians, inspector/
risk assessors, supervisors, planner/project designers, and workers; 
and commercial building and superstructure supervisors and workers. 
These procedures include specific training and, when appropriate, 
experience/education prerequisites that individuals seeking 
certification would have. Additionally, this section specifies 
requirements for the certification of firms involved in inspection and 
abatement activities.
    Proposed Sec. 745.228 contains standards for conducting these 
activities. The standards for lead-based paint activities are divided 
into three separate categories: target housing, public buildings, and 
commercial buildings and steel structures. In target housing, the 
standards cover inspection, risk assessment, and lead abatement. The 
second set of standards, for public buildings, cover the inspection, 
risk assessment, abatement, and demolition. The final set of standards 
are for industrial settings. These include activities such as 
identification, deleading, and demolition for commercial buildings and 
superstructures.
    The Agency hopes that this model will be especially useful to the 
many States that do not currently have an existing lead-based paint 
activities program. The Agency believes that adoption of this program 
would effectively reduce the risks of lead-based paint activities. 
However, the State program need not duplicate the Federal program in 
order to receive authorization from EPA. A State may choose to develop 
its own program, and it would be authorized if it is as protective as 
the Federal program.
    1. Major program elements When developing a lead-based paint 
activities program, a State may choose to use the Federal program as a 
specific model or it may develop its own program. For States that 
choose not to use the Federal program as a specific model, the Agency 
has identified several major program elements below that a State 
program must have if it seeks to receive authorization from the Agency 
to administer and enforce the program.
    To administer and enforce such a program successfully, a State must 
develop the appropriate infrastructure. A State program must establish 
a State agency or agencies, or designate an existing State agency or 
agencies to implement, administer, and enforce the State program. Given 
the scope of the program, it is likely that more than one State agency 
would be involved in the implementation and enforcement of this 
program. States are required to identify one State agency or 
organization within a State (the primary agency) that would serve to 
coordinate the activities of these agencies. States are also encouraged 
to, whenever possible, utilize existing State and local certification 
and accreditation programs and procedures.
    The State program would require the certification of individuals 
and firms engaged in lead-based paint activities. The program would 
establish training requirements for individuals engaged in lead-based 
paint activities. The training component of a State's program would 
require that training be provided by an accredited training program. 
Proposed Sec. 745.226 details the certification program developed by 
the Agency which may be adopted by a State, or it may be used as a 
model for States developing their own certification program.
    The State program would contain regulations or procedures for the 
accreditation of training programs. The regulations or procedures would 
contain the following: (1) Minimum requirements for the accreditation 
of training programs; (2) minimum training curriculum requirements; (3) 
minimum training hour requirements; (4) minimum hands-on training 
requirements; (5) minimum trainee competency and proficiency 
requirements; and (6) minimum requirements for training program quality 
control. The State accreditation program would contain the minimum 
requirements of the accreditation program found at proposed 
Sec. 745.225 of the regulatory text.
    The State agency would establish standards for performing lead-
based paint activities, taking into account reliability, effectiveness, 
and safety. The Federal program at proposed Sec. 745.228 would 
establish specific standards for performing these activities which a 
State program may choose to adopt. A State may also develop its own 
standards for some or all of these activities, as long as they are 
judged by EPA to be at least as protective as the Federal standards.
    For instance, at proposed Sec. 745.228(b), the Agency has developed 
procedures for conducting a risk assessment in target housing. The goal 
of a risk assessment is to determine and report the existence, nature, 
severity, and location of lead-based paint hazards in residential 
dwellings. Proposed Sec. 745.228(b) specifically describes a method of 
conducting such an assessment, and a State may choose to adopt this 
standard. A State may also develop its own procedures that achieve the 
same goal. This is the case for all of the standards in this 
regulation. In general, the Agency has developed specific standards 
that States may choose to adopt, or they may utilize their own 
standards, as long as they are at least as protective as the EPA 
standards.
    The State agency or agencies would provide for the enforcement of 
the State certification and accreditation program, and establish 
suitable sanctions for those who fail to comply with the program 
requirements. This element of a State's program is essential because 
one of the Agency's two decision criteria for approval of State 
programs is the adequacy of the State's enforcement program. Before 
promulgation of the final regulation, the Agency anticipates developing 
a compliance and inspection strategy that would facilitate State 
implementation and provide guidance in determining that the State 
programs provide adequate enforcement. The State agency or agencies 
must have the authority to charge certification and accreditation fees. 
Section 402(a)(3) of TSCA states that:

    The Administrator (or the State in the case of an authorized 
State program) shall impose a fee on:
    (1) persons operating training programs accredited under this 
title; and
    (2) lead-based paint activities contractors certified in 
accordance with [section 402(a)] paragraph (1).
    The fees shall be established at such a level as is necessary to 
cover the costs of administering and enforcing the standards and 
regulations under this section [section 402] which are applicable to 
such programs and contractors. The fee shall not be imposed on any 
State, local government, or nonprofit training program. The 
Administrator (or the State in the case of an authorized State 
program) may waive the fee for lead-based paint activities 
contractors under subparagraph A) for the purposes of training their 
own employees.

    EPA will determine what fees it will impose pursuant to section 402 
(a)(3) before the Agency begins to enforce and administer the Federal 
program in any State.
    2. Reciprocity. EPA strongly encourages each State to establish 
reciprocal arrangements with other States with authorized State 
programs. Such arrangements might address cooperation in certification 
determinations, the review and accreditation of training programs, 
candidate testing and examination administration, curriculum 
development, policy formulation, compliance monitoring, or the exchange 
of information and data. The benefits to be derived from these 
arrangements include a potential cost-savings from the reduction of 
duplicative activity and attainment of a more professional workforce as 
States are able to refine and improve the effectiveness of their 
programs based upon the experience and methods of other States.
    There are several elements of the EPA training and accreditation 
program at proposed Secs. 745.225 through 745.226 that are intended to 
facilitate interstate reciprocity. The first, and most critical, is the 
certification examination. The examination would serve to ensure that 
each individual who is certified under this program has a minimum level 
of knowledge in his or her particular discipline. At the same time, the 
certification examination development procedures would allow a State 
the flexibility to either adopt a ``standardized'' examination, or 
develop its own examination according to ``standardized'' guidelines.
    As an additional element to facilitate interstate reciprocity, the 
Agency has proposed relatively specific minimum curriculum 
requirements. A third element is the inclusion of a refresher training 
course in the Federal program. Successful completion of a State 
accredited refresher course may serve as an ideal requirement for 
individuals seeking a reciprocal certification in another State.

D. Indian Lands

    This proposal also addresses implementation of sections 402 and/or 
406 of TSCA on Indian lands. For the most part, implementation of 
section 402 and 404 would be primarily a State responsibility. EPA 
would enforce a Federal program only if it does not approve a State 
program or if it finds that a State program is inadequate. While 
Congress did not specifically address implementation of Title IV on 
Indian lands, EPA has determined that proper lead abatement is as 
important for Indian Tribes as for anyone else. Accordingly, EPA has 
decided to treat Indian Tribes as if they were States for the purpose 
of administering and enforcing lead programs under sections 402 and 
404.
    1. Authority. States generally are precluded from enforcing their 
civil regulatory programs on Indian Reservations, absent an explicit 
Congressional authorization or State-Tribal agreement to do so. 
California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, 480 U.S. 202, 216 and 
n.18 (1987). Furthermore, Congress has not created an explicit role for 
Tribes or the appropriate Indian Governing Body to implement Title IV, 
as it has done under most other major environmental statutes amended 
since 1986 (Safe Drinking Water Act, CERCLA, Clean Water Act, Clear Air 
Act). The term Indian Governing Body is used throughout this proposal 
to mean the governing body of the Tribe, band or group of Indians 
subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. and recognized by the U.S. as 
possessing powers of self government.
    There exist three principal options for effectively ensuring 
comprehensive implementation of Title IV on Indian Reservations: (1) 
Allow Tribes to apply for approval of section 402 or 406 programs in 
the same manner as States under this proposal; (2) make determinations 
on a case-by-case basis whether the State has adequate authority to 
ensure compliance with section 402 or 406 on Indian Reservations; and 
(3) make a blanket determination that States lack the authority to 
implement their programs on Indian Reservations and that EPA would 
enforce sections 402 or 406 directly on Indian Reservations in light of 
this determination.
    EPA believes that the preferred approach would be to use a 
combination of options 1 and 2. Under this approach a State may 
propose, as part of its program approval application, to ensure section 
402 or 406 compliance on Indian Reservations. The State would have to 
demonstrate adequate authority to ensure compliance with section 402 or 
406 on the Indian Reservations. The burden the State would meet to 
demonstrate its authority to regulate on Indian Reservations is a high 
one, however. This type of demonstration of State authority over Indian 
Reservations is allowed, for instance, under regulations for the 
Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program of the Safe Drinking Water 
Act as well as several other EPA programs. 40 CFR 125.24(b). See e.g., 
45 FR 33378 (1980); 53 FR 43080 (1988).
    In the alternative, an Indian Governing Body could apply for 
authorization to run a section 402 or 406 program in the same manner as 
a State pursuant to the procedures specified in this proposal. Where it 
does not do so, EPA would enforce section 402 or 406 directly. Allowing 
for Tribal assumption of the section 402 or 406 program is consistent 
with EPA's Indian Policy and existing practice for other environmental 
programs.
    EPA believes that adequate authority exists under TSCA to allow 
Tribes to apply for and receive authorization to run Title IV programs. 
EPA's interpretation of TSCA is governed by the principles of Chevron. 
USA v. NRDC, 467 U.S. 837 (1984). Where Congress has not explicitly 
stated its intent in adopting a statutory provision, the Agency charged 
with implementing that statute may adopt any interpretation which, in 
the Agency's expert judgment, is reasonable in light of the goals and 
purposes of the statute as a whole. Id. at 844. EPA believes that 
Interpreting TSCA to allow Tribes to apply for program authorization 
satisfies the Chevron test.
    While some tribes may entirely develop their own lead programs, 
other tribes may look to existing programs as a starting point. Today's 
action does not require tribes to develop lead programs wholly from 
scratch. For example, a tribe could negotiate a cooperative agreement 
with an adjoining State to jointly plan and administer lead programs 
that are appropriately tailored to individual reservation conditions 
and tribal policies. Such an agreement would be subject to the review 
and approval of EPA.
    Another possible option includes incorporating standards from an 
adjacent State as the tribe's own, with appropriate revisions that 
adapt the State standards to reservation conditions and tribal 
policies. Such adaptations would build on State experience and 
expertise and might represent quicker and less costly ways to establish 
tribal programs than developing tribal programs independently. This 
technique of utilizing small-scaled adaptations of State programs would 
allow tribes to build experience and expertise that could later be used 
to revise existing programs, if appropriate.
    Smaller tribes may also wish to form consortiums or create inter-
tribal agencies as ways to develop the necessary expertise to 
administer lead programs in a cost-effective way. Aside from any formal 
arrangements between tribes and States, EPA notes that the objective of 
this proposed rule is to provide for the safe, effective, and reliable 
abatement of lead-based paint hazards. Therefore, EPA encourages all 
affected sovereigns to work cooperatively in informal capacities to 
protect the public health and welfare from the serious health and 
welfare effects associated with lead-based paint hazards.
    Consistent with EPA's interpretation of the application of Title IV 
to Indian lands, the proposed regulations would permit the Agency to 
make grants to Indian Governing Bodies and States to implement 
authorized Section 402 and 406 programs.
    EPA specifically invites comment on its interpretation of the 
implementation of section 402 or 406 of TSCA on Indian lands.

E. Effective Dates

    State programs may seek authorization of their programs pursuant to 
subpart Q effective date of promulgation of the final rule. Subpart L 
of part 745 shall apply in any State that does not have an authorized 
program under subpart Q, effective 2 years after promulgation of the 
final rule. In such States: (1) Training providers shall not provide, 
or claim to provide training for certification without accreditation 
from the Agency pursuant to Sec. 745.225 after 2 years and 180 days 
after promulgation of the final rule; (2) No person shall engage in 
lead-based paint activities without certification from the Agency, 
pursuant to Sec. 745.226 after 3 years after promulgation of the final 
rule; and (3) All lead-based paint activities shall be performed 
pursuant to the standards contained in Sec. 745.228 after promulgation 
of the final rule. These dates should allow training providers 
sufficient time to receive accreditation, and for individuals to then 
receive training from an accredited training program and obtain 
certification. The Agency felt that because the standards in this 
regulation are being taught in the training courses, the standards 
should only be enforced after individuals have received training and 
obtain certification. Upon promulgation, the Agency will assess the 
number of programs that it must administer. If the demand for 
accreditation and certification is expected to greatly exceed the 
Agency's capability to approve training providers and certify 
individuals, the enforcement deadlines may be revised following 
appropriate public notice.
    The timelines for implementation of the various requirements of 
this regulation should serve as a model for State program development, 
and States are encouraged to adopt these intervals.

