Notice2021-24010
Withdrawal of Two Answers to Frequent Questions About Property Management Companies and the Toxic Substances Control Act Lead-Based Paint Renovation, Repair, and Painting Rule
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
November 4, 2021
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The EPA intends to withdraw two Frequently Asked Questions (FQs) concerning property management companies (PMCs) and their compliance responsibilities under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule. This notice explains the rationale for the withdrawal, the impact on the regulated community, how EPA will exercise its enforcement discretion, and invites public comment. The requirements of the RRP rule are intended to protect people, especially children, from the hazardous health effects of lead from lead-based paint.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 86 Issue 211 (Thursday, November 4, 2021)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 211 (Thursday, November 4, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60812-60815]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2021-24010]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-EPA-HQ-OECA-2021-0763; FRL-9204-01-OECA]
Withdrawal of Two Answers to Frequent Questions About Property
Management Companies and the Toxic Substances Control Act Lead-Based
Paint Renovation, Repair, and Painting Rule
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice and opportunity for public comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA intends to withdraw two Frequently Asked Questions
(FQs) concerning property management companies (PMCs) and their
compliance responsibilities under the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting (RRP) Rule. This notice
explains the rationale for the withdrawal, the impact on the regulated
community, how EPA will exercise its enforcement discretion, and
invites public comment. The requirements of the RRP rule are intended
to protect people, especially children, from the hazardous health
effects of lead from lead-based paint.
DATES: The EPA intends to withdraw FQ 23002-13650 and 23002-18348 (the
``PMC FQs''), found below and at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/lead/fqs-rrp-rule">https://www.epa.gov/lead/fqs-rrp-rule</a>
on March 21, 2022. However, due to the significant public interest in
the issues addressed in this notice, the EPA is providing an
opportunity for public comment on the EPA's intended action. The EPA is
requesting comments by December 6, 2021 to identify any relevant
information that could change the EPA's decision to withdraw these two
FQs. Following the comment period and the Agency's consideration of
comments received by that date, the EPA intends to post a memorandum
that states whether the withdrawal will take effect as planned. The EPA
would make the memorandum available on its website at: <a href="http://www.epa.gov/lead">www.epa.gov/lead</a>, and in the public comment docket for this notice at Docket EPA-
HQ-OECA-2021-0763. By providing advance notice of the planned
withdrawal of the FQs in 135 days from publication in the Federal
Register, the EPA is providing more than sufficient time for PMCs to
obtain any needed certification under the Lead RRP rule.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OECA-2021-0763, by any of the following methods:
<bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: <a href="https://www.regulations.gov/">https://www.regulations.gov/</a>
(our preferred method). Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
<bullet> Agency Website: <a href="http://www.epa.gov/lead">www.epa.gov/lead</a>. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
<bullet> Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket
Center, OECA Docket, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20460.
<bullet> Hand Delivery/Courier: EPA Docket Center, WJC West
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004.
The Docket Center's hours of operations are 8:30 a.m.-4:30 p.m.,
Monday-Friday (except Federal Holidays).
Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
No. for this notice. Comments received may be posted without change to
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov/">https://www.regulations.gov/</a>, including any personal information
provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional
information on the notice, see the ``Public Participation'' heading of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. Out of an
abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, the EPA
Docket Center and Reading Room are open to the public by appointment
only to reduce the risk of transmitting COVID-19. Our Docket Center
staff also continues to provide remote customer service via email,
phone, and webform. Hand deliveries and couriers may be received by
scheduled appointment only. For further information on EPA Docket
Center services and the current status, please visit us online at
<a href="https://www.epa.gov/dockets">https://www.epa.gov/dockets</a>.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Aimee Hessert, Federal Facilities
Enforcement Office (MC 2261A), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: (202)
564-0993; email address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#30585543435542441e51595d5555705540511e575f46"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="335b5640405641471d525a5e5656735643521d545c45">[email protected]</span></a>; and Amos Presler,
Office of Civil Enforcement (MC 2249A), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460; telephone
number: (202) 564-1076; email address: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7e0e0c1b0d121b0c501f13110d3e1b0e1f50191108"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="75050710061910075b14181a06351005145b121a03">[email protected]</span></a>. Comments
or questions submitted by email must include ``Docket EPA-HQ-OECA-2021-
0763'' in the subject line of the email message.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Public Participation
A. Written Comments
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OECA-2021-
0763, at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> (our preferred method), or the
other methods identified in the ADDRESSES section. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from the docket. The EPA may
publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit to
EPA's docket at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> any information you
consider to be Proprietary Business Information (PBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For
[[Page 60813]]
additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit <a href="https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets">https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets</a>.
