- Readers Respond: Business and the $4 gallon of gas
- Readers respond to debit card swipe fees
- Ohio lawmakers recognize Klinker's
- Whirlpool dryers board the Energy Star train
- PRO Group welcomes new distributor
- Home Depot points to holiday innovation
- True Value rolls out new paint center
- Krylon introduces Superbond Paint + Primer
- Over lead paint, Lowe's settles for $500,000
The following letter was a response to "EPA lead rule suffers setback:"
"There is no need for a better ‘test kit,’ as highly reliable and affordable X-Ray Fluorescence technology has been in use for decades. There are many consultants who have XRF machines, and lead inspections are inexpensive. XRF testing produces no damage, while ‘test kits’ and chip sampling involves producing widely scattered damage (12 to 15 sample locations for a typical room in a house).
“The reality is that lead-based paint is rare in residential buildings constructed from 1960 to 1978, and is not everywhere in older buildings. EPA’s big mistake was not requiring that the buildings be inspected, so that procedures for dealing with lead-based paint are only used where it is actually present.”
— F. Stephen Masek