F. Regulatory Assessment

    1. Introduction. EPA has prepared a Regulatory Impact Analysis 
(RIA) in conjunction with this proposed rule. Ideally, when conducting 
an RIA, a benefit-cost analysis which measures all marginal benefits 
and costs of the regulation should be performed. Although it was 
possible to estimate the incremental costs, it was not possible to 
estimate incremental benefits. Data limitations prevented a complete 
estimate of incremental benefits: The absence of the necessary dose-
response functions precluded the estimation of certain benefit 
categories (e.g., adult residential benefits and ecological benefits), 
and knowledge of certain impacts (e.g., blood-lead levels with and 
without training) did not allow for the estimation of the incremental 
benefits associated with this proposed rule. Therefore, an alternative 
approach was employed whereby total measured benefits (i.e., benefits 
that have been identified and quantified) of the regulation abatements 
were estimated to provide a perspective on the magnitude of the 
benefits against which to assess the possibility of net benefits.
    The major findings contained in the RIA are presented in this brief 
summary, organized into five sections appearing below: Cost of 
Regulatory Action; Benefits of Regulatory Action; Benefit-Cost 
Analysis; Uncertainties and Sensitivity Analysis; and Impacts of the 
Proposed Rule. The complete document, ``Title X Sections 402 and 404 
Regulatory Impact Analysis,'' is available for inspection in the public 
docket.
    Title X, the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 
1992, amended TSCA by adding Title IV. The purposes of Title X included 
a desire to develop a national strategy to build the infrastructure 
necessary to eliminate lead-based paint hazards in all housing as 
expeditiously as possible. Further, the Title X sought to encourage 
effective action to prevent childhood lead poisoning by establishing a 
workable framework for lead-based paint hazard evaluation and reduction 
and by ending the current confusion over reasonable standards of care.
    Section 402, Lead-Based Paint Activities Training and 
Certification, is only one of the initiatives under TSCA Title IV aimed 
at fulfilling these goals. EPA is currently developing or has developed 
other portions of this overall lead hazard reduction program. For 
example, a required information dissemination program to inform the 
public of lead-based paint hazards in the home during renovation has 
been proposed under section 406. A regulation developed under section 
1018 of Title X will soon be proposed and would require the 
distribution of this pamphlet at the time of real estate transfer, 
would require the disclosure of any known lead-based paint hazards and 
would allow the purchaser of real estate a 10-day period to conduct a 
risk assessment of the property. Benefits of these actions flow from 
providing information describing lead hazards to home owners renovating 
homes, home buyers, and renters. Costs of these actions include 
preparing and disseminating information.
    Section 403 of TSCA requires that the Agency shall ``. . 
.promulgate regulations which shall identify. . .lead-based paint 
hazards, lead-contaminated dust, and lead-contaminated soil.'' The 
section 403 regulations will represent EPA's determination of those 
conditions that cause exposure to lead in paint, residential soil and 
dust that would result in adverse human health effects. Benefits and 
costs accrue from the abatement of the identified lead-based hazards, 
and lead-contaminated dust and soil.
    Although each of these initiatives have positive and negative 
impacts associated with them, the following narrative focuses on those 
impacts resulting from the implementation of sections 402 and 404.
    2. Cost of regulatory action. The total estimated incremental costs 
associated with this proposed rule are presented in Table 1. Cost 
estimates are presented for two different abatement scenarios to 
present a range of possible costs: (1) Assuming abatement occurs 
whenever X-ray Florescence (XRF) Analysis indicates a lead in paint 
level of greater than 1 (XRF 1) and 500 parts per million 
(ppm) or more lead in soil (Scenario 1); and (2) assuming abatement 
occurs whenever X-ray Florescence Analysis indicates a lead in paint 
level of greater than 6 (XRF 6) for paint and 2,000 ppm or 
more lead in soil (Scenario 2).
    Lead-based paint activities take place in target housing, as well 
as in public buildings constructed before 1978, commercial buildings, 
and steel structures. Maintenance of steel structures such as bridges, 
water tanks, and electrical towers may also involve activities affected 
by the proposed rules. Estimates of the costs of performing lead-based 
paint activities pursuant to the proposed standards were based on a 
number of factors, including the number of lead-related inspections, 
risk assessments, and abatement activities and the unit costs 
associated with such activities.
    The incremental costs estimated to be incurred in association with 
the proposed rule have been grouped into three categories: (a) Costs 
resulting from the imposition of the standards for conducting lead-
based paint activities; (b) costs resulting from the training and 
certifying of individuals engaged in lead-based paint activities; and 
(c) costs of establishing and operating State or Federal programs to 
administer and enforce the standards, regulations, or other 
requirements established under this proposed rule. For each of these 
three categories of costs, total incremental costs were estimated 
separately for the first year following promulgation (1994), and the 
present value for a 50-year stream of costs discounted at 3 percent. (A 
50-year stream was used because it was thought to provide a reasonable 
estimate of the average life of a home, and a period beyond which 
discounted costs would have little impact on total costs).
    Under Scenario 1, total first-year incremental costs were estimated 
to be approximately $1.4 billion, while total incremental costs, 
discounted at 3 percent over 50 years, were estimated to be $10.6 
billion. Under Scenario 2, total first year incremental costs were 
estimated at $.8 billion and total incremental costs, discounted at 3 
percent over 50 years, were estimated at $6.2 billion. As may be 
discerned from Table 1, by comparing cost estimates for the two 
scenarios presented, total costs decrease as abatement cut-offs 
increase (paint and soil lead concentrations), since fewer structures 
and less soil would be abated.
    As demonstrated in the accompanying RIA, the standards for 
conducting lead-based paint activities are the main source of costs, 
accounting for approximately 80 percent of the total incremental costs 
under both scenarios, due largely to identification and inspection 
requirements and soil abatement. Under Scenario 1, the incremental cost 
of public building identification is the greatest expenditure, 
accounting for 27 percent of the total incremental costs in the first 
year of implementation and approximately 23 percent of the $10.6 
billion total incremental cost. Under Scenario 2, public building 
identification is again the greatest expenditure accounting for 47 
percent of total incremental costs in the first year of implementation 
and approximately 39 percent of the $6.2 billion total incremental cost 
discounted over 50 years. The public building identification costs 
associated with the nonresidential sector are high due to the assumed 
high level of activity in this sector during the first 3 years of rule 
implementation.
    Training costs were estimated to be approximately 17 percent of 
total discounted costs for each of the scenarios. Factors affecting the 
potential magnitude of training costs are frequency and duration of 
training, as well as the number of potential trainees and associated 
productivity losses.
    With regard to State program costs, EPA found the one-time start-up 
costs to be the dominant factor. Owing to such start-up costs, total 
first-year costs were estimated to be much larger than costs for any 
subsequent year. In developing its total cost estimates for State 
programs, EPA assumed all States would establish such programs. While 
nothing in Title IV requires States to seek authorization, the costs of 
EPA administration and enforcement were judged to be comparable to 
State costs; thus, for the purposes of this analysis, this assumption 
is believed to provide a reasonable representation of costs 
attributable to section 404.
    3. Benefits of regulatory action. To most accurately estimate the 
benefits associated with this proposed rule, all private and social 
advantages of the proposed rule's requirements would need to be 
identified and quantified. In particular, the incremental risk 
reduction brought about by conducting lead-based paint activities using 
trained and certified individuals and complying with the standards 
would need to be measured and valued as incremental benefits. Such risk 
reduction would be the result of reduced lead exposure to residents of 
target housing; to occupants of and visitors to public and commercial 
buildings; to risk assessors, inspectors, and abatement workers; to 
individuals in close proximity to lead-related activities; and to the 
environment.
    The total measured benefits (i.e., benefits that have been 
identified and quantified) associated with complete residential 
abatement, include intelligence effects on infants and children, 
reductions in neonatal mortality due to decreased exposure to pregnant 
residents, and benefits to workers of avoidance of the very high blood 
lead levels associated with occupational exposure. (EPA also considered 
benefits resulting from reduced exposure to adult residents. The 
results of these preliminary calculations are included in the 
sensitivity analysis below.)
    Total measured benefits estimated in this manner overstate actual 
benefits associated with the incremental improvement imparted by the 
training, certification, and standards outlined in the proposal. EPA 
believes, however, that these total measured benefit estimates when 
compared to the incremental cost are sufficient to provide the basis 
for an informed decision. EPA requests comment, in light of the data 
limitations, on the value of this approach in evaluating the potential 
effectiveness of this regulation. Further, the Agency requests the 
submission of any available data that would facilitate the development 
of incremental benefit values for the requirements of this regulation 
as well as incremental benefits and costs of alternative regulatory 
requirements.
    The results of this approach are presented in Table 2. The 
estimated discounted total measured benefits over 50 years range from a 
low of $11.8 billion (abatement Scenario 2) up to $21.6 billion 
(abatement Scenario 1). The largest category of benefits accrue in 
association with children's intelligence effects, with an expected 50-
year benefit of $11 billion to $19 billion, depending on the abatement 
scenario. Benefits realized in association with reductions in neonatal 
mortality were estimated to range between $.8 billion and $2.6 billion, 
while benefits to workers were estimated at $2.1 to $5.1 million, over 
50 years. In addition, benefits to non-residential abatement workers 
were estimated at $34 to $49 million.
    4. Benefit-cost analysis. As shown in Table 3, total measured 
benefits are approximately double the incremental costs--the estimated 
incremental costs of the regulation under Scenario 2, discounted at 3 
percent and summed over 50 years, is estimated to be $6.2 billion, and 
the estimated total measured benefits of the regulation, discounted at 
3 percent and summed over 50 years, are $11.8 billion.
    Given that the incremental costs associated with the nonresidential 
sector amount to nearly 58 percent of all costs attributable to the 
rule and that the data limitations so severely restrict the benefit 
estimations for the nonresidential sector, the base case analysis also 
compares total measured benefits and incremental costs on a per 
residential abatement basis to gain additional insight to the impacts 
of the proposed regulation. In an effort to minimize the impact of the 
above limitations on the assessment of net benefits, an additional 
comparison was made between benchmark total measured benefits and 
incremental costs for a single residential abatement. As shown in Table 
4, if only a small portion of estimated total measured benefits, say 15 
to 20 percent are attributable to the proposed rule, it is possible for 
the incremental benefits to equal or exceed the incremental costs for 
paint abatement activities in the residential housing sector.
    A similar comparison is not possible for the nonresidential sector 
because data limitations preclude benefit estimates for this sector. 
This is not to imply that the benefits resulting from nonresidential 
abatements are insignificant. All the benefit categories believed to 
result from public and commercial and steel structure deleading are 
identified in Table 3. Available information regarding the scope of 
activity (and presented in the uncertainties section below) would 
suggest that substantial benefits are likely to exist in the form of 
other worker benefits, benefits to nearby residents, and ecological 
benefits.
    The estimate of the benefits would increase if all the omitted 
health and ecological effects were included. Even when restricted to 
the limited coverage of the effects of lead paint exposure that are 
included in this analysis, it is possible that the measured benefits 
associated with sections 402 and 404 will exceed the costs of the 
regulations. The measured benefits of complete abatements are more than 
six times the incremental costs for Abatement Scenario 2. Thus if the 
sections 402 and 404 rules increase the measured benefits of 
residential abatements (using current industrial practices) by as 
little as 18 percent, the benefits would exceed the costs of the 
regulation. A benefits analysis that included the significant omitted 
benefit categories would indicate that an even smaller percentage 
increase in the benefits of current abatement practices would be 
sufficient to cover the costs of the regulation.
    5. Uncertainties and sensitivity analysis uncertainties. The 
development of the estimated costs for this proposed rule relied on 
three steps: The determination of ``common'' practices, a comparison of 
these practices to the requirements of the rule, and an estimation of 
the cost of the additional or incremental activities. While there is a 
general uncertainty about all the estimates, this approach may have 
resulted in an overestimate of the costs. In the case of the number of 
samples to be tested, the analysis included costs for the full number 
of tests required under the regulation. Inspectors are already taking 
some samples, although some may not take as many as the regulations 
will require. Lacking information on the typical number of samples 
tested, the analysis included the costs for all the tests. Likewise, 
interviews with industry representatives indicated that very few soil 
abatements were currently taking place. Therefore, the analysis 
estimated the rate of soil abatements under the regulation based on 
estimates of household radon abatement. Since radon abatements are less 
expensive than soil abatements, this assumption may have resulted in an 
overestimate of the number of soil abatements and thus an overestimate 
of both benefits and costs. Both these issues are examined by the 
sensitivity analysis below.
    The development of the benefit estimates was also limited by 
numerous factors. It was not possible to include several potentially 
major sources of health benefits at this time. Some of the major 
omitted benefits include:
     All benefits to adult residents.
     All benefits to building occupants.
     All benefits to workers with blood lead levels below 50 
g/dL.
     All benefits to residents near steel structure deleadings.
     All ecological benefits.
All of the benefits in three of the five major categories, and part of 
the benefits to workers, result from changes affecting abatements and 
deleading of public and commercial buildings and steel structures. As a 
result, the underestimation of benefits has its greatest effect on the 
evaluation of the proposed rule's affect on nonresidential lead-based 
paint activities.
    The magnitude of some of these omitted benefits can be approximated 
by examining the extent of the likely exposure and the nature of the 
resulting adverse effects. In the case of benefits to occupants of 
public and commercial buildings, the potentially exposed population is 
very large. Over one-third of public buildings built before 1980 
(approximately 900,000 buildings) have lead-based paint at an XRF 
reading of 1 or greater. In addition, about 27 percent of commercial 
buildings (approximately 415,000 buildings) have lead-based paint at an 
XRF reading of 1 or greater. An equal percentage (nearly 150,000) of 
industrial buildings also have lead-based paint at that level. 
Currently, these buildings result in over one-half million deleadings 
per year. While the length of time of exposure for each individual 
building occupant may be short, the number of exposed individuals is 
great, resulting in potentially substantial population risks from 
improperly performed abatements. In addition, inadequate inspection 
and/or risk assessments could result in much longer-term exposures if 
lead risks are not identified and abated.
    Since the deleading of steel structures mainly occurs out-of-doors, 
there is a significant potential of exposure to the surrounding 
environment if deleading is not conducted properly. Currently, there 
are approximately 725,000 highway and railroad bridges, 30,000 water 
tanks, 75,000 petroleum and liquefied natural gas tanks, and 133,000 
electrical transmission towers with lead-based paint that need 
repainting, and about 128,000 underground storage tanks with lead-based 
coatings that need removal and demolition. While this analysis has not 
estimated the number of people living in proximity to these structures, 
the large number of structures combined with the fact that many are 
located in urban areas means that substantial numbers of people and 
large areas of ecosystems could be exposed to lead.
    In addition to adverse human health effects, lead can impose 
substantial adverse effects on ecosystems. Although lead occurs 
naturally in the environment, it plays no known beneficial role in 
biological processes. In fact, lead is a natural toxicant that affects 
a broad spectrum of species and persists in the environment. Elevated 
ambient lead levels that are bioavailable can seriously disrupt 
population and ecosystem dynamics. As a result, lead is considered a 
particularly hazardous ecotoxicant. While deleading of steel structures 
is likely to have the greatest impact on ecosystems, improperly 
performed abatements in other nonresidential and residential buildings 
can also introduce lead into the general environment.
    In addition to omitting benefits to occupants of nonresidential 
buildings, benefits to residents near steel structures, and ecological 
benefits, the estimates presented in the RIA may underestimate benefits 
because of the assumption made concerning which residential units will 
be abated. The analysis assumes that all the housing stock with XRF 
and/or soil-lead levels greater than the scenario levels are eligible 
candidates for abatement, and that housing units receiving abatements 
are twice as likely to have young children and newborns as the housing 
stock in general. This second assumption captures the increased concern 
about lead hazards and children, and the increased benefits that would 
accrue to households with young children. The increased concern will 
likely result in increased abatement rates among housing units with 
children. However, there are no data currently available on which to 
base an estimate of this increased likelihood of abatement, and the 
estimate used may be low. A low estimate will result in an 
underestimate of the average residential unit benefits. (Likewise, a 
high estimate will result in an overestimate of the average residential 
unit benefits.) In addition, if the likelihood of abatement increases 
with the level of lead present in the home, which is very likely, the 
average per unit benefits of residential abatement will increase 
correspondingly.
    Data limitations have prevented the estimation of the relevant 
abatement demand and cost functions which are necessary for accurately 
estimating the aggregate benefits and costs of the proposed rule. 
Adoption of the rule will impact variables that affect both the demand 
and supply functions. For instance, in theory, the increase in 
abatement costs resulting from training, accreditation, and standards 
required by section 402 will be reflected in an upward shift of the 
supply function, increasing prices and resulting in a decreased demand. 
However, it is reasonable to expect countervailing forces to exist. If 
people perceive that abatements performed by trained and certified 
contractors are a better quality service than currently available, the 
demand for the improved abatements may increase.
    In addition to demand shifts as a result of section 402, 
informational sections of Title IV and Title X such as sections 405, 
406, and 1018, respectively, will likely stimulate demand for 
abatements further. These actions provide information and education to 
consumers about the inherent dangers of lead.
    The net effect of these countervailing forces is difficult to 
predict with the limited information available. Data limitations have 
also prevented an assessment of how the quantity of lead-based paint 
activities may change with alternative regulatory options. Therefore, 
EPA has been unable to estimate the effect of more (or less) 
precriptive approaches relative to the proposal on the quantity of 
lead-based paint activities. The Agency solicits comments and 
suggestions about data sources or methods that may help in assessing 
the incremental benefits and costs of alternative approaches.
    In order to deal with this issue, it is assumed that the demand for 
deleading in Massachusetts can provide a proxy for estimating national 
demand after the regulation is in place. This is deemed appropriate 
since the training, accreditation, and performance requirements (thus 
costs) for the established Massachusetts' program are similar to that 
of the proposed rule. To the extent that residential abatements are 
mandatory in Massachusetts when elevated-blood-lead (EBL) children are 
identified, the adoption of Massachusetts' abatement rates will result 
in an overestimation of the number of national residential abatements. 
However, it is felt that overestimation will be minimal for the 
following two reasons: information from the Massachusetts' Department 
of Health indicates that only 10 to 20 percent of the residential 
abatements are a result of the presence of EBL children, and because it 
is likely that other States will also adopt a mandatory abatement 
provision for EBL children.
    EPA knows of no other State programs that may provide additional 
insights to the expected impacts on demand resulting from the 
implementation of the proposed rule and, therefore, solicits public 
comment on the existence of State programs and relevant information 
germane to this issue.
    6. Sensitivity analysis. Six sets of sensitivity analyses were 
conducted. Two sets affecting only the costs are alternative costs of 
standards, resulting from alternative estimates of unit costs or 
alternative assumptions of the number of events; and, alternative 
training costs, resulting from alternative definitions of training 
requirements. There are two sets of sensitivity analyses that affect 
the benefits while leaving the costs unchanged. These two analyses 
explore alternative levels of benefits to adult residents of units 
abated and alternative value of a statistical life. And finally, there 
are two sets of analyses that affect both the costs and the benefits. 
These use an alternative discount rate, and assume alternative levels 
of abatement activity. The impacts of these variables on the estimated 
costs and benefits are presented in Tables 5 and 6, respectively.
    The greatest affects on the estimated benefits and costs are 
associated with the assumptions concerning choice of discount rate and 
the rate at which soil abatements will occur. Since the benefits 
resulting from the proposed regulation will not occur simultaneously 
with the costs, it is necessary to compare streams of costs with the 
resulting streams of benefits. This is done by discounting future costs 
and benefits and summing the discounted values. Two alternative 
approaches were investigated: using 7 percent in place of 3 percent to 
reflect an alternative social rate of time preference, and using a two-
stage procedure that allows for the use of two different discount 
rates: marginal rate of return on capital (7 percent) for annualizing 
the capital costs; and a social rate of time preference (3 percent) for 
discounting the stream of annualized costs and benefits. The 
distinction between these two approaches rests with whether the source 
of funds for lead-based paint activities are displacing investment or 
consumption.
    Simply discounting the stream of costs by 7 percent decreases the 
total 50-year cost estimate by 27 percent. At the same time, increasing 
the discount rate to 7 percent substantially decreases the estimated 
benefits more than the cost, because many of the benefits will occur 
further in the future. There are potentially two separate effects of 
changing the discount rate. First, the benefits per abatement decrease 
for all the quantified benefit categories except for workers benefits 
and the present value of the 50-year benefits decreases for all the 
benefit categories (including workers). The combination of these two 
effects decreases the present value of the 50-year benefit stream by 87 
percent. Consequently, the choice of discount rate affects benefits to 
a much greater extent than it does costs.
    The results of the two-stage discounting procedure are very 
sensitive to the amortization period (the length of time capital is 
diverted from investments). Given the uncertainties about the 
appropriate amortization period, 50-year discounted costs were not 
calculated. However, as demonstrated in the literature the two-stage 
results will fall between the single discount rates of 3 and 7 percent 
used in these analyses.
    One of the most important elements used in estimating the benefits 
is the willingness to pay to avoid a unit reduction in the risk of 
death, also referred to as the value of a statistical life. The value 
of a statistical life directly enters the calculations of the benefits 
of the avoided neonatal mortality, adult resident hypertension related 
benefits (when included), and worker benefits. The results presented in 
base case are calculated using a value of $5.3 million per statistical 
life. The standard deviation of these values is $3.8 million. A useful 
range of alternative values for sensitivity analysis is mean value 
minus one standard deviation, and the mean value plus one standard 
deviation. The range of alternative values of a statistical life is 
therefore $1.8 million to $9.1 million. Use of this range will have a 
significant effect on neonatal mortality benefits. However, the 
alternative values do not alter the overall benefit estimates greatly; 
the present value of benefits per abatement and of total benefits (over 
50 years, discounted at 3 percent) changes by plus or minus 5 percent.
    The primary analysis relies on Massachusetts and OSHA data to 
estimate most of the levels of abatement activity, in terms of the 
number of inspections, and abatements/deleading, under the proposed 
regulation. The Massachusetts and OSHA data provide little information 
regarding the number of soil abatements. For estimates of rates of soil 
abatement, therefore, the analysis relies on information on rates of 
radon abatement. The primary analysis assumes a similar response rate 
to the presence of lead in soil as to the presence of radon in soil. In 
other words, 20 percent of the soil inspections that determine the 
presence of lead result in a soil abatement.
    The sensitivity analysis assumes two alternative abatement rates 
(84 and 10 percent) which reflect likely response rate extremes. For 
target housing, the lead paint abatement rate was 84 percent. If 
individuals respond to the presence of lead in the soil similarly to 
interior lead paint, then the soil abatement rate also will be 84 
percent. The 10 percent alternative is examined because based on the 
radon abatement experience, the 20 percent abatement rate used in the 
primary analysis may be too high.
    Changing the level of soil abatement activities will affect 
training, standards, and state costs at an 84 percent abatement rate, 
the total cost of the regulation will increase by 26 percent, with 
standards costs increasing 32 percent. Using a 10 percent abatement 
rate the total costs will decrease by only 4.5 percent.
    Changing the level of soil abatement activities also changes the 
estimated benefits. The per-abatement benefits do not change from 
performing an interior-only, soil-only, or combined paint and soil 
abatement. However, the average per-abatement benefits change when the 
number of soil (and paint and soil combined) abatements change. At an 
84 percent abatement rate, the total measured benefits will increase 30 
percent; and using a 10 percent abatement rate will result in a 5 
percent decrease in total measured benefits.
    7. Impacts of the proposed rule. In assessing impacts of the 
proposed rule, EPA focussed on the potential of the rule to affect 
international trade and to impact technological innovation. The 
distributional consequences of regulation (environmental equity) were 
also investigated. (Small business impacts, assessed pursuant to the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, were also assessed. The results of 
this analysis are presented in unit X. of this preamble.)
    With regard to international trade impacts, EPA examined the 
affected industries to determine whether the extent of foreign trade 
merited a detailed examination of potential impacts. Since the 
industries directly affected by this proposed rule are service 
industries, marketable goods would not be produced for trade. The 
reduction in lead-based paint hazards expected is achieved through the 
identification and abatement of lead-based paint structures in the 
United States and, therefore, will have no implications for 
international trade. Thus, EPA concludes that there is no appreciable 
international trade in these services.
    In assessing the proposed rule's potential impacts on innovative 
activity, EPA believes that certain requirements are likely to 
encourage innovation, while others may be a hinderance. For example, an 
area where innovation might be encouraged is in the case of testing to 
determine the presence of lead. The standards require that the presence 
of lead be determined by a test that produces discrete measures. While 
this proposed rule does not prescribe or prohibit any particular 
practice, it does require that certain results be achieved. Thus, in 
setting criteria for new approaches in this case, the proposed rule 
does not eliminate the potential for innovation by requiring the use of 
any particular method, such as XRF.
    The key factor in EPA's investigation into the distributional 
impacts of the proposed rule was the distribution of lead-based paint 
in the nation's housing stock. Lead-based paint is more common in 
older, low-cost housing units in the Northeast and Midwest. Because 
such housing units tend to be occupied by households at or below the 
poverty level, including a disproportionate share of African-Americans, 
these subpopulations are exposed to relatively more risks than other 
subpopulations. While these sub-populations would be likely to receive 
a greater portion of the overall risk reduction benefits of the rule, 
the fact that most abatements are voluntary suggests that wealthier 
households will be more likely to proceed with abatements. 
Unfortunately, data are not available to permit estimates to be made of 
the demand for abatement given differing household income levels; thus, 
the distribution of benefits and costs across geographic and 
demographic lines were not estimated.