Due to public health concerns related to COVID-19, the EPA Docket
Center and Reading Room are open to the public by appointment only. Our
Docket Center staff also continues to provide remote customer service
via email, phone, and webform. For further information and updates on
EPA Docket Center services, please visit us online at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/dockets">https://www.epa.gov/dockets</a>.
The EPA continues to carefully and continuously monitor information
from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), local area
health departments, and our Federal partners so that we can respond
rapidly as conditions change regarding COVID-19.
II. General Information
A. Does this action affect you?
This announcement matters to you if you are a PMC, if you are
employed by a PMC, if you live in target housing managed by a PMC, or
if you work with PMCs on renovation, repair or painting activities
covered by the EPA's RRP rule. Target housing includes residential
dwellings constructed before 1978. This notice also matters to you if
you have a child under the age of 6 years who regularly visits a
``child-occupied facility,'' such as a daycare or a kindergarten, in a
pre-1978 building managed by a PMC.
B. Intended Action
This Notice by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announces
it intends to withdraw two Frequently Asked Questions (``FQs'')
concerning property managers and property management companies
(collectively, ``property management companies'' or ``PMCs'') and their
compliance responsibilities under the Lead-based Paint Renovation,
Repair, and Painting Rule (``RRP rule''), section 402(c) of the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), 40 CFR part 745, subpart E, including
the pre-renovation information distribution requirements promulgated
under TSCA section 406(b) and codified at 40 CFR 745.84. The FQs are
viewable on the EPA website: <a href="http://www.epa.gov/lead/fqs-rrp-rule">www.epa.gov/lead/fqs-rrp-rule</a>.
The first of the PMC FQs to be withdrawn indicated the EPA's prior
statement that a PMC did not need to obtain firm certification for
itself or renovator certification for an employee if none of its
employees ``do the work'' of the renovation:
Question (23002-13650): A property management company performs
most of the clerical functions of the business, and hires plumbers,
electricians, carpenters, etc., for its renovation needs. Does the
property management company need firm certification?
Answer: A property management company acts as an agent for the
landlord and has the same responsibilities as the landlord under the
RRP rule. Therefore, if the property management company uses its own
employees to do the work, the property management company must be a
certified firm and one of the employees must be a certified
renovator. If the property management company hires a renovation
firm to perform the renovation, the property management company does
not need firm or renovator certification, but the firm the property
management company hires must be certified and must perform the
renovation using a certified renovator that directs and provides on-
the-job training to any workers that are not certified renovators.
The second of the two PMC FQs explained how the EPA would exercise
its enforcement discretion under circumstances in which a certified
firm hired by the PMC fails to comply with a requirement of the RRP
rule:
Question (23002-18348): If a property management company hires a
certified firm to perform a renovation and the firm violates the RRP
rule, for example, by failing to distribute the necessary materials
or keep proper records, which entity is subject to enforcement
action, the property manager or the certified firm?
Answer: It is the certified firm's responsibility to comply with
the requirements of the RRP rule, and any enforcement action taken
would be against the firm.
With the withdrawal of FQ 23002-13650 and FQ 23002-18348, the EPA
would assess compliance by PMCs with the RRP rule, as it would for any
other entity, according to the broadly applicable language of the RRP
rule: That no firm may perform, offer, or claim to perform renovations
without certification from EPA in target housing or child-occupied
facilities (unless the renovation qualifies for a specified exception).
See, e.g., 40 CFR 745.81(a)(2)(ii). Furthermore, the EPA will evaluate
compliance and appropriate enforcement actions on the basis of each
case's individual facts and circumstances, and the EPA may exercise its
enforcement discretion regarding PMC obligations.
As stated in the introduction to the current FQs document
(available at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/lead/answers-frequent-questions-about-epas-lead-renovation-repair-and-painting-rrp-rule">https://www.epa.gov/lead/answers-frequent-questions-about-epas-lead-renovation-repair-and-painting-rrp-rule</a>), the FQs
present the agency's preliminary responses, may be periodically
revised, and do not necessarily bind the EPA to a specific application
of the RRP rule. This notice, like the PMC FQs, is intended solely for
guidance and does not alter any statutory or regulatory requirements
and does not create binding obligations.
For information on how to get certified, please see <a href="https://www.epa.gov/lead/renovation-repair-and-painting-program-contractors">https://www.epa.gov/lead/renovation-repair-and-painting-program-contractors</a>.