                                                     Table 1.--Summary of Estimate of the Total Cost                                                    
                                          Scenario 1: XRF  1 for Paint and 500 ppm or More for Soil                                          
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                   Total Discounted 50-yr. Cost (3%)                                    
                    Cost                      First Year Cost (1994) ($millions)              ($millions)                  Percentage of Total Cost     
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Training                                                                     501                               1,878                                 18%
Standards                                                                    830                               8,439                                 80%
State Program Administration                                                  36                                 259                                  2%
Total for XRF  1, 500 ppm                                       1,367                              10,576                                100%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                                                        
                                         Scenario 2: XRF  6 for Paint and 2,000 ppm or More for Soil                                         
                                                                                                                                                        
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Training                                                                     222                               1,053                                 17%
Standards                                                                    557                               4,952                                 80%
State Program Administration                                                  24                                 184                                  3%
Total for XRF  6, 2,000 ppm                                       803                               6,190                                100%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Source ``Title X Sections 402 and 404 Regulatory Impact 
Analysis,'' U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, 
Regulatory Impacts Branch.

                                  Table 2.--Summary of Total Measured Benefits                                  
                      Scenario 1: XRF  1, Soil Lead Content  500 ppm                      
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Benefit Category       Total Benefits, First Year (Millions)            Present Value, 50 Years (Millions)     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Children**                                                 $836.5                                        $18,975
Neonatal                                                                                                        
 Mortality**                                               $115.8                                         $2,605
Workers Involved                                                                                                
 in Abatement                                                $0.2                                           $5.1
All Other Workers                                            $4.9                                            $49
Total Benefits***                                          $957.5                                        $21,635
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                
                     Scenario 2: XRF  6, Soil Lead Content  2,000 ppm                     
                                                                                                                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Children**                                                 $494.0                                        $10,968
Neonatal                                                                                                        
 Mortality**                                                $36.4                                           $804
Workers Involved                                                                                                
 in Abatement                                               $0.10                                           $2.1
All Other Workers                                            $2.6                                          $34.0
Total Benefits***                                          $533.2                                        $11,808
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    **Benefits of complete abatements, not just incremental benefits 
from this rule
    ***Combination of incremental and complete abatement benefits

                     Table 3.--Estimated Total Benefits and Incremental Costs over 50 Years                     
                 Scenario 2 (XRF6, Soil2,000 ppm)--3 percent discount rate                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Total Measured Benefits from Abatements (except where             Incremental Costs Due to Regulation        
                          noted)                           -----------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------                                                     
      Benefit Category                Present Value                Cost Category              Present Value     
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Residential Abatements                                             
                                                                                                                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Infant and Children           $11.0 Billion                 Training Cost                            $91 Million
 Intelligence Effects --                                                                                        
 Total                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                
Other Infant & Children       Not Measured                  State Program Cost                       $54 Million
 Neurological Effects --                                                                                        
 Total                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                
Neonatal Mortality--Total     $804 Million                  Standards Cost                          $1.7 Billion
                                                                                                                
Adult Hypertension--Total     Not Measured                                                                      
                                                                                                                
Other Adult Health Benefits   Likely Substantial*                                                               
                                                                                                                
Workers (PbB > 50 g/ $2 Million                                                                        
 Dl)--Increment due to                                                                                          
 Regulation                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                
Other Worker Benefits         Likely Substantial*                                                               
                                                                                                                
Ecological Benefits           Not Measured                                                                      
                                                                                                                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent Value of 50 Year      $11.77 Billion                Percent Value of 50 Year                $1.8 Billion
 Stream--Residential                                         Stream--Residential                                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                
                          Public and Commercial Building and Steel Structure Deleading                          
                                                                                                                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Workers (PbB > 50 g/ All Deleading $34 Million     Training Cost                           $963 Million
 Dl)--Increment Due to                                                                                          
 Regulation                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                
Other Worker Benefits         Likely Substantial*           State Program Cost                      $129 Million
                                                                                                                
Building Occupants            Not Measured                                                                      
                                                                                                                
Benefits to Nearby Residents  Likely Substantial*           Standards Cost                          $3.3 Billion
                                                                                                                
Ecological Benefits           Likely Substantial*                                                               
                                                                                                                
Present Value of 50 Year      Likely Substantial*           Present Value of 50 Year                $4.4 Billion
 Stream Non-Residential                                      Stream Non-Residential                             
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                
    Total Present Value (Sum of Residential and Non-Residential Structures): Quantifiable Benefits and Costs    
                                                                                                                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Structure Types--50 Year  $11.81 Billion + Substantial  All Structure Types--50                 $6.2 Billion
 Stream                        Unquantifiable Benefits       Year Stream                                        
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    *Benefits are presumed to be substantial, but cannot be 
estimated due to lack of quantified information on the incremental 
reductions in human and ecosystem exposure.

    Table 4.--Comparison of Residential Incremental Costs Due to Proposed Rule to Total Measured Residential    
                                      Benefits, Per Residential Unit Abated                                     
                              Scenario 1 (XRF1, Soil500 ppm)                              
                                             Residential Abatements                                             
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Total Measured Benefits from Complete Abatements (except            Incremental Costs Due to Regulation        
                       where noted)                        -----------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------                                                     
                                   Estimated Value Per             Cost Category            Estimated Cost Per  
      Benefit Category                  Abatement                                               Abatement       
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Infant and Children           $8,271                        Training Cost                                    $94
 Intelligence Effects--Total                                                                                    
                                                                                                                
Other Infant & Children       Not Measured                  State Program Cost                               $52
 Neurological Effects--Total                                                                                    
                                                                                                                
Neonatal Mortality--Total     $1,133                        Standards Cost                                $1,763
                                                                                                                
Adult Hypertension--Total     Not Measured                                                                      
                                                                                                                
Other Adult Health Effects    Not Measured                                                                      
                                                                                                                
Workers (PbB > 50 /  $2.22                                                                             
 Dl)--Increment due to                                                                                          
 regulation                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                
Other Worker Effects          Not Measured                                                                      
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total                         $9,406                        Total                                         $1,909
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                
                             Scenario 2 (XRF6, Soil2,000 ppm)                             
                                             Residential Abatements                                             
                                                                                                                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Infant and Children           $15,482                       Training Cost                                   $123
 Intelligence Effects--Total                                                                                    
                                                                                                                
Other Infant & Children       Not Measured                  State Program Cost                               $88
 Neurological Effects--Total                                                                                    
                                                                                                                
Neonatal Mortality--Total     $1,133                        Standards Cost                                $2,303
                                                                                                                
Adult Hypertension--Total     Not Measured                                                                      
                                                                                                                
Other Adult Health Effects    Not Measured                                                                      
                                                                                                                
Workers (PbB > 50 g/ $2.74                                                                             
 Dl)--Increment Due to                                                                                          
 Regulation                                                                                                     
                                                                                                                
Other Worker Effects          Not Measured                                                                      
                                                                                                                
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total                         $16,618                       Total                                         $2,514
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



               Table 5.--Sensitivity of Cost Estimates to Variations in the Value of Key Variables              
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Total Discounted Costs ($billion)                                
      Variation in Key Variable       --------------------------------------------------   %Change from Primary 
                                           Primary Analysis       Sensitivity Analysis           Analysis       
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reduce Lab Fees by 15%                                   $6.19                    $5.85                    -5.4%
                                                                                                                
Increase Lab Fees by 15%                                 $6.19                    $6.53                    +5.4%
                                                                                                                
Reduce Amount of Hands-on Training                                                                              
 Time by One Half                                        $6.19                    $6.18                    -0.2%
                                                                                                                
Use 7% Discount Rate                                     $6.19                    $4.51                   -27.1%
                                                                                                                
Reduce Soil Abatement Rate by One                                                                               
 Half (to 10%)                                           $6.19                    $5.91                    -4.5%
                                                                                                                
Increase Soil Abatement Rate 4.2                                                                                
 Times (to 84%)                                          $6.19                    $7.80                   +26.0%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



               Table 6.--Sensitivity of Cost Estimates to Variations in the Value of Key Variables              
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Total Discounted Benefits ($billion)                               
      Variation in Key Variable       --------------------------------------------------   %Change from Primary 
                                           Primary Analysis       Sensitivity Analysis           Analysis       
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reduce Value of a Statistical Life to                                                                           
 $1.4 Million                                            $11.8                    $11.2                      -5%
                                                                                                                
Increase Value of Statistical Life to                                                                           
 $9.1 Million                                            $11.8                    $12.4                      +5%
                                                                                                                
Include Benefits to Adult Residents,                                                                            
 Assuming 2.13 g/D1 Change                                                                             
 in Blood Lead                                           $11.8                    $31.2                    +164%
                                                                                                                
Include Benefits to Adult Residents,                                                                            
 Assuming 0.1 /D1 Change in                                                                            
 Blood Lead                                              $11.8                    $12.8                      +8%
                                                                                                                
Use 7% Discount Rate                                     $11.8                     $1.5                     -87%
                                                                                                                
Reduce Soil abatement Rate by One                                                                               
 Half (to 10%)                                           $11.8                    $11.2                      -5%
                                                                                                                
Increase Soil Abatement Rate 4.2                                                                                
 Times (to 84%)                                          $11.8                    $15.3                     +30%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Enforcement

    Section 409 of TSCA makes it unlawful to fail or refuse to comply 
with any provision of a rule promulgated under Title IV of TSCA. 
Therefore, failure to comply with any provisions of the final rule 
would be a violation of TSCA. In addition, section 15 of TSCA makes it 
unlawful for any person to fail or refuse to permit entry or inspection 
as required by section 11 of TSCA.
    Violators may be subject to both civil and criminal liability. 
Under the penalty provision of section 16 of TSCA, any person who 
violates section 15 or 409 is subject to a civil penalty of up to 
$25,000 for each violation. Each day a violation continues may 
constitute a separate violation. Knowing or willful violations of any 
provision of the final rule could lead to the imposition of criminal 
fines of up to $25,000 and imprisonment for up to 1 year for each 
violation. In addition, other remedies are available to EPA under 
sections 7 and 17 of TSCA, such as seeking an injunction to restrain 
violations of the rule and seizing any imminently hazardous chemical 
substance. Section 15 and 16 of TSCA apply to ``any person'' who 
violates various provisions of TSCA. EPA may, at its discretion, 
proceed against individuals as well as companies or Federal facilities. 
In particular, EPA may proceed against individuals who report false or 
misleading information or cause it to be reported.

H. Business Confidentiality

    Pursuant to section 14 of TSCA, a person may assert a claim of 
business confidentiality for any public comments submitted to EPA in 
connection with the proposed rule. Any person who submits a public 
comment for which a claim of confidentiality has been made must also 
submit a nonconfidential version. Any claim of confidentiality must 
accompany the information when it is submitted to EPA. Persons may 
claim information in comments confidential by circling, bracketing, or 
underlining it, and marking it with ``CONFIDENTIAL'' or some other 
appropriate designation. EPA will disclose information subject to a 
claim of business confidentiality only to the extent permitted by 
section 14 of TSCA and 40 CFR part 2, subpart B. If a person does not 
assert a claim of confidentiality for information in comments at the 
time it is submitted to EPA, EPA will make the information public 
without further notice to that person by placing the comments in the 
public docket for this rulemaking.

I. Hearing Procedures

    EPA will hold an informal hearing at a time and place announced at 
a later date in the Federal Register. Any informal hearing will be 
conducted in accordance with EPA's ``Procedures for Conducting 
Rulemaking Under Section 6 of the Toxic Substances Control Act'' (40 
CFR part 750). Persons or organizations desiring to participate in the 
informal hearing must file a written request to participate. The 
written request to participate must be sent to the Environmental 
Assistance Division at the address listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT. The written request to participate must include: (1) A brief 
statement of the interest of the person or organization in the 
proceeding; (2) a brief outline of the points to be addressed; (3) an 
estimate of the time required; and (4) if the request comes from an 
organization, a non-binding list of the persons to take part in the 
presentation. Organizations are requested to bring with them, to the 
extent possible, employees with individual expertise in and 
responsibility for each of the areas to be addressed.

J. Official Rulemaking Record

    EPA has established a record for this rulemaking (docket control 
number OPPTS-62128). A public version of the record, without any 
information claimed as confidential business information, is available 
in the TSCA Nonconfidential Information Center (NCIC) from 12 noon to 4 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except legal holidays. The TSCA NCIC is 
located at EPA headquarters, in Rm. NE-B607, 401 M St., SW., 
Washington, DC. 20460.
    The rulemaking record contains information considered by EPA in 
developing this proposed rule. The record includes: (1) All Federal 
Register notices, (2) relevant support documents, (3) reports, (4) 
memoranda and letters, and (5) hearing transcripts responses to 
comments, and other documents related to this rulemaking.
    The following is a list of documents which the Agency relied upon 
while developing this proposed regulation and can be found in the 
docket. Other documents, not listed here, such as those submitted with 
written comments from interested parties, are contained in the TSCA 
Docket office as well. The drafts of proposed rules submitted by the 
Administrator to the Office of Management and Budget for any 
interagency review process prior to proposal of the rule will also be 
contained in the public docket. The drafts of the final rule submitted 
for OMB review before promulgation will also be placed into the public 
docket.
    (1) Committee on the Institutional Means for Assessment of Risks to 
Public Health - Commission on Life Sciences - National Research 
Council. 1983. Risk Assessment in the Federal Government: Managing the 
Process. National Academy Press, Washington D.C.
    (2) DOL, OSHA. 1993. Lead Exposure in Construction; Interim Final 
Rule. May 4, 1993. 29 CFR Part 1926.
    (3) HUD, Office of Public and Indian Housing, 1990. Lead-Based 
Paint: Interim Guidelines for Hazard Identification and Abatement in 
Public and Indian Housing. (September, 1990, pages 87,89, A14-111 
revised May 1991).
    (4) HUD, Office of Policy Development and Research, 1991. The HUD 
Lead-Based Paint Abatement Demonstration (FHA). (August 1991).
    (5) HUD, Office of Public and Indian Housing. 1992. Lead-Based 
Paint Risk Assessment Protocol. (September 1992).
    (6) SOEH, (Society for Occupational and Environmental Health). 
Protective Work Practices for Lead-Based Paint Abatement. Draft for 
Final Review.
    (7) State of California [Sacramento], Department of Transportation. 
1982. Long-Term Environmental Evaluation of Paint Residue and Blast 
Cleaning Abrasives from the Middle River Bridge Repainting Project. 
(July 1982).
    (8) USEPA. 1992. EPA Model Lead Abatement Training Course for 
Supervisors and Contractors: Instructor Manual. (July 1992).
    (9) USEPA. 1993. Lead Inspector Training - Model Training Course 
Curriculum: Instructor Manual. (March 1993).
    (10) USEPA, OPPT, CMD, TPB. 1992. Applicability of RCRA Disposal 
Requirements to Lead-Based Paint Abatement Wastes: Final Report. 
(October 1992).
    (11) USEPA, OPPTS. 1993. Residential Sampling for Lead: Draft 
Protocols for Lead Dust and Soil Sampling (June 23, 1993).

IX. Regulatory Assessment Requirements

A. Executive Order 12866

    Under E.O. 12866, (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the Agency must 
determine whether regulatory action is ``significant'' and therefore 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the 
requirements of the Executive Order. Under section 3(f), the order 
defines ``a significant regulatory action'' as an action that is likely 
to result in a rule (1) having an annual effect on the economy of $100 
million or more, or adversely and materially affecting a sector of the 
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public 
health or safety, or State, local or tribal governments or communities 
(also referred to as ``economically significant''); (2) creating 
serious inconsistency or otherwise interfering with an action taken or 
planned by another agency; (3) materially altering the budgetary 
impacts of entitlement, grants, user fees, or loan programs; or (4) 
raising novel legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the 
Presidents priorities, or the principles set forth in this Executive 
Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of this Executive Order, it has been 
determined that this rule is a ``significant regulatory action'' 
because it will have an annual effect on the economy of over $100 
million annually. As such, this action was submitted to OMB for review, 
and any comments or changes made in response to OMB suggestions or 
recommendations, have been documented in the public record.

B. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    (1). Introduction. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) 
requires regulators to analyze impacts on small entities. EPA conducted 
such an analysis, including it as part of the RIA. Based on this 
analysis of available data, EPA preliminarily concludes that the 
proposed rule should not place undue burden on small business. The 
analysis is summarized below.
    (2). Impacts on Small Businesses. EPA assessed potential impacts, 
both absolute and relative burden, on small abatement firms in the 
construction industry. To examine the potential impacts of the proposed 
rule on small abatement establishments, compliance costs as a 
percentage of operating costs were estimated for both small and large 
firms and then compared to determine if small firms are more adversely 
impacted than large firms.
    The compliance costs consist of two components: (1) Licensing and 
training costs for workers and supervisors, as well as licensing costs 
for firms, and (2) incremental costs of performance standards for 
abatement procedures. These two components coincide with the two 
decision points faced by firms interested in performing lead-based 
paint abatement work (including soil abatement). In order to be a 
``player'' in this industry, a firm must be licensed and its employees 
must be trained and certified. It is likely that a firm will incur 
these expenses in anticipation of work, based on its assessment of the 
future demand for such services, its competition, and the price it will 
be able to charge. Therefore, the firm may incur the costs with no 
opportunity to recoup them, thus decreasing its profits.
    The second set of costs, those resulting from performance 
standards, are of a different nature. The firms that do lead abatement 
work also perform similar work in settings that do not involve lead and 
are not affected by the proposed rule. These costs occur at the second 
decision point. They will be incurred by a firm only if it chooses to 
undertake a given lead-based paint job. In each case, the firm can 
determine the impact of the performance standards on its sales and 
profit levels. If the impact will be undesirable (e.g., decrease profit 
levels), the firm can decline the work. In this voluntary setting, the 
performance standards will not have an impact on the profits of small 
businesses. Likewise, owners of property will incur the performance 
standards costs only if abatements are in their benefit.
    A comparison of incremental training and licensing costs to the 
estimated operating costs for an average small firm, for each SIC group 
involved with lead abatement, is shown in Table 7 below. These SIC 
groups cover abatements in residential, public, commercial, and 
industrial buildings, as well as steel structure abatement and 
deleading. Assuming that none of the training and licensing costs are 
shifted forward in the form of higher prices, the ratio of compliance 
costs to operating costs for small establishments range between 1.2 and 
3.2 percent. Cost ratios are similarly estimated for large 
establishments in Table 8 below. For large firms, the ratios tend to be 
slightly lower, ranging from1.0 to 2.3 percent. For both large and 
small establishments, the largest cost ratio occurs for SIC 1721, 
painting contractors. However, for these firms, a large non-lead paint 
market is available. In all cases, compliance costs equal a small 
percentage of operating costs.
    While this shifting of costs will alleviate the burden on abatement 
and deleading firms, the incremental costs of the regulations may 
affect residential and commercial building owners. Consistent with the 
arguments presented above, under this proposed rule abatement is a 
voluntary action. As such, a landlord is unlikely to undertake an 
abatement unless he or she is able to pass the cost on to his or her 
tenants or otherwise recoup the costs in terms of higher property 
values. EPA is concerned about the possibility that landlords of 
marginally profitable property, under the threat of civil suits may 
chose the alternative of abandoning the property rather than incur the 
cost of abatement. EPA solicits comments providing data or methods any 
such effects on the removal target housing from the market.
    An alternative indicator which demonstrates potential impacts on 
small abatement firms focuses on profitability. EPA subtracted 
estimated establishment compliance costs from average profits per 
establishment to determine post-compliance profits. This calculation 
was also performed separately for small and large establishments for 
the same SIC codes identified above assuming Scenario 1 (See Tables 9 
and 10 below). The estimated average adjusted profits for small 
establishments in two of the nine affected industry sectors become 
negative. One of these sectors, Miscellaneous Trade Contractors, was 
assumed as the most likely to perform a high frequency of very costly 
soil abatement projects; thus, compliance costs exceeded profits by 
more than a factor of 10. For 3 other sectors, compliance costs 
represented more than 50 percent of abatement establishment profits. 
For large firms, the results of this calculation indicated the typical 
large firm to remain profitable in all sectors. Thus, based on the 
profitability indicator size of deleading firms entering the abatement 
industry may be impacted by this proposed rule.
    These calculations on profits assume all costs were absorbed by 
affected firms. This is more reasonable in the short run than in the 
long run. EPA does not have the necessary information to ascertain the 
cost pass through rate and resulting impacts on individual firms in the 
short run. Also, the analysis was constrained to use SIC data that are 
from a set of firms that may be different from firms complying with 
this proposed rule and, therefore, the financial information may not be 
representative of potential abatement firms. EPA solicits comments on 
available data to estimate these impacts.
    The two indicators presented above were selected to present the 
likely bounds of the impacts associated with the proposed rule. The 
actual impact will likely lie somewhere between these extremes.
    The comparison of impacts on small and large training providers was 
not performed for two reasons. Except for the RLTCs, most training 
providers are small, so there would be no differential effect based on 
size of the firm. In addition, it is likely that the training providers 
will pass the additional costs on to their trainees. Since the changes 
will be required by Federal regulations, they will apply to all 
training providers. Second, there will be heightened concern about 
lead-based paint hazards and thus a greater willingness to pay for 
trained personnel who will presumably provide higher quality services. 
In fact, these regulations are likely to create a market for training 
services and thus will be beneficial to small businesses.

                    Table 7.--Impacts on Operating Costs for Small Establishments By SIC Code                   
                             Scenario 2 (XRF6, Soil2,000 ppm)                             
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Operating Costs Per          Compliance Costs Per       Compliance Cost/Operating 
       SIC Codes                 Establishment                 Establishment                    Costs           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1541 Industrial                                                                                                 
 Buildings and                                                                                                  
 Warehouses                                  $475,390                        $6,641                        1.4% 
1542 Other                                                                                                      
 Nonresidential                                                                                                 
 Buildings                                    418,475                         6,867                        1.6% 
1611 Highway and Street                                                                                         
 Construction                                                                                                   
 Contractors                                  543,130                         6,533                        1.2% 
1622 Bridge, Tunnel and                                                                                         
 Elevated Highway                                                                                               
 Contractors                                  646,332                         9,206                        1.4% 
1721 Painting                                                                                                   
 Contractors                                  142,568                         4,508                        3.2% 
1751 Carpentry Work                                                                                             
 Contractors                                  170,404                         4,341                        2.6% 
1791 Structural Steel                                                                                           
 Erection Contractors                         384,631                         7,870                        2.1% 
1795 Wrecking and                                                                                               
 Demolition                                   299,717                         6,199                        2.1% 
1799 Misc. Trade                                                                                                
 Contractors, NEC                             241,250                         5,530                        2.3% 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Source: ``Title X Sections 402 and 404 Regulatory Impact 
Analysis,'' U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, 
Regulatory Impacts Branch.

                    Table 8.--Impacts on Operating Costs for Large Establishments By SIC Code                   
                             Scenario 2 (XRF6, Soil2,000 ppm)                             
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              Operating Costs Per          Compliance Costs Per       Compliance Cost/Operating 
       SIC Codes                 Establishment                 Establishment                    Costs           
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1541 Industrial                                                                                                 
 Buildings and                                                                                                  
 Warehouses                                $5,294,916                       $71,424                        1.4% 
1542 Other                                                                                                      
 Nonresidential                                                                                                 
 Buildings                                  4,773,679                        65,550                        1.4% 
1611 Highway and Street                                                                                         
 Construction                                                                                                   
 Contractors                                6,840,501                        68,730                        1.0% 
1622 Bridge, Tunnel and                                                                                         
 Elevated Highway                                                                                               
 Contractors                                6,754,332                        87,379                        1.3% 
1721 Painting                                                                                                   
 Contractors                                1,894,301                        43,797                        2.3% 
1751 Carpentry Work                                                                                             
 Contractors                                1,103,563                        22,702                        2.1% 
1791 Structural Steel                                                                                           
 Erection Contractors                       3,090,078                        59,044                        1.9% 
1795 Wrecking and                                                                                               
 Demolition                                 3,043,743                        60,056                        2.0% 
1799 Misc. Trade                                                                                                
 Contractors, NEC                           2,354,724                        48,346                        2.1% 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Source: ``Title X Sections 402 and 404 Regulatory Impact 
Analysis,'' U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, 
Regulatory Impacts Branch.

                                                Table 9.--Statistics of Small Establishments By SIC Code                                                
                                                        (XRF1, Soil500 ppm)                                                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  No. of      Constr.                               EPA Costs       EPA                                 
                                                 Constr.      Payroll/   Total Sales  Profits per   of Initial  Incremental                Profits Minus
                  SIC Codes                     Wkrs. Per      Estab.     per Estab.     Estab.     Training &    Costs of   Total Costs     Costs per  
                                                 Estab.*       ($000)                               Licensing*   Standards                    Estab.    
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1541                                                   4.1          $89     $494,683      $19,293       $7,123       $9,365      $16,488          $2,805
1542                                                   3.9           75      436,366       17,891        6,796        2,710        9,506           8,385
1611                                                   3.7          102      568,128       24,998        7,075          140        7,215          17,783
1622                                                   5.3          133      671,863       25,531        9,807        1,579       11,386          14,145
1721                                                   2.5           45      153,961       11,393        4,842        7,201       12,043           (650)
1751                                                   2.4           44      182,837       12,433        4,581        2,773        7,354           5,079
1791                                                   4.5          100      409,182       24,551        8,369          349        8,718          15,833
1795                                                   3.5           68      318,171       18,454        6,142        1,542        7,684          10,770
1799                                                   3.1           54      258,298       17,048        5,488      306,911      312,399      (295,351)*
*1:2 Supervisor:Worker Ratio                                                                                                                            
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Source: ``Title X Sections 402 and 404 Regulatory Impact 
Analysis,'' U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, 
Regulatory Impacts Branch and CONSAD (1993).

                                                Table 10.--Statistics of Large Establishments By SIC Code                                               
                                                        (XRF1, Soil500 ppm)                                                       
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  No. of      Constr.                               EPA Costs       EPA                                 
                                                  Const.    Payroll Per  Total Sales  Profits Per   of Initial  Incremental                Profits Minus
                  SIC Codes                     Wrks. Per      Estab.     Per Estab.     Estab.     Training &    Costs of   Total Costs     Costs Per  
                                                  Estab.       ($000)                               Licensing*   Standards                    Estab.    
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1541                                                  54.2       $1,335   $5,567,735     $272,819      $75,788       $8,500      $84,288        $188,531
1542                                                  45.1        1,035    5,030,220      256,541       63,292        2,763        6,055         190,486
1611                                                  47.3        1,418    7,253,978      413,477       73,932          142       74,074         339,403
1622                                                  60.2        1,559    7,102,347      348,015       94,170        1,597       95,767         252,248
1721                                                  31.1          743    2,081,649      187,348       46,338        7,285       53,623         133,725
1751                                                  16.0          341    1,190,467       86,904       24,011        2,957       26,968          59,936
1791                                                  40.6        1,122    3,393,413      303,335       63,543          344       63,887         239,448
1795                                                  41.3          797    3,279,895      236,152       58,080        1,505       59,585         176,567
1799                                                  33.2          663    2,565,059      210,335       46,767        5,250       52,017         158,318
* 1:3 Supervisor:Worker Ratio                                                                                                                           
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Source: ``Title X Sections 402 and 404 Regulatory Impact 
Analysis,'' U.S. EPA, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, 
Regulatory Impacts Branch and CONSAD (1993) and CONSAD (1993).

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Information Collection requirements in this proposed rule have 
been submitted for approval to the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. An 
Information Collection Request (ICR) document has been prepared by EPA 
(ICR No. 15 USC 2682 and 15 USC 2688) and a copy may be obtained from 
Sandy Farmer, Information Policy Branch, (2136) EPA, 401 M st., SW 
Washington DC 20460, or by calling (202) 260-2740.
    This collection of information has an estimated reporting burden 
averaging 2.67 hours per response while the estimated recordkeeping 
burden was estimated to be 0.32 hours per response. These estimates 
include time to review instructions, search existing data sources, 
gather and maintain the data needed, and complete the collection 
information.
    Send comments regarding the burden estimate, or any other aspect of 
this collection of information including suggestions for reducing this 
burden to Chief, Information Policy Branch, (2136) EPA 401 M St., S.W., 
Washington, DC 20460, marked ``Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.'' The 
final rule will respond to OMB or public comments on the information 
collection requirements contained in this proposal.
    This regulation includes a number of reporting and record keeping 
requirements, which are designed to help EPA verify compliance with the 
rule after it is promulgated. This analysis identifies the reporting 
and record keeping requirements specified in the proposed rule and 
estimates the burden and cost that these requirements will impose.
    This regulation will add to the reporting and recordkeeping burden 
for three entities: states, training providers, and lead inspection and 
abatement firms. Where applicable, burden numbers were based on those 
developed for the Asbestos Model Accreditation Plan (MAP)(U.S. EPA, 
1993b). In all other cases, burden numbers were estimated.
    Reporting burdens presented are classified into two groups: initial 
and annual. The burden associated with the start-up efforts of states, 
training providers, and lead inspection and abatement firms are 
referred to as the initial burden. For the purpose of this analysis, 
all of these efforts are assumed to be completed during 1994, the first 
year of the rule. The burden associated with reporting requirements 
that will be required on an annual basis are referred to as the annual 
burden and are presented based on the projected activity level for 
1994. Initial and annual estimates are combined to project the burden 
and costs that will be imposed during the first year of the rule, while 
the annual costs alone serve as an estimate of the burden level 
expected during the second year (and subsequent years) of the rule.
    The first and second year burden estimates for all entities subject 
to reporting requirements under this rule, were estimated to two 
abatement scenarios of XRF1, soil-lead500 ppm, 
and for XRF6, soil-lead 2,000 ppm. With regard to 
the first abatement scenario, during the initial year of the rule the 
burden is projected to be 11.4 million hours and $228.8 million. 
Assuming all entities seeking accreditation and certification are in 
place during the first year of the rule, the burden estimate 
associatedwith the second year (and all subsequent years) is projected 
to be 10.8 million hours and $217.6 million. At XRF6, soil-
lead2000 ppm, the total burden for the initial year is 
estimated to be 6.2 million hours and $126.1 million. For the second 
year, and subsequent years, the total burden is 6.1 million hours and 
$120.9 million.
    The majority of the burden, for both abatement scenarios, falls on 
lead abatement firms and is driven by the reporting requirements 
associated with on-site lead-based paint activities. Because this 
burden is driven by the number of lead-based paint projects, it is 
expected to decline substantially in subsequent years.
    The total annual recordkeeping costs for the XRF 1 and 
soil-lead 500 ppm represent the worst-case scenario due to 
the number of events that occur. Total annual costs are estimated to be 
approximately $1.3 million.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 745

    Environmental protection, Abatement, Housing renovation, Lead, 
Lead-based paint, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: August 18, 1994.
Carol M. Browner,
Administrator.

    Therefore, it is proposed that proposed 40 CFR part 745 be amended 
as follows:
    1. The authority citation for proposed part 745 would continue to 
read as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2605, 2607, and 2681-2692.

    2. By adding subparts L and Q to read as follows:
Subpart L--Lead-Based Paint Activities
Sec.
745.220    Scope and applicability.
745.223    Definitions.
745.225    Accreditation of training programs.
745.226    Certification of individuals and firms engaged in lead-
based paint activities.
745.228    Standards for conducting lead-based paint activities.
745.230    Lead-based paint activities requirements.
745.235    Enforcement.
745.237    Inspections.
745.239    Effective dates.
      *    *    *    *    *
Subpart Q--State Programs
745.320    Scope and purpose.
745.323    Definitions.
745.325    Authorization of State Programs.
745.327    Authorization of Indian Tribal Programs.
745.330    Grants.
745.339    Effective dates.

Subpart L--Lead-based Paint Activities


Sec. 745.220   Scope and applicability.

    This subpart contains procedures and requirements for the 
accreditation of lead-based paint activities training programs, 
procedures and requirements for the certification of individuals and 
firms engaged in lead-based paint activities, and standards for 
performing such activities. This subpart also contains requirements 
that all lead-based paint activities shall be performed by certified 
individuals. This subpart is applicable to all individuals and firms 
who are engaged in lead-based paint activities as defined in 
Sec. 745.223, except persons who perform these activities within 
residences which they own, unless the residence is occupied by a person 
or persons other than the owner or the owner's immediate family while 
these activities are being conducted. This subpart is applicable only 
in those states or Indian Reservations that do not have an authorized 
state program pursuant to Sec. 745.325 or Sec. 745.327 respectively of 
Subpart Q of this part. Each department, agency, and instrumentality of 
the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of the Federal 
Government having jurisdiction over any property or facility or engaged 
in any activity resulting, or which may result, in a lead-based paint 
hazard, and each officer, agent, or employee thereof, shall be subject 
to, and comply with all Federal, State, interstate, and local 
requirements, both substantive and procedural, including the 
requirements of this subpart regarding lead-based paint, lead-based 
paint activities, and lead-based paint hazards.


Sec. 745.223   Definitions.

    For purposes of this subpart, the definitions of Sec. 745.3 apply. 
In addition, the following definitions apply:
    Abatement means any set of measures designed to permanently 
eliminate lead-based paint hazards in accordance with standards 
established by the Administrator under Title IV of TSCA. Such term 
includes:
    (1) The removal of lead-based paint and lead-contaminated dust, the 
permanent containment or encapsulation of lead-based paint, the 
replacement of lead-painted surfaces or fixtures, and the removal or 
covering of lead-contaminated soil.
    (2) All preparation, cleanup, disposal, and post-abatement 
clearance testing activities associated with such measures. Abatement 
shall be presumed in the following circumstances:
    (i) Projects for which there is a written contract stating that an 
individual or firm will be conducting activities in or to a dwelling 
unit that will permanently eliminate lead-based paint hazards.
    (ii) Projects involving the permanent elimination of lead-based 
paint or lead contaminated soil and conducted by firms or individuals 
certified in accordance with Sec. 745.226.
    (iii) Projects involving the permanent elimination of lead-based 
paint or lead-contaminated soil and conducted by firms or individuals 
who, through their company name, promotional literature, or otherwise 
advertise or hold themselves out to be lead abatement professionals.
    (3) Abatement does not include renovation and remodeling, or 
landscaping activities whose primary intent is not to permanently 
eliminate lead-based paint hazards, but is instead to repair, restore, 
or remodel a given structure or dwelling, even though these activities 
may incidently result in a reduction in lead-based paint hazards.
    Accredited training program means a training program that has been 
accredited by an approving authority to provide training for 
individuals engaged in lead-based paint activities.
    Approving authority means the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
or, in the case of a state or tribal program authorized by EPA under 
subpart Q of this part, the appropriate State agency or Tribal 
authority.
    Area means a portion of a unit such as a room, closet, pantry, 
hall, or portion of a room (such as the dining area of a kitchen/dining 
room).
    Available means reachable by telephone, either directly or through 
a pager or answering service, at all times when abatement activities 
are being conducted and able to be present at the work site in no more 
than 2 hours.
    Certified contractor means a contractor, inspector, or supervisor 
who has completed a training program certified by the appropriate 
Federal agency and has met any other requirements for certification or 
licensure established by such agency or who has been certified by any 
State through a program which has been found by such Federal agency to 
be at least as protective as the Federal certification program; and 
workers or designers who have fully met training requirements 
established by the appropriate Federal agency.
    Certified firm means a company, partnership, corporation, sole 
proprietorship, association, or other business entity, which has 
submitted a letter signed by the owner to the approving authority 
stating that:
    (1) All its employees or subcontractors performing lead-based paint 
activities have each individually received the required training and 
certification from the appropriate approving authority.
    (2) The certified firm and its employees or subcontractors will 
perform lead-based paint activities in accordance with all applicable 
local, State and Federal standards, including all applicable 
recordkeeping requirements.
    (3) A certified supervisor will be assigned and available to all 
the firm's abatement, deleading, and demolition projects.
    Certified inspector/risk assessor for target housing and public 
buildings means an individual who has been trained by an accredited 
training program and certified by an approving authority to act as an 
inspector and risk assessor for target housing and public buildings.
    Certified inspector technician for target housing and public 
buildings means an individual who has been trained by an accredited 
training program and certified by an approving authority to perform 
inspections in target housing and public buildings solely for the 
purpose of determining the presence of lead-based paint through the use 
of on-site testing, such as XRF analyzers, and the collection of 
samples for laboratory analysis, and to perform inspections for the 
presence of lead-based paint, as well as sampling for lead in dust and 
soil for the purposes of abatement cleanup, waste disposal, and 
clearance testing.
    Certified lead worker for commercial buildings and superstructures 
means an individual who has been trained by an accredited training 
program and certified by an approving authority to perform deleading, 
lead removal, and demolition activities on commercial buildings and 
superstructures.
    Certified lead worker for target housing and public buildings means 
an individual who has completed training from an accredited training 
program and has been certified by an approving authority to perform 
abatement activities in target housing and public buildings.
    Certified planner/project designer for target housing and public 
buildings means an individual who has been trained by an accredited 
training program and certified by an approving authority to plan and 
design abatement projects in target housing and public buildings.
    Certified supervisor for commercial buildings and superstructures 
means an individual who has been trained by an accredited training 
program and certified by an approving authority to supervise lead-based 
paint activities and to identify the presence of lead-based paint or 
other lead-based surface coatings in commercial buildings and on 
superstructures. The supervisor is also responsible for the planning 
and oversight of lead-based paint activities associated with commercial 
buildings and superstructures.
    Certified supervisor for target housing and public buildings means 
an individual who has been trained by an accredited training program 
and certified by an approving authority to supervise and conduct 
abatements in target housing and public buildings.
    Commercial building means any building used primarily for 
commercial or industrial activity, which is generally not open to the 
public, or occupied or visited by children, including but not limited 
to, warehouses, factories, storage facilities, aircraft hangers, 
garages, and wholesale distribution facilities.
    Common area means a portion of a building generally accessible to 
all residents/users including, but not limited to, hallways, stairways, 
laundry and recreational rooms, playgrounds, community centers, and 
boundary fences.
    Component or building component means specific design or structural 
elements or fixtures of a building or residential dwelling which are 
distinguished from each other by form, function, and location. These 
include, but are not limited to interior components such as: ceilings, 
crown molding, walls, chair rails, doors, door trim, floors, fireplace, 
radiators and other heating units, shelves, shelf supports, stair 
treads, stair risers, stair stringers, newel posts, railing caps, 
balustrades, windows and trim, including sashes, window heads, jambs, 
sills, and stools, built-in cabinets, columns, beams, bathroom 
vanities, counter tops and air conditioners; and exterior components 
such as: painted roofing, chimneys, flashing, gutters and downspouts, 
ceilings, soffits, facias, rake boards, corner-boards, bulkheads, doors 
and door trim, fences, floors, joists, lattice work, railings and 
railing caps, siding, handrails, stair risers and treads, stair 
stringers, columns, balustrades, window sills, casings, sashes and 
wells, and air conditioners.
    Course test blue print means written documentation of the 
proportion of course test questions devoted to each major topic in the 
course curriculum.
    Deleading means activities conducted by a person who offers to 
eliminate lead-based paint or lead-based paint hazards or to plan such 
activities in commercial buildings, bridges, or other structures or 
superstructures.
    Demolition means the act of pulling down or destroying any building 
or structure.
    Deteriorated paint means paint which is cracking, flaking, 
chipping, or peeling from a building component.
    Discipline means one of the specific types or categories of lead-
based paint activity enumerated in this subpart for which individuals 
may receive training from accredited programs and become certified by 
approving authorities. For example, ``lead worker in commercial 
buildings and superstructures'' is a discipline.
    Distinct painting history means the record of application, over 
time, of paint or other surface coatings to a component of a building 
structure.
    Encapsulation is a process that makes lead-based paint 
inaccessible, by providing a barrier between the lead-based paint and 
the environment, with this barrier being formed using a liquid applied 
coating or an adhesively bonded material, and with the primary means of 
attachment is by the bonding of the product to the surface either by 
itself of through the use of an adhesive.
    Firm means any company, partnership, corporation, sole 
proprietorship, association, or other business entity.
    Hands-on assessment means an evaluation which tests the trainees' 
ability to perform specified work practices and procedures 
satisfactorily.
    Hazardous waste means any waste as defined in 40 CFR 261.3.
    Historical records means documentation which identifies the 
material make-up (including brand, color type, lead content) and dates 
of application of paint and other surface coatings used in target 
housing, public and commercial buildings, and superstructures.
    Inspection means a surface-by-surface investigation for the 
presence of lead-based paint conducted by a certified inspector 
technician or inspector/risk assessor according to the procedures in 
Sec. 745.228(a).
    Interim certification means the status of an individual who has 
successfully completed the appropriate training course in a discipline 
from an accredited training program, but has not yet received formal 
certification in that discipline from an approving authority. Interim 
certifications expire 6 months following the completion of the training 
course.
    Interim controls means a set of measures designed to reduce 
temporarily human exposure or likely exposure to lead-based paint 
hazards, including specialized cleaning, repairs, maintenance, 
painting, temporary containment, ongoing monitoring of lead-based paint 
hazards or potential hazards, and the establishment and operation of 
management and resident education programs.
    Lead-based paint activities means (1) in the case of target 
housing, risk assessment, inspection, and abatement; and (2) in the 
case of any public building constructed before 1978, commercial 
building, bridge, or other structure or superstructure, identification 
of lead-based paint and materials containing lead-based paint, 
deleading, removal of lead from bridges, and demolition.
    Lead-contaminated soil means bare soil on residential real property 
that contains lead at or in excess of the levels determined to be 
hazardous by an inspector/risk assessor certified under this 
regulation.
    Living area means areas of a target housing unit most often 
frequented by children under the age of 6, including, but not limited 
to living rooms, kitchen areas, dens, play rooms, and children 
bedrooms.
    Personal protection equipment (PPE) means specialized clothing and 
equipment including, but not limited to respirators, masks, gloves, 
designed to protect workers against chemical and physical hazards.
    Principal instructor means the individual who has the primary 
responsibility for organizing and delivering a particular course.
    Public building means any building constructed prior to 1978, 
except target housing, which is generally open to the public or 
occupied or visited by children, including but not limited to, schools, 
daycare centers, museums, airport terminals, hospitals, stores, 
restaurants, office buildings, convention centers, and government 
buildings.
    Recognized laboratory means any environmental laboratory recognized 
by the Agency as being capable of performing an analysis for lead 
compounds in paint, soil, and dust.
    Residential dwelling means (1) a single-family dwelling, including 
attached structures such as porches and stoops; or (2) a single-family 
dwelling unit in a structure that contains more than one separate 
residential dwelling unit, which is used or occupied, or intended to be 
used or occupied, in whole or in part, as the home or residence of one 
or more persons.
    Risk assessment means an on-site investigation conducted by a 
certified inspector/risk assessor according to the procedures at 
Sec. 745.228(b) to determine the existence, nature, severity, and 
location of lead-based paint hazards and the provision to the property 
owner/occupant of a report explaining the results of the investigation 
and providing options for reducing lead-based paint hazards with a 
rationale for those options.
    Room means an enclosed or semi-enclosed living space within a unit 
or dwelling unit.
    Student T-test is a statistical analysis used to determine if the 
difference between pre- and post-abatement soil lead levels are 
significantly different from each other. A confidence limit of 95 
percent is used to establish statistical significance.
    Superstructure means a large steel or other industrial structure 
including, but not limited to bridges or water towers which may contain 
lead-based paint.
    Training curriculum means an established set of course topics that 
provide specialized knowledge and skills that must be taught in an 
accredited training program for a particular discipline.
    Training hour means the number of hours spent in training 
activities in an accredited training program, including, but not 
limited to, hours devoted to lecture, learning activities, small group 
activities, demonstrations, evaluations, and/or hands-on experience.
    Training manager means the individual responsible for administering 
a training program and monitoring the performance of the principal 
instructors, work practice instructors, and guest instructors.
    Train-the-trainer course means a 40-hour (or longer) course of 
study which provides instruction in the planning and teaching of adult 
education courses.
    Unit means a room or connected group of rooms used or intended to 
be used by a single tenant or owner.
    Visual inspection for clearance testing means the visual 
examination of the abatement site following an abatement action for 
evidence that the abatement has been successfully completed, as 
indicated by the absence of visible residue, dust and debris.
    Visual inspection for risk assessment means the visual examination 
of a unit to locate the existence of deteriorating paint.
    Window sill means the portion of the horizontal window ledge that 
protrudes into the interior of the room, adjacent to the window sash 
when the window is closed.
    Window stool means the flat, horizontal molding fitted over the 
window sill, on the window interior, between jambs, which comes in 
contact with the bottom of the rail of the lower operating sash and the 
window sill.
    Window well means the portion of the horizontal widow sill that 
receives the window sash when the window is closed; often located 
between the storm window and the interior window sash.
    Work practice instructor means the individual(s) who are 
responsible for teaching particular skills in a specific course.