C. Background
The RRP rule is intended to protect residents of pre-1978 homes
from lead-based paint disturbed in the course of renovation, repair or
painting activities. Compliance with the RRP rule's requirements
protects people from the hazardous health effects of lead, especially
children six years old and younger and pregnant women, both of whom are
most susceptible to the effects of lead. Even low levels of lead in the
blood of children can result in: Behavior and learning problems; lower
IQ and hyperactivity; slowed growth; hearing problems; and anemia. In
rare cases, ingestion of lead can cause seizures, coma and even death.
Lead accumulates in the body over time, where it is stored in the bones
along with calcium. During pregnancy, lead is released from the
pregnant mother's bones, along with calcium, and can pass from the
mother, exposing the fetus or the breastfeeding infant to lead. This
can result in serious effects to the developing fetus and infant. It
can cause the baby to be born too early or too small; hurt the baby's
brain, kidneys, and nervous system; increase the likelihood of learning
or behavioral problems; and put the mother at risk for miscarriage.
Congress recognized almost thirty years ago, upon enactment of the
legislation that included TSCA Title IV, that lead in paint was
responsible for ``low-level lead poisoning [that was] widespread among
American children, afflicting as many as 3,000,000 children under age
6, with minority and low-income communities disproportionately
affected.'' 42 U.S.C. 4851. Disproportionate risks of lead exposure in
minority and low-income communities persist today.\1\ Withdrawal of the
PMC FQs is important for the safety of all who live in PMC-managed
[[Page 60814]]
housing, and it is vitally important to the health of children under
the age of 6 years, particularly in communities burdened by exposure to
high levels of lead-based paint in pre-1978 housing. Communities with
environmental justice concerns often include a higher proportion of
rental housing. PMCs manage a significant portion of the nation's
rental housing market, and each PMC often manages a large number of
rental housing units. For example, the largest 50 PMCs alone control
3.4 million units.\2\ PMCs also manage approximately 205,000 family
housing projects, which comprise 99% of privatized military housing.
More than 3.18 million children under the age of 6 years live in pre-
1980 rental housing.\3\ A portion of these children may be at risk of
exposure to lead-based paint hazards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Hauptman, et al., Individual- and Community-Level Factors
Associated with Detectable and Elevated Blood Lead Levels in US
Children: Results From a National Clinical Laboratory, JAMA
Pediatrics (published online September 27, 2021) (finding
statistically significant associations between detectable or
elevated blood lead levels and zip codes with concentrations of
poverty, Black populations, or Hispanic populations, and other
community factors).
\2\ National Multifamily Housing Council (NMHC) (tallying
3,405,227 rental units under management by 50 PMCs). <a href="https://www.nmhc.org/research-insight/the-nmhc-50/top-50-lists/2019-managers-list/">https://www.nmhc.org/research-insight/the-nmhc-50/top-50-lists/2019-managers-list/</a>.
\3\ American Housing Survey Table, 2019 National--Household
Demographics--All Occupied Units--Tenure Filter: Renter--Year Built
Variable (2019) (rental filtered sum of pre-1980 households (columns
I-M) with one child under 6 years (rows 170-71, 176-77, 182-83) plus
doubled sum of pre-1980 households of two or more children under 6
years old (rows 172,73, 178-79, 184-85) yields a minimum estimate of
3,188,000 children under 6 years old in pre-1980 rental housing).
Spreadsheet is derived from the Custom AHS Table tool maintained by
the U.S. Census at <a href="https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/ahs">https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/ahs</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. RRP Rule Applicability
The RRP rule broadly applies to renovation, repair or painting
activities performed for compensation that disturb painted surfaces in
target housing and child occupied facilities.
When the EPA developed the RRP rule, as required by section 402(c)
of TSCA, it defined the scope of the RRP rule based on the
circumstances of the renovation, repair and painting activity, rather
than the person or entity performing the renovation. The RRP rule
``applies to all renovations performed for compensation in target
housing and child-occupied facilities. . . .'' 40 CFR 745.82(a). The
purpose of this broad application, as stated in the regulation is ``to
ensure'' that ``individuals performing renovations . . . are properly
trained; renovators and firms performing these renovations are
certified; and the work practices in [the regulation] are followed. . .
.'' Sec. 745.80(b). Work practice requirements, such as work-area
containment, and a prohibition on certain work practices, such as open-
flame burning, minimize exposure to lead-based paint hazards.
The regulations provide that ``no firm may perform, offer, or claim
to perform renovations without certification from EPA . . . in target
housing or child-occupied facilities [unless an exception applies].''