Sec. 745.225   Accreditation of training programs.

    (a) Application process. For the purposes of certification, 
approving authorities shall only recognize training and refresher 
training received from an accredited training program. The following 
are procedures a training program shall follow to receive accreditation 
from an approving authority.
    (1) A training program may seek accreditation to offer courses in 
any of the following disciplines -- target housing and public 
buildings: inspector technicians, inspector/risk assessors, 
supervisors, planner/project designers, and workers; commercial 
buildings and superstructures: supervisors and workers. The training 
program may also seek accreditation to offer refresher courses for each 
of the course disciplines.
    (2) A training program seeking accreditation shall submit to the 
approving authority a written application containing the following 
information:
    (i) The training program's name, address, and telephone number.
    (ii) A list of courses for which it is applying for accreditation.
    (iii) A statement, signed by the training program manager, which 
certifies that the training program meets the minimum requirements 
established in paragraph (b) of this section.
    (iv) A signed statement by the training program manager certifying 
that each instructor meets the qualifications described in paragraph 
(b)(1), (b)(2), or (b)(3) of this section, as well as a list of the 
topics/skill areas to be taught by each instructor.
    (v) Either:
    (A) A statement signed by the training manager, which certifies 
that the program will use, if available, EPA developed model training 
materials; or
    (B) A copy of the student manuals and instructor manuals to be used 
for each course; and
    (C) A copy of the course agenda, which includes the time allocation 
for each course topic.
    (vi) A copy of the test blueprint, which describes the proportion 
of course test questions devoted to each major course topic.
    (vii) A description of the facilities and equipment available for 
lecture and hands-on training.
    (viii) A description of the procedures for conducting the 
assessment of hands-on skills.
    (ix) A copy of the quality control plan as described in paragraph 
(b)(10) of this section.
    (x) An example of numbered certificates, as described in paragraph 
(b)(9) of this section, to be issued to students who successfully 
complete the training program.
    (3) The approving authority shall approve or disapprove a request 
for accreditation within 180 days of receiving an application from a 
training program. In the case of approval, a certificate of 
accreditation shall be sent to the applicant. In the case of 
disapproval, a letter describing the reasons for disapproval shall be 
sent to the applicant. Prior to disapproval, the approving authority 
may, at its discretion, work with training programs to address 
inadequacies in the application for accreditation. The approving 
authority may also request additional materials retained under 
paragraph (h) of this section. If a training program's application is 
disapproved, the program may reapply for accreditation at any time.
    (4) A training program may offer courses or refresher courses in as 
many training disciplines as it chooses, but shall seek accreditation 
for each discipline. A training program may seek accreditation for 
additional disciplines at any time as long as the program can 
demonstrate that it meets the minimum requirements of paragraph (b) of 
this section.
    (b) Minimum requirements for the accreditation of training 
programs. For a training program to obtain accreditation from an 
approving authority to teach lead-based paint activities, the program 
shall demonstrate, through its application materials, that it meets the 
following minimum requirements for each discipline for which the 
program is seeking accreditation:
    (1) The training program shall employ a training manager who:
    (i) Has at least 2 years classroom experience in teaching workers/
adults; or
    (ii) Has a bachelor's or graduate level degree in building 
construction technology, engineering, industrial hygiene, safety, or 
public health; or
    (iii) Has 4 years experience in managing an occupational health and 
safety training program that specialized in environmental hazards; and
    (iv) Has completed a 40-hour train-the-trainer course that provides 
instruction in the planning and teaching of any adult education course; 
or has obtained a bachelor's or graduate level degree in adult 
education from an accredited college or university.
    (2) The training program shall employ a qualified principal 
instructor for each course who:
    (i) Has completed a 40-hour train-the-trainer course, or has 
obtained a degree in adult education from an accredited college or 
university, or has at least 2 years of classroom experience in teaching 
workers/adults.
    (ii) Has successfully completed at least 24 hours of any lead-
specific training.
    (iii) Has 2 years of experience in the construction trade, 
including, but not limited to, lead or asbestos abatement, painting, 
carpentry, or renovation and remodeling.
    (3) The training program shall employ qualified work practice 
instructors who are responsible for teaching particular skills in a 
specific course and who:
    (i) Have met all of the requirements listed in paragraph (b)(2) of 
this section.
    (ii) Have had 1 additional year of experience in a relevant 
construction trade, including but not limited to, lead or asbestos 
abatement, painting, carpentry, or renovation and remodeling.
    (4) The training program shall, for each course offered, designate 
a principal instructor. Principal instructors are responsible for the 
organization of the course and oversight of the teaching of all course 
material. Additional instructors shall be designated as either work 
practice instructors or guest instructors.
    (5) The following documents shall be recognized by approving 
authorities as proof that training managers, principal instructors, and 
work practice instructors meet the relevant educational, work 
experience, and training requirements specifically listed in paragraphs 
(b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of this section:
    (i) Official academic transcripts as proof of meeting the 
educational requirements.
    (ii) Resumes, letters of reference, lead certification in another 
State, or documentation of work experience as proof of meeting the work 
experience requirements.
    (iii) Certificates from train-the-trainer courses and lead-specific 
training courses as proof of meeting the training requirements.
    (6) The training program shall provide adequate facilities for 
lecture and hands-on training and assessment. This includes providing 
training equipment that reflects current work practices, and 
maintaining or updating the equipment and facilities as needed.
    (7) The training program shall provide training courses that meet 
the following training hour requirements:
    (i) The inspector technician course for target housing and public 
buildings shall last a minimum of 24 training hours, with a minimum of 
8 hours devoted to hands-on training.
    (ii) The inspector/risk assessor course for target housing and 
public buildings shall last a minimum of 40 training hours [inspector 
technician (24 hours) plus inspector/risk assessor (16 hours) equals a 
total of 40 hours], with a minimum of 8 hours devoted to hands-on 
training which includes site visits.
    (iii) The supervisor course for target housing and public buildings 
shall last a minimum of 40 training hours, with a minimum of 8 hours 
devoted to hands-on training.
    (iv) The planner/project designer course for target housing and 
public buildings shall last a minimum of 56 training hours [supervisor 
course (40 hours) plus planner/project designer course (16 hours) 
equals a total of 56 hours], with a minimum of 4 hours devoted to 
hands-on training which include site visits.
    (v) The lead abatement worker course for target housing and public 
buildings shall last a minimum of 32 training hours, with a minimum of 
10 hours devoted to hands-on training.
    (vi) The supervisor course for commercial buildings and 
superstructures shall last a minimum of 32 training hours, with a 
minimum of 8 hours devoted to hands-on training.
    (vii) The lead worker course for commercial buildings and 
superstructures shall last a minimum of 32 training hours, with a 
minimum of 10 hours devoted to hands-on training.
    (8) For each course it offers, the training program shall conduct a 
course test at the completion of each course and a hands-on skills 
assessment. The hands-on assessment and the course test will be used to 
evaluate trainee competency and proficiency. The hands-on assessment 
and a course test must be successfully completed for an individual to 
pass any course.
    (i) The hands-on skills assessment is an evaluation of the 
effectiveness of the hands-on training which shall test the ability of 
the trainees to demonstrate satisfactory performance of work practices 
and procedures specified in paragraph (c) of this section, as well as 
any other skills demonstrated in the course. The training manager is 
responsible for maintaining the validity and integrity of the 
assessment to ensure that it accurately evaluates the trainee's 
performance of these work practices and procedures.
    (ii) The course test is an evaluation of the overall effectiveness 
of the training which shall test the trainee's knowledge and retention 
of the topics covered during the course. Seventy percent shall be 
considered the passing score on the course test. The training manager 
is responsible for maintaining the validity and integrity of the course 
to ensure that it accurately evaluates the trainee's knowledge and 
retention of the course topics.
    (iii) The course test shall be developed in accordance with the 
test blueprint submitted with the training accreditation application.
    (9) Training programs shall issue unique course completion 
certificates to each individual who successfully completes the course 
requirements. The course completion certificate shall include:
    (i) A unique certificate number.
    (ii) The name, a unique identification number, and address of the 
individual.
    (iii) The name of the particular course that the individual 
completed.
    (iv) Dates of course completion/test passage.
    (v) Expiration date of interim certification, which shall be 6 
months from the date of course completion.
    (vi) Name, address, and telephone number of the training program.
    (vii) A certified statement signed by the training manager which 
certifies that the training received complies with the requirements of 
this subpart. The statement must read as follows:

    Under civil and criminal penalties of law for the making or 
submission of false or fraudulent statements or representations (18 
U.S.C. 1001 and 15 U.S.C. 2615), I certify that this training 
complies with all applicable requirements of Title IV of TSCA, 40 
CFR part 745, and any other applicable Federal, state, or local 
requirements.

    (10) The training manager shall develop and implement a quality 
control plan. The plan shall be used to maintain or improve the quality 
of the training program over time. This plan shall contain at least the 
following elements:
    (i) Procedures for periodic revision of training materials and 
course test to reflect innovations in the field.
    (ii) Procedures for the training manager's annual review of 
instructor competency.
    (11) Training programs shall offer courses which teach the 
standards for conducting lead-based paint activities contained in 
Sec. 745.228, and other such standards adopted by the EPA, or the 
authorized state from which the program received accreditation.
    (12) The training manager shall be responsible for ensuring that 
the training program complies at all times with all of the requirements 
in paragraph (b) of this section.
    (c) Minimum training curricula requirements. To be accredited, 
training programs must ensure that their courses of study for the 
various lead-based paint activities disciplines cover the following 
subject areas. Listed requirements ending in an asterisk (*) indicate 
areas that require hands-on experience as an integral component of the 
course.
    (1) Target housing and public buildings - inspector technician.
    (i) Background information on lead.
    (ii) Health effects of lead.
    (iii) Regulatory review. This entails a discussion of applicable 
Federal, state and local regulations that pertain to lead-based paint.
    (iv) Roles and responsibility of lead-based paint inspector.
    (v) Lead-based paint inspection methods.*
    (vi) Dust and soil sampling methodologies.*
    (vii) Formulation and implementation of the final inspection 
report.*
    (2) Target housing and public buildings- inspector/risk assessors.
    (i) All information taught in the inspector technician course as 
listed in paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
    (ii) Background information to perform risk assessment.
    (iii) Visual inspection.*
    (iv) Risk assessment report form.*
    (v) Sampling and inspection guidelines.*
    (vi) Sampling for other sources of lead exposure.
    (vii) Interpretation of sampling results.
    (viii) Preparation of final report.*
    (ix) Recommendations to abate or reduce lead-based paint hazards 
including instruction on when interim controls are appropriate.
    (x) Development of an interim control plan.
    (xi) Recordkeeping.
    (xii) Identification of the lead-based paint hazards, lead-
contaminated dust, and lead-contaminated soil.
    (3) Target housing and public building - supervisor.
    (i) Background information on lead.
    (ii) Regulatory background, Federal, state and local.
    (iii) Legal and insurance issues relating to lead-based paint 
abatement.
    (iv) Development of pre-abatement work plan.*
    (v) Hazard recognition and control.*
    (vi) Respiratory protection and protective clothing.*
    (vii) Employee information and training.
    (viii) Project management.
    (ix) Contract specifications.
    (x) Supervisory techniques.
    (xi) Lead paint abatement or lead hazard reduction including 
prohibited methods.*
    (xii) Interior dust abatement/clean-up or lead hazard reduction.*
    (xiii) Soil and exterior dust abatement or lead hazard reduction.*
    (xiv) Soil, dust, and air sampling.
    (xv) Clearance standards and testing.
    (xvi) Waste disposal.
    (xvii) Community relations process.
    (xviii) Cost estimation.
    (xix) Recordkeeping.
    (4) Target housing and public buildings - planner/project designer.
    (i) All information taught in the supervisor course as listed in 
paragraph (c)(3) of this section.
    (ii) Risk assessment/inspection report interpretation.*
    (iii) Worker protection/worker safety.
    (iv) Environmental safety.
    (v) The following information on project design.*
    (A) Integration with modernization projects.
    (B) Design abatement or lead hazard reduction strategy.
    (C) Cost estimation.
    (D) Construction techniques.
    (vi) Abatement and other lead hazard reduction methods.
    (vii) Operations and maintenance planning.
    (viii) Clean-up.
    (ix) Clearance testing.*
    (x) Waste disposal.
    (xi) Insurance and liability.
    (5) Target housing and public buildings - lead abatement worker.
    (i) Background information and health effects of lead.
    (ii) Sources of environmental lead contamination (paint, surface 
dust and soil, water, air, food, other).
    (iii) Regulatory background, Federal, state and local.
    (iv) Hazard recognition and control.*
    (v) Respiratory protection.*
    (vi) Personal hygiene.*
    (vii) Lead-based paint abatement and lead hazard reduction 
methods.*
    (viii) Interior dust abatement methods/clean-up or lead hazard 
reduction.*
    (ix) Soil and exterior dust abatement methods or lead hazard 
reduction.*
    (x) Waste disposal.*
    (6) Commercial buildings and superstructures - supervisor.
    (i) Background information on lead.
    (ii) Sources of environmental lead contamination (paint, surface 
dust and soil, water, air, food, other).
    (iii) Regulatory background, Federal, state and local.
    (iv) Health effects.
    (v) Identification of lead-based paint.*
    (A) Historical information.
    (B) Limited sampling procedures.
    (C) Laboratory analysis.
    (vi) Development of deleading work plan.*
    (vii) Medical monitoring.
    (viii) Respiratory protection.*
    (ix) Work preparation procedures.*
    (x) Clean up/waste disposal.
    (xi) Exposure monitoring.
    (xii) Environmental monitoring.*
    (A) Soil, dust, and air sampling.
    (B) [Reserved]
    (xiii) Recordkeeping.
    (xiv) Other safety and health hazards.
    (xv) Paint removal operations pertaining to superstructures and 
commercial buildings, including:
    (A) Power tools.
    (B) Abrasive blasting.
    (xvi) Welding, burning and torch cutting.
    (xvii) Mechanical disturbance of lead.
    (7) Commercial buildings and superstructures - lead workers.
    (i) Background information on lead.
    (ii) Regulatory review.
    (iii) Health effects.
    (iv) Medical monitoring.
    (v) Control methods.*
    (vi) Respiratory protection.*
    (vii) Work preparation procedures.*
    (viii) Personal hygiene.*
    (ix) Clean up/waste disposal.*
    (x) Exposure monitoring.
    (xi) Recordkeeping.
    (xii) Other safety and health hazards.
    (xiii) Paint removal operations.
    (A) Power tools and miscellaneous.
    (B) Abrasive blasting.
    (xiv) Welding, burning, and torch cutting.
    (xv) Mechanical disturbance of lead.
    (d) Minimum requirements for the accreditation of refresher 
training programs. (1) Training programs may seek accreditation to 
offer a refresher course for any course discipline for which they 
already have received accreditation or for which they are concurrently 
applying for accreditation. Training programs will not receive 
accreditation for a refresher course if they do not also receive 
accreditation for the corresponding course discipline.
    (2) An accredited refresher training course shall address the 
following topics:
    (i) An overview of key safety practices.
    (ii) An update on current laws and regulations.
    (iii) An update on current technologies related to lead-based paint 
activities.
    (3) The course must include at least 7 training hours.
    (4) Each student shall be required to pass a course test that 
covers all of the topics contained in the course. Passing students 
shall be provided with a course completion certificate.
    (5) A training program seeking refresher course accreditation shall 
submit to the approving authority the following:
    (i) The training program's name, address, and telephone number.
    (ii) A list of courses for which it is applying for accreditation.
    (iii) A copy of student manuals and instructor notebooks for the 
course.
    (6) If a training program applies for accreditation of a refresher 
course concurrently with accreditation of the corresponding training 
course, the approving authority shall use the approval procedure 
described in paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
    (7) If an application for refresher training authorization is 
received apart from an application for accreditation as described in 
paragraph (a)(4) of this section, the approving authority shall approve 
or disapprove a request for accreditation within 45 days of receiving 
the application. In the case of approval, a certificate of 
accreditation shall be sent to the applicant. In the case of 
disapproval, a letter describing the reasons for disapproval shall be 
sent to the applicant. The approving authority may, at its discretion, 
work with training programs to address inadequacies in the application 
for accreditation. If a training program's application is disapproved, 
the program may reapply at any time.
    (8) A training program may offer as many refresher training courses 
as it chooses, but shall seek accreditation for each course. A training 
program may seek accreditation for additional refresher training 
courses at any time.
    (e) Re-accreditation of training programs. (1) If a training 
program meets the requirements of this section, the training program 
shall be re-accredited. Unless re-accredited, a training program's 
accreditation shall expire 3 years after the date of issuance.
    (2) A training program seeking re-accreditation shall submit an 
application to the approving authority no later than 180 days before 
its accreditation expires. If a training program does not submit its 
application for re-accreditation by that date, the approving authority 
cannot guarantee the application will be reviewed and acted upon before 
the end of the 3-year period.
    (3) The training program's application for re-accreditation shall 
contain:
    (i) The training program's name, address, and telephone number.
    (ii) A list of courses for which it is applying for re-
accreditation.
    (iii) A description of any changes or updates to the training 
facility or equipment.
    (iv) The certified statement as described in paragraph (e)(4) of 
this section below.
    (4) The training program's application for re-accreditation shall 
contain a statement signed by the training program manager which 
certifies that:
    (i) The course materials, for each course, meet the requirements in 
paragraphs (c)(1) through (c)(7) of this section, as appropriate.
    (ii) The training manager, principal instructors, and work practice 
instructors meet the qualifications in paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2), and 
(b)(3) of this section.
    (iii) The training program manager complies at all times with all 
requirements in paragraph (b) of this section.
    (iv) The quality control program meets the requirements in 
paragraph (b)(11) of this section.
    (v) The recordkeeping and reporting requirements of paragraph (h) 
of this section will be followed.
    (5) An audit may be performed by the approving authority to verify 
the certified statement and the contents of the application.
    (f) Suspension, revocation, and modification of accredited training 
programs. (1) The approving authority may after notice and an 
opportunity for hearing, suspend, revoke, or modify training program 
accreditation if a training program, training manager, or other person 
with supervisory authority over the training program, has:
    (i) Misrepresented the contents of a training course to the 
approving authority and/or the student population.
    (ii) Failed to submit required information or notifications in a 
timely manner.
    (iii) Failed to maintain required records.
    (iv) Falsified accreditation records, instructor qualifications, or 
other accreditation information.
    (v) Failed to comply with the training standards and requirements 
in this section.
    (vi) Failed to comply with Federal, State, or local lead-based 
paint statutes or regulations.
    (2) In addition to an administrative or judicial finding of 
violation, execution of a consent agreement in settlement of an 
enforcement action constitutes, for purposes of this section, evidence 
of a failure to comply with relevant statutes or regulations.
    (3) Training programs shall permit representatives of the approving 
authority to attend any training course, for the purpose of evaluation 
or monitoring of the course, without charge to the approving authority.
    (g) Procedures for suspension, revocation, or modification of 
training program accreditation. (1) When an approving authority decides 
to suspend, revoke, or modify the accreditation of a training program, 
it shall notify the affected entity in writing of the following:
    (i) The grounds upon which the suspension or withdrawal is based.
    (ii) The commencement date and duration of the suspension, 
revocation, or modification.
    (iii) Actions, if any, which the affected entity may take to avoid 
suspension, revocation, or modification, or to receive accreditation in 
the future.
    (iv) Any additional conditions which the approving authority may 
impose.
    (v) The opportunity and method for requesting a hearing prior to 
final approving authority action to suspend, revoke, or modify 
accreditation.
    (2) If a hearing is requested by the accredited training program 
pursuant to paragraph (g)(1) of this section, the approving authority 
shall:
    (i) Prior to the hearing, notify the affected entity of those 
assertions of law and fact upon which the action to suspend, revoke, or 
modify is based.
    (ii) Provide the affected entity an opportunity to offer written 
statements in response to those assertions of law and facts, and any 
other explanations, comments, and arguments it deems relevant to the 
proposed action.
    (iii) Provide the affected entity such other procedural 
opportunities as the approving authority may deem appropriate to ensure 
a fair and impartial hearing.
    (iv) Appoint an official of the approving authority as Presiding 
Officer to conduct the hearing. No person shall serve as Presiding 
Officer if he or she has had any prior connection with the specific 
case.
    (3) The Presiding Officer appointed pursuant to paragraph (g)(iv) 
of this section shall:
    (i) Conduct a fair, orderly, and impartial hearing, within 90 days 
of the request for a hearing.
    (ii) Consider all relevant evidence, explanation, comment, and 
argument submitted pursuant to paragraph (g)(2) of this section.
    (iii) Notify the affected entity in writing within 90 days of 
completion of the hearing of his or her decision and order. Such an 
order is a final agency action subject to judicial review.
    (4) If the approving authority determines that the public health, 
interest, or welfare warrants immediate action to suspend the 
accreditation of any training program prior to the opportunity for a 
hearing, it shall:
    (i) Notify the affected entity of its intent to immediately suspend 
training program accreditation for the reasons listed in paragraph 
(f)(1) of this section. If a suspension, revocation, or modification 
notice has not previously been issued pursuant to paragraph (g)(1) of 
this section, it shall be issued at the same time the emergency 
suspension notice is issued.
    (ii) Notify the affected entity in writing of the grounds upon 
which the immediate suspension is based and why it is necessary to 
suspend the entity's accreditation before an opportunity for a 
suspension, revocation, or modification hearing.
    (iii) Notify the affected entity of the commencement date and 
duration of the immediate suspension.
    (iv) Notify the affected entity of its right to request a hearing 
on the immediate suspension within 15 days of the suspension taking 
place and the procedures for the conduct of such a hearing.
    (5) Any notice, decision, or order issued by the approving 
authority under this section, and any documents filed by an accredited 
training program in a hearing under this section, shall be available to 
the public, except as otherwise provided by section 14 of TSCA or by 
part 2 of this title. Any such hearing at which oral testimony is 
presented shall be open to the public, except that the Presiding 
Officer may exclude the public to the extent necessary to allow 
presentation of information which may be entitled to confidential 
treatment under section 14 of TSCA or part 2 of this title.
    (6) The public shall be notified of the suspension, revocation, or 
modification of training program accreditation through appropriate 
mechanisms developed by the authority.
    (7) The approving authority shall maintain a list of parties whose 
accreditation has been suspended, revoked, or modified. This list shall 
be made available to the public upon request.
    (h) Training program recordkeeping requirements. (1) Accredited 
training programs shall maintain, and make available to the approving 
authority if requested, the following records:
    (i) All documents specified in paragraph (b)(5) of this section 
that demonstrate the qualifications listed in paragraphs (b)(1), 
(b)(2), and (b)(3) of this section of the training manager, principal 
instructors, and work practice instructors.
    (ii) Current curriculum/course materials, and documents reflecting 
any changes made to these materials.
    (iii) The course test blueprint.
    (iv) Information on how the hands-on assessment is conducted 
including, but not limited to, who conducts the assessment, how the 
skills are graded, what facilities are used, and the pass/fail rate.
    (v) The quality control plan as described in paragraph (b)(10) of 
this section.
    (vi) Results of the student's hands-on skills assessments and 
course tests, and a copy of each student's course completion 
certificate.
    (vii) Any other material not listed in (h)(1)(i) through (h)(1)(vi) 
of this paragraph that was submitted to the approving authority as part 
of the program's application for accreditation.
    (2) The training program shall retain these records at the location 
(i.e., address) specified on the training program accreditation 
application for a minimum of 3 years 6 months.
    (3) The training program shall notify the approving authority 30 
days prior to relocating its business or transferring the records.


Sec. 745.226   Certification of individuals and firms engaged in lead-
based paint activities.

    (a) Certification of individuals. (1) Following the submission of 
an application meeting all the requirements of this section and a 
determination by the approving authority that an individual has met all 
applicable requirements to perform lead-based paint activities, the 
approving authority shall certify the applicant in one or more of the 
following disciplines:
    (i) Target housing and public buildings - inspector technician, 
inspector/risk assessor, supervisor, planner/project designer, or lead 
abatement worker.
    (ii) Commercial buildings and superstructures - supervisor or lead 
worker.
    (2) Certified individuals conducting lead-based paint activities 
shall comply with the standards for performing lead-based paint 
activities in Sec. 745.228.
    (3) It shall be considered a violation of TSCA, as well as any 
other applicable State or local law or regulation, for an individual to 
conduct any of the lead-based paint activities described in 
Sec. 745.228 of this proposal unless that individual has received the 
appropriate certification pursuant to the requirements specified in 
paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section.
    (b) Inspector technician, inspector/risk assessor or supervisor. 
(1) To become certified as an inspector technician, inspector/risk 
assessor or supervisor, an individual shall:
    (i) Successfully complete and receive a course completion 
certificate from an accredited training program for the appropriate 
discipline.
    (ii) Meet or exceed the following additional experience and/or 
education requirements:
    (A) Inspector technicians in target housing and public buildings:
    (1) No additional experience and/or education requirements.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (B) Inspector/risk assessors in target housing and public 
buildings:
    (1) One year experience in a related field (e.g., lead, asbestos, 
or environmental remediation work), or 25 inspections over at least a 
3-month period as a certified lead inspector technician, and one of the 
following:
    (i) Bachelor's degree and 1-year experience in a related field.
    (ii) Certification as an industrial hygienist, an engineer, a 
registered architect, or an environmentally related scientific field, 
such as an environmental scientist.
    (iii) A high school diploma (or equivalent), plus at least 2 years 
of experience in a related field.
    (2) [Reserved]
    (C) Supervisor in target housing and public buildings:
    (1) One-year experience as a lead abatement worker.
    (2) At least 2 years experience in a related field or in the 
building trades.
    (D) Supervisor in commercial buildings and superstructures:
    (1) At least 2 years industrial painting field experience.
    (2) At least 90 days field supervisory or management experience in 
hazardous paint removal within the previous 24 months.
    (3) Work experience that demonstrates knowledge of current, 
relevant safety practices that have been accepted by the EPA for 
deleading operations.
    (4) Work experience that demonstrates knowledge of current waste 
handling procedures for wastes derived from deleading operations.
    (5) Work experience that demonstrates knowledge of environmental 
monitoring during deleading operations.
    (iii) Pass the certification examination offered by the approving 
authority. The certification examination must be administered in such a 
way that the validity and security of the certification examination are 
maintained.
    (2) The following documents shall be recognized by the approving 
authority as proof of meeting the requirements listed in this 
paragraph:
    (i) Official academic transcripts as proof of meeting the 
educational requirements.
    (ii) Resumes, letters of reference, certification in another state, 
documentation of work experience, or copies of inspection reports as 
proof of meeting the work experience requirements.
    (iii) Certificates from lead-specific or other related training 
courses as proof of meeting the training requirements.
    (iv) A signed, certification by the applicant that he/she meets the 
qualifications described in this paragraph.
    (3) In order to take the certification examination for a particular 
discipline, an individual shall submit the following: a course 
completion certificate for that discipline from an accredited training 
program; the required documentation of education and/or experience 
prerequisites as described in paragraph (b)(2) of this section; and 
photographic proof of identity to the appropriate official of the 
certification examination administering body.
    (4) The course completion certificate shall serve as interim 
certification for an individual who seeks to apply for certification 
until the next available opportunity to take the certification 
examination. Interim certification shall expire after 6 months. The 
approving authority shall offer separate certification examinations for 
the inspector technician for target housing and public buildings, 
inspector/risk assessor for target housing and public buildings, 
supervisor for target housing and public buildings, and the supervisor 
for commercial buildings and superstructures discipline.
    (5) After passing the certification exam and meeting the 
appropriate training, education and/or experience prerequisites, an 
individual shall be issued a certificate by the approving authority. 
Certification shall be valid for 3 years.
    (6) If an individual does not pass the certification exam and 
receive a certificate within 6 months of receiving his/her course 
completion certificate, the individual must retake the appropriate 
course from an accredited training program before reapplying for 
certification from the approving authority.
    (c) Worker and planner/project designer. (1) An individual wishing 
to become certified as a worker in target housing and public buildings 
or commercial buildings and superstructures or as a planner/project 
designer in target housing and public buildings shall successfully 
complete a training course for the appropriate discipline offered by an 
accredited training program.
    (2) Workers and planner/project designers shall be certified on an 
interim basis following course completion until they apply for and 
receive their certification from the approving authority. To receive 
certification from the approving authority, individuals shall submit a 
valid copy of their course completion certificate within 30 days of 
completing the course. The course completion certificate shall serve as 
interim certification until certification from the approving authority 
is received, but shall be valid for no more than 6 months from the date 
of course completion.
    (3) Upon receipt of the valid course completion certificate, the 
approving authority shall issue a certification to each worker or 
planner/project designer. This certification shall be valid for 3 
years. To maintain certification, an individual must be re-certified as 
described in paragraph (e) of this section by the approving authority 
before the certification expires.
    (d) Certification based on prior training. (1) Any individual who 
received lead-based paint activities training between October 1, 1990, 
and [the effective date of this section] shall be eligible for 
certification by the approving authority under the following 
alternative procedures:
    (i) Applicants for the disciplines of inspector technician (target 
housing and public buildings), inspector/risk assessor (target housing 
and public buildings), and supervisor (target housing and public 
buildings, or commercial buildings and steel structures) must:
    (A) Show proof and date of the successful completion of training or 
on the job training equivalent to that specified in Sec. 745.225 for a 
lead inspector, risk assessor, or supervisor.
    (B) Demonstrate that the applicant meets the education and/or 
experience requirements in paragraph (b)(1)(ii) of this section.
    (C) Successfully complete an accredited refresher training course 
for the appropriate discipline.
    (D) Pass a certification exam for that discipline administered by 
the approving authority.
    (ii) Applicants for the disciplines of worker (target housing and 
public buildings, or commercial buildings and superstructures) and 
planner/project designer (target housing and public buildings) must:
    (A) Show proof and date of the successful completion of worker 
training equivalent to that specified in Sec. 745.225.
    (B) Successfully complete an accredited refresher training course.
    (2) Individuals have until [6 months after the effective date of 
Sec. 745.225] to apply for certification under the above procedures. 
After that date, all individuals wishing to obtain certification must 
do so through the procedures described in paragraph (c) of this 
section.
    (e) Re-certification. (1) To maintain certification, all certified 
individuals, must be re-certified by the approving authority every 3 
years.
    (2) To become re-certified an individual shall submit a valid copy 
of the refresher course completion certificate to the approving 
authority.
    (f) Certification of firms. (1) All firms engaged in or offering to 
perform lead-based paint activities must be certified by the 
appropriate approving authority.
    (2) A firm seeking certification shall submit to the approving 
authority a letter certifying that the firm will only employ certified 
employees to conduct lead-based paint activities, and that the firm 
will follow the standards for conducting lead-based paint activities in 
Sec. 745.228.
    (3) From the date of receiving the certification application, the 
approving authority shall have 90 days to approve or disapprove the 
firm's request for certification. In the case of approval, a 
certificate shall be sent by the 90th day. In the case of disapproval, 
a letter describing the reason for disapproval shall be sent by the 
90th day.
    (4) The firm shall maintain all records pursuant to the 
requirements in Sec. 745.228.
    (g) Suspension, revocation, and modification of certifications of 
individuals engaged in lead-based paint activities. (1) The approving 
authority may, after notice and opportunity for hearing, suspend, 
revoke, or modify an individual's certification if an individual has:
    (i) Performed work requiring certification at a job site without 
having copies of initial and currently valid, original certificates 
available at the job site for inspection.
    (ii) Permitted the duplication or use of the individual's own 
certificate by another.
    (iii) Performed work for which appropriate certification has not 
been received from the approving authority.
    (iv) Been subject to a final order imposing a civil penalty or a 
criminal conviction for engaging in a prohibited act under section 15 
or 409 of TSCA.
    (2) In addition to the situations listed in paragraph (g)(1) of 
this section, the approving authority may suspend, revoke, or modify 
the certification of individuals who have failed to comply with 
Federal, State, or local lead-based paint statutes or regulations. In 
addition to an administrative or judicial finding of violation, for 
purposes of this section, execution of a consent agreement in 
settlement of an enforcement action constitutes evidence of a failure 
to comply with relevant statutes or regulations.
    (3) Any individual who performs any of the following acts shall be 
deemed to have committed a violation of TSCA, as well as any other 
applicable Federal, State, or local law or regulation:
    (i) Obtained certification through fraudulent representation of 
training or exam documents.
    (ii) Obtained training documentation through fraudulent means.
    (iii) Gained admission to and completed education through 
fraudulent representation of initial or previous education 
documentation.
    (iv) Obtained certification through fraudulent representation of 
certification requirements such as education, training, professional 
registration, or experience.
    (v) Obtained training from a training program that is not 
accredited to offer training for the particular discipline from the 
approving authority.
    (h) Suspension, revocation and modification of certifications of 
firms engaged in lead-based paint activities. (1) The approving 
authority may, after notice and opportunity for hearing, suspend, 
revoke, or modify a firm's certification if a firm has:
    (i) Performed work requiring certification at a job site with 
individuals who are not certified.
    (ii) Failed to maintain required records.
    (iii) Performed work for which appropriate certification has not 
been received from the approving authority; or
    (iv) Failed to comply with the standards established in 
Sec. 745.228.
    (2) In addition to the situations listed in paragraph (h)(1) of 
this section, the approving authority may suspend, revoke, or modify 
the certification of firms that have failed to comply with Federal, 
State, or local lead-based paint statutes or regulations. In addition 
to an administrative or judicial finding of violation, for purposes of 
this section, execution of a consent agreement in settlement of an 
enforcement action constitutes evidence of a failure to comply with 
relevant statutes or regulations.
    (3) Any firm that performs any of the following acts shall be 
deemed to have committed a violation of TSCA, as well as any other 
applicable Federal, State, or local law or regulation:
    (i) Obtained certification through fraudulent representation.
    (ii) Failed to obtain a certificate from the approving authority 
and performed work requiring certification at a job site.
    (4) In addition, the approving authority may suspend, revoke, or 
modify the certification of firms who have been subject to a final 
order imposing a civil penalty or a criminal conviction for engaging in 
a prohibited act under section 15 or 409 of TSCA. It shall be a 
prohibited act under section 15 or 409 of TSCA, as well as any other 
applicable provision of law, for a firm that fraudulently obtains 
certification, to engage in any lead-based paint activities requiring 
certification.
    (i) Procedures for suspension, revocation, or modification of the 
certification of individuals or firms. (1) If the approving authority 
decides to suspend, revoke, or modify the certification of any 
individual or firm, it shall notify the affected entity in writing of 
the following:
    (i) The grounds upon which the suspension, revocation, or 
modification is based.
    (ii) The commencement date and duration of the suspension, 
revocation, or modification.
    (iii) Actions, if any, which the affected entity may take to avoid 
suspension, revocation, or modification or to receive certification in 
the future.
    (iv) Any additional conditions which the approving authority may 
impose.
    (v) The opportunity and method for requesting a hearing prior to 
final approving authority action to suspend, revoke, or modify 
certification.
    (2) If a hearing is requested by the certified individual or firm, 
the approving authority shall:
    (i) Prior to the hearing, notify the affected entity of those 
assertions of law and fact upon which the action to suspend, revoke, or 
modify is based.
    (ii) Provide the affected entity an opportunity to offer written 
statements in response to those assertion of law and fact, and any 
other explanations, comments, and arguments it deems relevant to the 
proposed action.
    (iii) Provide the affected entity such other procedural 
opportunities as the approving authority may deem appropriate to ensure 
a fair and impartial hearing.
    (iv) Appoint an official of the approving authority as Presiding 
Officer to conduct the hearing. No person shall serve as Presiding 
Officer if he or she has had any prior connection with the specific 
case.
    (3) The Presiding Officer appointed pursuant to paragraph (i)(2) of 
this section shall:
    (i) Conduct a fair, orderly, and impartial hearing within 90 days 
of the request for a hearing.
    (ii) Consider all relevant evidence, explanation, comment, and 
argument submitted pursuant to paragraph (i)(2) of this section.
    (iii) Notify the affected entity in writing within 90 days of 
completion of the hearing of his or her decision and order. Such an 
order is a final approving authority action subject to judicial review.
    (4) If the approving authority determines that the public health, 
interest, or welfare warrants immediate action to suspend the 
certification of any individual or firm prior to the opportunity for a 
hearing, it shall:
    (i) Notify the affected entity of its intent to immediately suspend 
certification for the reasons listed in paragraph (h)(1) of this 
section. If a suspension, revocation, or modification notice has not 
previously been issued, it shall be issued at the same time the 
immediate suspension notice is issued.
    (ii) Notify the affected entity in writing of the grounds upon 
which the immediate suspension is based and why it is necessary to 
suspend the entity's accreditation before an opportunity for a hearing 
to suspend, revoke, or modify the individual's or firm's certification.
    (iii) Notify the affected entity of the commencement date and 
duration of the immediate suspension.
    (iv) Notify the affected entity of its right to request a hearing 
on the immediate suspension within 15 days of the suspension taking 
place and the procedures for the conduct of such a hearing.
    (5) Any notice, decision, or order issued by the approving 
authority under this section, and any documents filed by a certified 
individual or firm in a hearing under this section, shall be available 
to the public, except as otherwise provided by section 14 of TSCA or by 
part 2 of this title. Any such hearing at which oral testimony is 
presented shall be open to the public, except that the Presiding 
Officer may exclude the public to the extent necessary to allow 
presentation of information which may be entitled to confidential 
treatment under section 14 of TSCA or part 2 of this title.
    (j) Effective date. (1) Training providers shall not provide, or 
claim to provide training for certification without accreditation from 
the Agency pursuant to Sec. 745.225 after [Insert date 2 years and 180 
days after publication of the final rule].
    (2) No person shall engage in lead-based paint activities without 
certification from the Agency, pursuant to Sec. 745.226 after [Insert 
date 3 years after publication of the final rule].