Sec. 745.81(a)(2)(ii). The regulations broadly define ``firms'' to
include: ``a company, partnership, corporation, sole proprietorship or
individual doing business, association, or other business entity; a
Federal, State, Tribal or local government agency; or a nonprofit
organization.'' Sec. 745.83.
E. Basis for EPA's PMC FQs
In an effort to help the public understand and comply with the RRP
rule, the EPA posted answers to frequent questions on its website at
<a href="https://www.epa.gov/lead/fqs-rrp-rule">https://www.epa.gov/lead/fqs-rrp-rule</a> (``FQ document''). When the EPA
added the PMC FQs to the FQ document in 2010, it did not have
experience with implementation of the RRP rule and the PMC industry's
response to it. PMC FQ 23002-13650 states, ``if the property management
company hires a renovation firm to perform the renovation, the property
management company does not need firm or renovator certification.'' The
FQ, which as noted above is not binding, analogized PMCs to landlords
and provided that a PMC that did not use its own employees ``to do the
work'' would not have enforceable obligations under the RRP rule and,
for example, would not need to ensure that lead-safe work practices
were followed. The FQ did not elaborate on the phrase ``do the work.''
At the time the FQ was written, EPA generally did not think that a PMC
that hired a renovation firm to perform a renovation would itself be
doing work such that it also would be performing or offering to perform
the renovation for compensation. Therefore, EPA did not think the PMC
would need to comply with the RRP rule and need to be a certified firm.
Consistent with this prior interpretation, FQ 23002-18348 states that
any enforcement action taken would be against the renovation firm, not
the PMC. EPA now has experience implementing the RRP rule and
understands there are circumstances where a PMC hires a renovation firm
to perform the renovation, and also engages in activities such that the
PMC also performs or offers to perform the renovation, and these
circumstances are described in more detail in this notice.
F. EPA's Experience Implementing the RRP Rule Supports Withdrawal of
the PMC FQs
The EPA has gained experience implementing the RRP rule since 2010
and, based on this experience, has a better understanding of the
activities commonly undertaken by PMCs. As explained below, the EPA has
concluded that it is not appropriate to make categorical assumptions
about PMC compliance obligations and that these obligations should be
determined based on the facts and circumstances of each individual
case. While PMCs may in some instances and in some circumstances act as
agents of a landlord, unlike landlords they are not property owners,
but instead are a distinct type of entity that performs services for
compensation. In the EPA's experience, PMCs often do not hire certified
renovation firms. Furthermore, the EPA has found many circumstances
where a PMC that hires a renovation firm for a renovation also performs
or offers to perform the renovation for compensation in target housing.
For example, in some cases, the PMC might offer to perform renovation,
repair, or painting activities through its contractual agreements with
the building owner, and in other cases the PMC might perform an element
of the renovation for compensation.
Given the EPA's understanding of these circumstances, the EPA
intends to assess compliance by PMCs with the RRP rule, just as it
would for any other entity, in accordance with the broadly applicable
language of the RRP rule: That no firm may perform, offer, or claim to
perform regulated renovations without certification from the EPA in
target housing or child-occupied facilities. See, e.g., 40 CFR
745.81(a)(2)(ii). Consistent with the requirements in the RRP rule, the
EPA will evaluate compliance and appropriate enforcement actions on the
basis of each case's individual facts and circumstances, and the EPA
may exercise its enforcement discretion regarding PMC obligations.
G. Examples of PMCs' Varying Levels of Involvement With Renovations
The following discussion is intended to help elaborate on how the
RRP rule may apply to PMCs when they hire a renovation firm. In some
cases, the PMC might offer to perform renovation, repair, or painting
activities through its contractual agreements with the building owner,
and in other cases the PMC might perform an element of the renovation
for compensation.
When a PMC enters into a business relationship with the property
owner, the PMC typically agrees to perform various property management
services. In some circumstances, a PMC's services may be strictly
limited to leasing and rent collection. That circumstance would be
unlikely to give rise to facts
[[Page 60815]]
indicating that a PMC ``performed'' a renovation.
More often, a PMC agrees to provide--and is compensated for--
property management services that include maintenance, repair,
painting, renovations, or other activities that disturb painted
surfaces and may be subject to the RRP rule and require a certified
renovator. In such agreements, oral contracts, or written contracts,
the agreement obligates the PMC to perform the renovation. Whether the
PMC uses its own employees to perform the work or hires an outside firm
to perform the work, the PMC remains obligated by such an agreement
with the property owner (and typically is compensated for fulfilling
such obligations) to ensure that the renovation is performed.