Sec. 745.228   Standards for conducting lead-based paint activities.

    (a) Inspection in target housing. An inspection is a surface-by-
surface investigation for the presence of lead-based paint conducted by 
a certified inspector technician or inspector/risk assessor according 
to the procedures in this paragraph.
    (1) An inspection shall be conducted only by persons certified by 
the appropriate approving authority as an inspector technician or 
inspector/risk assessor.
    (2) When conducting an inspection, the following locations shall be 
tested for the presence of lead-based paint:
    (i) All component surfaces with visible distinct painting histories 
in every room, of every residential dwelling chosen for inspection, as 
well as all exterior components with distinct painting histories of 
every residential dwelling chosen for testing, except those components 
that are known to the inspector technician or inspector risk assessor 
to have been replaced after 1980.
    (ii) All components with distinct visible painting histories in 
every common area, except those components that are known to the 
inspector technician or inspector risk assessor to have been replaced 
after 1980.
    (3) Testing for the presence of lead-based paint shall be conducted 
by documented methodologies which incorporate adequate quality control 
procedures.
    (4) If testing of paint chip samples is being conducted utilizing 
laboratory analysis:
    (i) Paint chips should be collected according to the procedures 
found in the HUD Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control of Lead-
Based Paint Hazards in Housing unless EPA issues regulations on this 
subject pursuant to section 402 of TSCA.
    (ii) All samples shall be sent for analysis to a laboratory 
recognized by EPA as being capable of performing these activities.
    (5) If using X-Ray Fluorescence Spectroscopy (XRF) to test for the 
presence of lead-based paint, XRF should be used according to the 
procedures found in the HUD Guidelines for the Evaluation and Control 
of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing unless EPA issue regulations on 
this subject pursuant to section 402.
    (6) The following information shall be recorded in a written 
inspection report by an inspector technician or inspector/risk assessor 
when conducting an inspection:
    (i) Date of inspection.
    (ii) Address of buildings and units.
    (iii) Date of construction of buildings and units.
    (iv) Unit numbers (if applicable).
    (v) Name, address, and telephone number of the owner of buildings 
and units.
    (vi) Name and signature of certified inspector technician and 
inspector/risk assessor conducting testing, including certification or 
license numbers.
    (vii) Name, address, and telephone number of the certified firm 
employing each inspector technician or inspector/risk assessor.
    (viii) Name, address, and telephone number of each recognized 
laboratory conducting an analysis of collected samples.
    (ix) Each testing device and/or sampling procedure employed, and if 
used, the serial number of any XRF device.
    (x) Precise locations of all components and surfaces on components 
tested/sampled.
    (xi) All data collected using on-site testing devices.
    (xii) A list of all tested surfaces (components) found, either 
through on-site testing or laboratory analysis, to contain lead-based 
paint, as defined in Sec. 745.3, and those surfaces that did not 
contain lead-based paint.
    (xiii) Any recommendation by an inspector technician or inspector/
risk assessor regarding the need for additional testing or a risk 
assessment.
    (7)(i) Reports and plans required under paragraph (a)(6) of this 
section shall be maintained by the owner of the residence or building, 
and the certified firm that conducted the inspection for no less than 3 
years.
    (ii) This information is subject to the disclosure requirements 
developed under section 1018 of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard 
Reduction Act of 1992 in subpart E, ``Residential Property 
Renovation.''
    (b) Risk assessment in target housing. A risk assessment is an on-
site investigation conducted according to the procedures in this 
paragraph by a certified inspector/risk assessor to determine the 
existence, nature, severity, and location of lead-based paint hazards 
and the provision to the property owner/occupant of a report explaining 
the results of the investigation and providing options for reducing 
lead-based paint hazards with a rationale for those options.
    (1) Any risk assessment, or other lead hazard assessment activity 
shall be conducted only by persons certified by the appropriate 
approving authority as an inspector/risk assessor.
    (2) Background information regarding the physical characteristics 
of the unit and residential use patterns shall be collected, and shall 
include the following information:
    (i) A schematic site plan showing each room within the/every unit, 
its use and the number of children under age 6 currently residing in 
the unit.
    (ii) The age of the structure and any additions thereto.
    (iii) A copy of any previous test results or inspections regarding 
lead-based paint or other assessments for lead-related hazards.
    (iv) A description of any lead-related health problems for either 
children or adults in the residence, provided such information is made 
available to the inspector/risk assessor by the residents.
    (v) Other available information that the risk assessor determines 
is necessary to characterize occupant use patterns that may generate or 
contribute to lead-based paint hazards.
    (3) A visual inspection to determine the condition of all painted 
surfaces shall be completed by the inspector/risk assessor.
    (4) Dust samples shall be collected within each selected unit 
according to the following procedures by an inspector/technician or the 
inspector/risk assessor:
    (i) Parts of the living area where children are most likely to come 
into contact with dust as determined by the risk assessor shall be 
sampled.
    (ii) The samples shall be sent for analysis to a laboratory 
recognized by EPA as being capable of performing these activities.
    (5) Where applicable, dust samples shall be collected by an 
inspector/technician or inspector/risk assessor in the following common 
areas:
    (i) In buildings three floors or less, collect samples from common 
areas adjacent to the sampled unit. Additional samples shall be 
collected in the following common areas:
    (A) Entry area of building.
    (B) First level landing above the ground floor.
    (ii) In buildings containing four floors or more, collect samples 
from floor and window sills of common areas (if present).
    (iii) The samples shall be sent for analysis to a laboratory 
recognized by EPA as being capable of performing these activities.
    (6) Any paint found to be deteriorated, or any other area that the 
inspector/risk assessor, in their professional opinion, shall be tested 
by an inspector/technician or the inspector/risk assessor according to 
the procedures found in paragraph (a)(4) of this section and, if 
applicable, paragraph (a)(5) or (a)(6) of this section in order to 
determine lead concentrations.
    (7) Randomly selected soil samples shall be collected by an 
inspector/technician or inspector/risk assessor and analyzed in order 
to adequately characterize the lead concentrations in the following 
areas:
    (i) Exterior play areas.
    (ii) Areas containing bare soil.
    (iii) Dripline/foundation areas.
    (iv) The samples shall be sent for analysis to a laboratory 
recognized by EPA as being capable of performing these activities.
    (8) The following information shall be recorded in a risk 
assessment report by a certified inspector/risk assessor when 
conducting a risk assessment for lead-based paint hazards in target 
housing:
    (i) Date of assessment.
    (ii) Address of residences and buildings.
    (iii) Date of construction of residences and buildings.
    (iv) Unit numbers (if applicable).
    (v) Name, address, and telephone number of the owner of residences 
and buildings.
    (vi) Name of each occupant of the residences and buildings at the 
time of assessment (if applicable).
    (vii) Name and signature of certified inspector/risk assessor 
conducting the assessment, including their certification or license 
number.
    (viii) Name, address, and telephone number of the certified firm 
employing each inspector/risk assessor.
    (ix) Name, address, and telephone number of each recognized 
laboratory conducting analysis of collected samples.
    (x) Any background information collected.
    (xi) Results of the visual inspection.
    (xii) Testing method and sampling procedure for paint analysis 
employed.
    (xiii) Precise locations of all painted surfaces (components) 
tested for the presence of lead-based paint.
    (xiv) All data collected from on-site testing.
    (xv) All results of laboratory analysis on collected paint, soil, 
and dust samples.
    (xvi) Any other sampling results.
    (xvii) An evaluation, to the extent that they are utilized as part 
of the hazard determination, of the adequacy of any previous 
inspections or analyses of the presence of lead-based paint, or other 
assessments of lead related hazards.
    (xviii) A detailed description of recommended control strategies 
for reducing lead-based paint hazards and justification for the 
strategy selected, the locations where the recommended actions should 
take place, and a suggested prioritization for taking each action, 
based on the immediacy of the hazard.
    (9) Reports and plans required under paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(8) 
of this section shall be maintained by the owner of the residence or 
building, and the certified individual or firm that conducted the risk 
assessment for no less than 3 years. This information is also subject 
to the disclosure requirements under section 1018 of the Residential 
Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 in subpart E of this 
part, ``Residential Property Renovation.''
    (c) Abatement in target housing. (1) Abatement means any set of 
measures designed to permanently eliminate lead-based paint hazards in 
accordance with the standards established by the Administrator in this 
section. Such term includes:
    (i) The removal of lead-based paint and lead-contaminated dust, the 
permanent containment or encapsulation of lead-based paint, the 
replacement of lead-painted surfaces or fixtures, and the removal or 
covering of lead- contaminated soil.
    (ii) All preparation, cleanup, disposal, and post-abatement 
clearance testing activities associated with such measures.
    (2) Abatement shall be presumed in the following circumstances:
    (i) Projects for which there is a written contract stating that an 
individual or firm will be conducting activities in or to a dwelling 
unit that will permanently eliminate lead-based paint hazards.
    (ii) Projects involving the permanent elimination of lead-based 
paint or lead-contaminated soil and conducted by firms or individuals 
certified in accordance with this part.
    (iii) Projects involving the permanent elimination of lead-based 
paint or lead-contaminated soil and conducted by firms or individuals 
who, through their company name, promotional literature, or otherwise, 
advertise or hold themselves out to be lead abatement professionals.
    (3) An abatement shall be conducted only by an individual certified 
by the appropriate approving authority as a worker or supervisor.
    (4) A supervisor, certified by the appropriate approving authority, 
shall be assigned to each abatement project and available by phone and 
able to be present physically at the worksite within 2 hours of when 
abatement activities are being conducted.
    (5) The certified abatement project supervisor, and the certified 
firm employing that supervisor are responsible for ensuring completion 
of all abatement activities conducted in target housing according to 
the standards of this section and all other Federal, State and local 
regulations.
    (6) Notification of the commencement of lead-based paint abatement 
activities must be presented, for their information, to the approving 
authority, according to the procedures established by the approving 
authority, prior to the commencement of abatement activities.
    (7) A written pre-abatement plan shall be developed for lead 
abatement firms by a certified planner project designer (or by a 
supervisor for projects with less than 10 units to be abated), and 
shall contain the following elements:
    (i) Measures taken to ensure worker protection which are consistent 
with all Federal, State, and local regulations; hazard recognition and 
control procedures; and information and training to be provided to 
abatement workers.
    (ii) Measures taken to ensure compliance with all Federal, State, 
and local environmental regulations.
    (iii) An occupant protection program, unique to each unit and 
developed prior to the abatement, that describes the measures that will 
be taken during the abatement to protect the building occupants, the 
method of verification that will be utilized to document this 
protection, and contains the following:
    (A) In plans which require the relocation of occupants, post-
abatement dust clearance levels must be met as described in paragraph 
(c)(9) of this section, before re-occupancy.
    (B) Duration of abatement activities.
    (C) Access to facilities and exits.
    (D) Total area involved.
    (E) Specifications for the use of containment.
    (8) If any exterior abatement of lead-based paint is planned, pre-
abatement composite soil samples, consisting of at least four sub-
samples shall be taken next to the foundation or from the dripline 
below any exterior surface to be abated, unless this information is 
available from a current risk assessment.
    (i) The samples shall be sent for analysis to a laboratory 
recognized by EPA as being capable of performing these activities.
    (ii) [Reserved]
    (9) The following post-abatement clearance procedures for units 
that have been abated shall be performed by a certified inspector/risk 
assessor:
    (i) Following an abatement, a visual inspection shall be performed 
by the inspector technician or inspector/risk assessor to determine if 
there are any deteriorated surfaces or visible amounts of dust. If 
deteriorated surfaces or visible amounts of dust are present these 
conditions must be corrected and recleaned prior to the continuation of 
the clearance procedures.
    (ii) Surface dust samples shall be taken no sooner than 24 hours 
after completion of final post abatement clean-up activities.
    (iii) All dust samples shall be sent for analysis to a laboratory 
recognized by EPA as being capable of performing these activities.
    (iv) The following locations shall be sampled for lead containing 
dust by an certified inspector technician or inspector/risk assessor:
    (A) After removing lead-based paint from components throughout a 
unit, three dust samples shall be taken from each area in every unit 
abated. One sample shall be taken from one window sill, one window 
well, and one floor of each area, if available.
    (B) After removing lead-based paint from components in a portion of 
the unit, procedures in paragraph (c)(9)(iv)(A) of this section shall 
be followed and one sample from outside the containment area (within 10 
feet) shall be taken.
    (C) Following a complete replacement or encapsulation of surfaces 
coated with lead-based paint, samples shall be taken from each area in 
every unit abated. One sample each shall be collected from window 
wells, window sills, and floors.
    (D) Following a partial replacement or encapsulation of surfaces 
coated with lead-based paint, the procedure stated in paragraph 
(c)(9)(iv)(C) of this section shall be followed and one sample from 
outside the work area (within 10 feet) shall be taken.
    (E) Following an exterior abatement, at least one sample shall be 
taken from an adjacent horizontal surface in the outdoor living area, 
including but not limited to, a patio, deck, porch, or stoop.
    (v) In each area within an individual unit, the inspector/risk 
assessor shall compare the residual lead dust level (as determined by 
the laboratory analysis) from each dust sample with the clearance 
levels for lead in dust on floors, window sills, window wells, and 
exterior surfaces, as established in the HUD Guidelines for the 
Evaluation and Controls of Lead-Based Paint Hazards in Housing, unless 
superseded by any clearance levels that the Agency may establish 
pursuant to section 403 of TSCA. If any of the area's residual dust 
levels exceed these clearance levels, the area shall be cleaned again 
and retested until the clearance levels are met. If the dust levels 
continue to exceed the clearance levels, alternate hazard control 
strategies should be considered for use. Until all applicable clearance 
levels for lead in dust are met, the area shall not be cleared for re-
occupancy.
    (vi) Once all residual lead levels for an area meet or fall below 
the clearance levels for lead in dust, and there is no deteriorated 
paint or visible dust present, the area shall be cleared for re-
occupancy by the certified inspector/risk assessor.
    (10) The following procedures for determining whether soil 
clearance lead levels have been met shall be performed by a certified 
inspector/technician or inspector/risk assessor:
    (i) Composite soil samples consisting of at least four subsamples 
shall be taken after all exterior abatement work from the dripline or 
next to the foundation below any exterior surface abated.
    (ii) Samples shall be sent for analysis to a laboratory recognized 
by EPA as being capable of performing these activities.
    (iii) A statistical analysis, such as, but not limited to, a paired 
student T-test shall be used to determine if the post-abatement soil 
lead level had increased at a statistically significant level 
(significant at the 95 percent confidence limit) from the pre-abatement 
soil lead level following exterior abatement activities.
    (iv) If soil lead levels do not show a statistically significant 
increase in lead concentrations based on a statistical analysis at the 
95 percent confidence limit after abatement, no remediation is 
required.
    (v) If the soil lead levels do show a statistically significant 
increase, above any applicable Federal or State standard for lead in 
residential soil, based on the statistical analysis at the 95 percent 
confidence limit, the measured level of lead in the soil shall be 
remediated back to the pre-abatement level or abatement of the soil 
shall be conducted according to the standards in paragraph (j) of this 
section.
    (11) All waste from abatement projects shall be disposed in 
accordance with the requirements of the Resource Conservation and 
Recovery Act and any other applicable Federal, State and local laws and 
regulations.
    (12) The following information shall be recorded in a written 
report by the certified supervisor when conducting abatement for lead-
based paint hazards in target housing:
    (i) Start and completion dates of abatement.
    (ii) The name and address of each certified firm conducting the 
abatements, and the name of each supervisor assigned to the abatement 
project.
    (iii) The name and address and signature of each certified 
inspector/risk assessor or inspector technician conducting clearance 
sampling and the date of clearance testing.
    (iv) The results of clearance testing, the name of each recognized 
laboratory that conducted the analyses, and the name and signature of 
the person conducting the analysis.
    (v) A detailed written description of the abatement, including 
abatement methods used, locations of rooms and/or components where 
abatement occurred, and reason for selecting particular abatement 
methods for each component.
    (vi) Information on the storage, transport and disposal of any 
hazardous waste generated during the abatement.
    (13) The certified firm conducting an abatement shall notify the 
approving authority prior to beginning any abatement project according 
to notification procedures developed by the approving authority.
    (14) Reports required under paragraphs (c)(7) and (c)(12) of this 
section shall be maintained by the building owner and certified firm 
conducting the abatement activity for no less than 3 years and are 
subject to the disclosure requirements mandated under section 1018 of 
the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 in 
subpart E of this part, ``Residential Property Renovation.''
    (d) Identification of lead-based paint in public buildings. (1) The 
procedures, requirements and standards in paragraphs (a)(1) through 
(a)(7)(i) of this section shall be followed when identifying lead-based 
paint and materials containing lead-based paint in public buildings.
    (2) All information collected from the identification of lead-based 
paint in public buildings as described in paragraph (d)(1) of this 
section shall be maintained by the owner of the building and certified 
firm responsible for the inspection for not less than 3 years.
    (e) Risk assessment for public buildings. (1) The standards in 
paragraphs (b)(1) through (b)(3) and (b)(4)(ii) as well as (b)(6) 
through (b)(9) (if applicable) of this section shall be followed when 
conducting a risk assessment in public buildings.
    (2) All information collected from the risk assessment in public 
buildings as described in paragraph (e)(1) of this section shall be 
maintained by the owner of the building and certified firm responsible 
for the risk assessment for not less than 3 years.
    (f) Abatement in public buildings. (1) The standards in paragraphs 
(c)(1) through (c)(9)(iv)(D) and (c)(11) through (c)(16) of this 
section shall be followed when abating a public building.
    (2) Reports required under paragraph (e)(1) of this section shall 
be maintained by the building owner and certified firm conducting the 
abatement activity for a period of not less than 3 years.
    (g) Demolition in public and commercial buildings and 
superstructures. The following standards shall be followed when 
conducting demolition in public and commercial buildings and steel 
structures:
    (1) A certified supervisor shall, through a review of available 
documents, obtain any relevant historical information on use of lead-
based paint on the building.
    (2) Whenever deleading is conducted as part of a demolition, such 
as welding, burning, or torch cutting of lead-based paint, the 
standards and procedures prescribed in paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(7) 
of this section shall be followed.
    (h) Standards for the identification of lead-based paint in 
commercial buildings and superstructures. The following standards shall 
be followed when conducting lead-based paint identification in 
commercial buildings and superstructures:
    (1) A certified supervisor shall, through a review of available 
documents, obtain any relevant historical information on use of lead-
based paint on the building.
    (2) If the presence of lead-based paint cannot be established as 
specified in paragraph (h)(1) of this section for a portion of the 
structure or the entire structure, a visual inspection and limited 
sampling shall be conducted at a rate of one sample per 1,000 square 
feet of surface with a distinct painting history, including any 
distinct finish color and maintenance painting, within the areas that 
the historical review was not conclusive.
    (3) All samples shall be sent for analysis to a laboratory 
recognized by EPA as being capable of performing these activities.
    (4) The following information shall be recorded in a written report 
by the certified supervisor when conducting lead identification 
activities:
    (i) Date of identification activity.
    (ii) Name and signature of each person making the identification.
    (iii) Determinations of existence of lead-based paint based on the 
results of testing.
    (iv) The name and address of each recognized laboratory doing paint 
analysis, date of analysis, results of analysis, and name and signature 
of the person performing the analysis.
    (5) Reports required under paragraph (h)(3) of this section shall 
be maintained by the owner or operator of such structure or building 
until such time that the structure or portion of the structure that was 
involved in the identification is repainted.
    (i) Deleading of lead-based paint in commercial buildings and 
superstructures. The following standards shall be followed when 
deleading or removing lead-based paint in commercial buildings or on 
superstructures:
    (1) Deleading shall only be conducted by persons certified by the 
appropriate approving authority as a worker or supervisor.
    (2) A supervisor, certified by the appropriate approving authority, 
shall be assigned to the deleading project and available at all times 
when deleading activities are being conducted.
    (3) The supervisor, certified for deleading on superstructures and 
commercial buildings by the appropriate approving authority, and the 
certified firm are responsible for ensuring completion of all deleading 
activities conducted on superstructures according to the standards of 
this section.
    (4) A written deleading plan shall be prepared by a certified 
supervisor and shall contain the following elements:
    (i) Measures taken to ensure worker protection which are consistent 
with all Federal, State, and local regulations; hazard recognition and 
control procedures; and information and training to be provided to 
deleading workers.
    (ii) Measures taken to ensure compliance with all Federal, State, 
and local environmental regulations.
    (5) All waste shall be disposed of in accordance with the 
appropriate requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 
and any applicable Federal, State, or local requirements.
    (6) A report containing the following information shall be 
maintained by a certified firm when conducting deleading activities on 
superstructures:
    (i) Start and completion dates of deleading.
    (ii) Names and addresses, as well as signature of each supervisor 
of the deleading and, their certification number(s).
    (iii) The name and address of each certified firm and recognized 
laboratory doing any analysis, date of analysis, and name and signature 
of each person performing the analysis.
    (iv) A detailed written description of the deleading, methods used.
    (v) Identification of storage and disposal sites of all hazardous 
waste.
    (7) The standards in paragraphs (i)(1) through (i)(7) of this 
section shall also be followed during deleading of lead-based paint on 
commercial buildings, as defined by Sec. 745.223.
    (8) Reports required under paragraph (i)(7) of this section shall 
be maintained by the owner or oversight agency of such structure until 
that structure or portion of that structure is repainted.
    (j) Soil abatement procedures. The following standards shall be 
followed when conducting the abatement of lead-contaminated soil:
    (1) Abatement shall only be conducted by persons certified by the 
appropriate approving authority as a worker or supervisor.
    (2) A supervisor, certified by the appropriate approving authority, 
shall be assigned to the abatement project and available at all times 
when abatement activities are being conducted.
    (3) The abatement supervisor, certified by the appropriate 
approving authority, and the certified firm are responsible for 
ensuring that all soil abatement activities are conducted according to 
the standards of this section.
    (4) Soil abatement shall be conducted in one of the following ways.
    (i) If soil removal is to be conducted, the lead-contaminated soil 
shall be removed to a depth determined by the inspector/risk assessor, 
until such time that the Agency promulgates a regulation pursuant to 
section 403 of TSCA defining lead-contaminated soil.
    (ii) If, after removal, the soil is to be replaced, the soil shall 
be replaced with non-contaminated soil, to prevent any recontamination 
that would pose a lead hazard.
    (iii) No replacement of soil.
    (iv) The contaminated soil shall be permanently covered.
    (5) Soil abatement shall be conducted in a way that minimizes the 
likelihood that significant amounts of lead contaminated soil and dust 
will be blown from the site or carried away by water run-off.
    (6) The following information shall be recorded in a written report 
by a certified firm when conducting soil abatement:
    (i) Start and completion dates of abatement.
    (ii) Names and addresses, as well as signature of each supervisor 
of the abatement and, their certification numbers.
    (iii) The name and address of each certified firm and recognized 
laboratory doing any analysis, date of analysis, and the name and 
signature of each person performing the analysis.
    (iv) The results of clearance and/or monitoring analysis conducted 
by recognized laboratories.
    (v) A detailed written description of the abatement, including 
abatement methods used, locations of abatement, and reason for 
selecting each abatement method.
    (vi) Identification of storage and disposal sites of all hazardous 
waste.
    (7) Notification of the commencement of soil abatement must be 
presented, for their information, to the approving authority, according 
to the procedures established by the approving authority, prior to the 
commencement of abatement activities.
    (8) Reports required under paragraph (j)(6) of this section shall 
be maintained by the owner or oversight agency of the site where soil 
abatement occurred and the certified individual or firm which performed 
the abatement for not less than 3 years.
    (k) Effective date. All lead-based paint activities shall be 
performed pursuant to the standards contained in Sec. 745.228 after 
[Insert date 3 years after publication of the final rule].


Sec. 745.230   Lead-based paint activities requirements.

    Lead-based paint activities, as defined in this part, shall only be 
conducted according to the procedures and standards contained in 
Sec. 745.228 of this subpart, or according to procedures and standards 
adopted by States or Tribes authorized by the Administrator. No 
individual or firm may perform or offer to perform any lead-based 
activity as defined in this part, unless certified according to the 
procedures at Sec. 745.226.


Sec. 745.235   Enforcement.

    (a) Failure or refusal to comply with any requirement of 
Sec. 745.225, 745.226, 745.228, or 745.230 is a violation of section 15 
of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2614).
    (b) Failure or refusal to establish and maintain records or to 
permit access to or copying of records, as required by Sec. 745.225, 
745.226, or 745.228, is a violation of section 15 of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 
2614).
    (c) Failure or refusal to permit entry or inspection as required by 
Sec. 745.237 and section 11 of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2610) is a violation of 
section 15 of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2614).
    (d) Violators are subject to civil and criminal sanctions pursuant 
to section 16 of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2615) for each violation.


Sec. 745.237   Inspections.

    EPA may conduct reasonable inspections pursuant to the provisions 
of section 11 of TSCA (15 U.S.C. 2610) to ensure compliance with this 
part.


Sec. 745.239   Effective dates.

    Subpart E of this part shall apply in any State that does not have 
an authorized program under subpart Q of this part, effective [Insert 
date 2 years after publication of the final rule]. In such States:
    (a) Training providers shall not provide, or claim to provide 
training for certification without accreditation from the Agency 
pursuant to Sec. 745.225 after [Insert date 2 years and 180 days after 
publication of the final rule].
    (b) No person shall engage in lead-based paint activities without 
certification from the Agency, pursuant to Sec. 745.230 after [Insert 
date 3 years after publication of the final rule].
    (c) All lead-based paint activities shall be performed pursuant to 
the standards contained in Sec. 745.228 after [Insert date 3 years 
after publication of the final rule].
        *    *    *    *    *

Subpart Q--State Programs


Sec. 745.320   Scope and purpose.

    The procedures established in this subpart must be followed by 
States that seek to administer and enforce the standards, regulations, 
or other requirements established under section 402 or 406 or both of 
the Toxic Substances Control Act.


Sec. 745.323   Definitions.

    For purposes of this subpart, the definitions in Secs. 745.3 and 
745.223, and the following definitions apply:
    Indian governing body means the governing body of any tribe, band, 
or group of Indians subject to the jurisdiction of the United States 
and recognized by the United States as possessing power of self-
government.
    Indian reservation means any federally-recognized reservation 
established by Treaty, Agreement, Executive Order, or Act of Congress.


Sec. 745.325   Authorization of State programs.

    (a) Submission of State application. (1) Any State which seeks 
authorization from EPA to administer and enforce the provisions in 
subpart L of this part for section 402(a) of TSCA or the provisions of 
subpart E of this part for section 406 of TSCA, shall submit an 
application to the Administrator in accordance with the procedures of 
this paragraph (a).
    (2) Before developing an application for authorization, a State 
must disseminate a public notice of intent to seek such authorization 
and provide an opportunity for public hearing.
    (3) A State application shall be sent with three complete copies to 
the Administrator and shall include:
    (i)(A) A copy of all existing or proposed State statutes and/or 
regulations relating to the State's lead-based paint activities 
program, including any State standards for conducting lead-based paint 
activities.
    (B) Copies of any State laws and regulations relating to the 
following: provisions for assessing criminal and/or civil penalties, 
and denying, suspending, and revoking certifications and accreditation; 
provisions for right-of-entry at reasonable times, including a 
mechanism to address refusals; and provisions to require recordkeeping 
and reporting.
    (ii)(A) The name of the State agency that is or will be responsible 
for administering and enforcing the State program, the names and job 
titles of responsible officials in that agency, and addresses and phone 
numbers where the officials can be contacted.
    (B) In the event that more than one agency is or will be 
responsible for administering and enforcing the State program, the 
State must designate a primary agency to oversee and coordinate 
administration and enforcement of the State program and serve as the 
primary contact with EPA.
    (C) In the event that more than one agency is or will be 
responsible for administering and enforcing the State program, the 
following information must be provided: A description of the functions 
to be performed by each agency, and how the program will be coordinated 
by the primary agency to ensure consistency and effective 
administration of the lead-based paint training accreditation and 
certification program within the State.
    (iii) A discussion of any special situations, problems, and needs 
pertaining to the application accompanied by an explanation of how the 
State intends to handle them.
    (iv) A description of the resources that the State intends to 
devote to the administration and enforcement of the State programs.
    (v) A written statement by the Governor or the Attorney General 
that the state has the legal authority necessary to adequately 
administer and enforce a State program under this subpart.
    (vi) Provisions to encourage voluntary compliance with State and 
Federal regulations.
    (b) State certification. (1) At the time of submitting an 
application, the State may also certify to the Administrator that the 
State programs meet the requirements contained in paragraphs (c)(1)(i) 
and (c)(1)(ii) of this section.
    (2) If this certification is contained in a State's application, 
the State programs shall be deemed to be authorized by EPA, until such 
time as the Administrator disapproves the program or withdraws the 
authorization.
    (3) If the application does not contain such certification, the 
State program will be authorized only after the Administrator 
authorizes the programs in accordance with paragraph (c) of this 
section.
    (4) This certification must take the form of a letter from the 
Governor to the Administrator.
    (c) EPA approval. (1) Within 180 days of receipt of a complete 
State application, the Administrator shall authorize the state programs 
or disapprove the application. The Administrator may authorize the 
State programs, after the opportunity for a public hearing, only if the 
Administrator finds that:
    (i)(A) In the case of an application to authorize the State to 
administer and enforce the provisions in subpart L of this part for 
section 402(a) of TSCA, the State program is at least as protective of 
human health and the environment as the Federal program under subpart L 
of this part; and/or
    (B) In the case of an application to authorize the State to 
administer and enforce the provisions for section 406 of TSCA, the 
State program is at least as protective of human health and the 
environment as the Federal program under subpart L of this part; and
    (ii) The State program provides adequate enforcement.
    (2) EPA shall notify the State of the Administrator's decision to 
authorize the State programs or disapprove the State's application. 
Upon authorization of a State program, it shall be a violation of 
Federal law for any person to fail or refuse to comply with any 
requirements of such program.
    (3) If the State applies for authorization of State programs under 
both subparts L and E of this part, EPA may authorized one program and 
disapprove the other.
    (d) Approving authority. (1) Upon notification of authorization, 
the designated State agencies will be deemed the approving authorities 
for purposes of administering and enforcing the State program.
    (2) If a State does not have a State program to administer and 
enforce section 402 of TSCA or section 406 or TSCA, authorized under 
this section and in effect by the date which is 2 years after 
promulgation of this regulation, the Administrator shall, by such date, 
establish and enforce, a Federal program in such State, under subpart L 
or section 406 of TSCA, as appropriate.
    (e) Modifications. When any substantial change is made in the 
administration or enforcement of a State program, a responsible 
official in the primary agency shall submit written notification of 
such changes to EPA.
    (f) Oversight. EPA may periodically evaluate the adequacy of a 
State's implementation and enforcement of its authorized programs.
    (g) Reports. The primary agency in each State that has an 
authorized program shall submit a written report to the Regional 
Administrator for the Region in which the State is located at least 
once every 12 months which includes the following information:
    (1) A summary of the State's implementation and enforcement 
activities during the last reporting period, including a list of all 
enforcement actions taken.
    (2) Any changes in the content, administration or enforcement of 
the State program implemented during the last reporting period.
    (3) Other reports as may be required by EPA to carry out effective 
oversight of a State program.
    (h) Withdrawal of authorization. (1) If EPA concludes that a State 
is not administering and enforcing an authorized program in compliance 
with the standards, regulations, and other requirements of Title IV of 
TSCA and this part, the Administrator shall notify the primary agency 
in the State in writing and indicate EPA's intent to withdraw 
authorization of the State program.
    (2) The notice will:
    (i) Identify the program aspects that EPA believes are inadequate 
and provide a factual basis for such findings.
    (ii) Include copies of relevant documents.
    (iii) Provide an opportunity for the State to respond either in 
writing or at a meeting with appropriate EPA officials.
    (3) EPA may request that an informal conference be held between 
appropriate State and EPA officials.
    (4) Prior to issuance of a withdrawal, a State may request that EPA 
hold a public hearing. At this hearing, EPA, the State, and or the 
public may present facts bearing on whether the State's authorization 
should be withdrawn.
    (5) If EPA finds, on the basis of information submitted by the 
State or at the conference that deficiencies did not exist or were 
corrected by the State, EPA may withdraw its notice of intent to 
rescind authorization.
    (6) Where EPA finds that deficiencies in the State program exist, a 
plan to correct the deficiencies shall be jointly prepared by the State 
and EPA. The plan shall describe the deficiencies found in the State 
program, specify the steps the State has taken or will take to remedy 
the deficiencies, and establish a schedule, no longer than 180 days, 
for each remedial action to be initiated.
    (7) If no hearing is requested within 60 days of issuance of the 
Notice of Intent to Rescind, and an agreement is not reached within 180 
days after the Agency determines that a State is not in compliance with 
the Federal program, the Agency shall issue an order withdrawing the 
State's authorization.


Sec. 745.327   Authorization of Indian Tribal Programs.

    (a) On Indian Reservations, the appropriate Indian Governing Body 
may seek to administer and enforce the provisions in subpart L of this 
part for section 402(a) of TSCA or the provisions of subpart E of this 
part for section 406 of TSCA, in lieu of the Federal program.
    (b) If the Indian Governing Body seeks to develop, administer, and 
enforce these provisions, it shall follow the procedures in 
Sec. 745.325 to receive authorization from EPA to do so.
    (c) Nothing in this section is intended either to confer or deny 
jurisdiction to the States over Indian Reservations not already 
conferred or denied under other laws or treaties.


Sec. 745.330   Grants.

    The Administrator or his designate, may make grants to States and 
Indian Governing Bodies under section 404(g) of TSCA to develop and 
carry out programs authorized pursuant to Secs. 745.325 and 745.327.


Sec. 745.339   Effective dates.

    State and Tribal programs may seek authorization of their programs 
pursuant to Subpart Q effective [Insert date of publication of the 
final rule].

[FR Doc. 94-21578 Filed 9-1-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-F