Specification of such ``renovation'' responsibilities in a written
contract between a property owner and a PMC is not essential to
establishing RRP rule applicability to the PMC, especially if other
facts establish that the PMC offered to perform or actually did perform
some other action necessary to ensure the performance of a renovation
activity.
When a PMC hires a firm for renovation, repair or painting
activities, the PMC, as part of the business relationship with the
property owner, is typically compensated for managing certain
activities that are necessary or even integral to the performance of
the renovation, repair or painting activity, including (but not limited
to):
<bullet> Soliciting and evaluating contractor bids;
<bullet> Applying for permits, as appropriate;
<bullet> Granting contractors access to the property;
<bullet> Overseeing contractor work on the property;
<bullet> Informing tenants of renovation activity;
<bullet> Verifying completion of renovation activity; or
<bullet> Remitting payment to the contractors.
The PMC may even oversee or supervise the outside renovation firms,
individuals and contractors who are not the PMC's employees but are
doing activities that are recognized as part of the renovation in the
RRP rule. The PMC may also coordinate work schedules of the various
outside contractors.
Compensation of a PMC by the property owner for any of these or
similar activities may establish that a PMC is performing a renovation
for compensation and must comply with the RRP rule, even if the PMC
uses an independent contractor instead of its own employees to do the
specific activities that disturb paint surfaces. Consistent with the
requirements in the RRP rule, the EPA will evaluate compliance and
appropriate enforcement actions on the basis of each case's individual
facts and circumstances, and the EPA may exercise its enforcement
discretion regarding PMC obligations.
H. Why Withdrawal of the PMC FQs Is Preferable
The EPA has over ten years of experience with the PMC FQs and has
concluded, as discussed above, that these FQs have contributed to non-
compliance with the RRP rule in rental property managed by PMCs.
EPA's experience also has shown that PMCs routinely hire smaller,
uncertified firms to conduct RRP activities. Collectively these hiring
decisions by PMCs have an outsized impact on worksite compliance at
properties managed by PMCs as the numerous contractors for renovation,
repair and painting activities are often small and transitory.
Withdrawing the PMC FQs signals that EPA plans to hold both the PMCs
and the contractors they hire responsible for compliance if the
circumstances indicate that both entities performed or offered to
perform renovations for compensation in target housing or child-
occupied facilities.
Withdrawal of the PMC FQs and the discussion in this notice helps
to increase the impact and effectiveness of the RRP Rule and improve
compliance in rental properties managed by PMCs. The EPA seeks to
explain the circumstances that may give rise to compliance obligations
for PMCs under the RRP Rule. We also aim to identify the potential
enforcement consequences for a PMC that performs or offers to perform
renovations for compensation without considering its role in RRP rule
compliance.
I. Assessing Compliance for PMCs
The EPA is cognizant that PMCs relying on the EPA's PMC FQs may
have declined to obtain RRP certification themselves or ensure the RRP
compliance of contractors they hired. Therefore, through this notice,
the EPA is informing the public and PMCs that EPA intends to withdraw
FQs 23002-13650 and 23002-18348 and intends, upon withdrawal, to assess
compliance by PMCs that are performing or offering to perform
renovations for compensation--either by using their own employees or
hiring an outside firm--according to the same requirements placed upon
any other entity that performs or offers to perform a renovation for
compensation in target housing or child-occupied facilities.
Consistent with the RRP rule, any individual or entity (including
PMCs) is subject to the RRP rule requirements when they perform or
offer to perform renovation, repair or painting activities for
compensation in housing and child-occupied facilities built before
1978, and therefore must be a certified firm.
Requirements for certified firms include, among other things:
Obtaining firm certification; providing owners and occupants with the
EPA's Renovate Right pamphlet; assigning a certified renovator to the
RRP activity (or ensuring assignment of a contractor's certified
renovator); ensuring all workers onsite are certified or receive on-
the-job training from a certified renovator; ensuring use of lead-safe
work practices and clean-up; ensuring documentation of compliance of
lead-safe work practices that minimize the release of lead-based paint
hazards such as paint chips and dust containing lead; and providing
that documentation to the EPA and to EPA-authorized state programs upon
request.
By providing advance notice of the planned withdrawal of the FQs in
135 days, the EPA is providing more than sufficient time for PMCs to
obtain any needed certification under the Lead RRP rule. For
information on how to get certified, please see <a href="https://www.epa.gov/lead/renovation-repair-and-painting-program-contractors">https://www.epa.gov/lead/renovation-repair-and-painting-program-contractors</a>.
Michael S. Regan,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2021-24010 Filed 11-3-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on November 4, 2021.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.