Replies

1. 
   Guest_ | Jun 11, 1999 11:19am | #1

   *
   John: Sounds like it's going to be a high-quality job. The biggest risk would be from ingestion. Do not eat, drink or smoke while working with the roofing. Wear gloves and throw them away at the end of the job. Wash your hands throughly at the end of each work session and before lunch.

   Soil contamination: Where do you live? In an acid rain area? (downwind of coal-fired power plants like New England is). It takes a lot to leach lead, but low levels in soils technically constitute "hazardous waste". But who's gonna check on a residental property? West Coast or Mountain States, I wouldn't expect a problem. And, although it might seem that lead-containing runoff would percolate down and contaminate a lot of soil depth, I've only ever seen lead in shallow, even just surficial soils. But then all my lead-related environmental engineering work has been on the west coast where our rain has a normal pH. Post or email if you've got more questions or want details. -David

2. 
   Nancy_S | Jun 11, 1999 08:43pm | #2

   *
   Are you sure you're even allowed to do that? You wouldn't be around here (New Englad)

   I have a friend, a property manager, who had tenants from Thailand. They raised all of their own vegetables in the summer, and their infant turned out to have very high lead levels. The infant couldn't crawl yet, so had to be getting the lead from the mother's milk (she ate the vegetables). The Health department made the property owner remove the top 2 feet of of soil, which tested as high in lead, and dispose of it at a hazardous waste site. Ånd of course the property owner had to pay for the infant's lead removal treatments.

   Are you sure you want to be liable for the future health of your own or the next homeowner's children?

   It's not just vegetable gardens, kids eat dirt.

3. 
   Guest_ | Jun 11, 1999 09:15pm | #3

   *
   Why lead? Isn't zinc often used with copper for metal roofing, like with Rheinzink (a zinc, copper, titanium alloy)? Seems you'd have the same benefit without concern for any lead toxicity.

1. 
   Guest_ | Jun 12, 1999 04:35am | #4

   *"But who's gonna check on a residental property?"The buyer. The next time the house is for sale and the type of roof is noted.Rich Beckman

1. 
   Guest_ | Jun 12, 1999 06:18am | #5

   *My God, What are we coming to? Lead coated copper is a great material to use for flat rooves-it is elegant, functional and will last almost forever. In addition to its use for flat rooves, it is also used for flashing. Its advantage over regular copper is that it will last just as long (if not longer) without the patina that is associated with copper. We recently did one of these on a house in Mass.-it had regular sautered seams and it looks GREAT. I guess we are being conditioned by all the do-gooders to not ever do or use anything that would "harm" or "hurt" our environment and children. Give me a break- what did we ever do before we had these people?

1. 
   Guest_ | Jun 12, 1999 07:35am | #6

   *Johnny M: I feel your pain, man. You have a good point, it's even a valid point. But, get ready for the big environmental steamroller coming to a town near you. Most of this kind of stuff is out and out ridiculous. I mean, come on, $250K to study a frog's habitat on a recent small bridge project??? An extra EIR ($25-75K) per SFR to study a snail??? These are not pertinent, you say, because they are not about toxic contamination? Well, dig this: A rancher acquaintance of mine was not allowed to finish grading his long driveway to his house because the ACE, F&G, CalEPA, and a host of others thought the creosote in the RR ties would leach into the riparian habitat thAT borders the area.I know, I know, I'm ranting. Sometimes I think the very best solution for these people would be if humans would themselves cease to exist.BTW: anyone who chews on paint ought to get out of the pool anyway. Know what I'm saying? Jeez, what happened to individual responsibility?After reviewing what I have put here, I think I'll still hit that "submit" button. Here goes...

1. 
   Guest_ | Jun 12, 1999 08:20am | #7

   *Kids eating lead based paint is definitely a problem and should be addressed when found. As far as the lead in the soil goes, if I were the property owner I would have had an independent lab test the soil and then take samples from the surrounding properties too. I would have fought it if at all possible. Then, if lead shows up in hazardous levels in the soil, they would have to show a direct link to eating vegetables grown from that soil and transfer of lead via breast milk to the child. Difficult to establish but then when the local health department gets involved, often politics rule rather than common sence.High lead levels abound throughout this country, and others, as a result of leaded gas used in our cars for decades. This is especially true in urban areas and around major highways. Who's to say that the lead, picked up by the mother wasn't from that sourse or from her homeland where leaded gas is the norm rather than the exception.

4. 
   JohnKirk | Jun 12, 1999 09:52am | #8

   *
   Nancy S,

   Lead coated steel roofs have been used in the New England states since the late 1700's. They call it "terne metal" and it is made by a company called Follensbee Steel.

   The roof is usually painted.

   They recently stopped making the lead coating and went to a zinc-tin coating.

   There are thousands of roofs all over the world with a lead coating.

1. 
   JohnKirk | Jun 12, 1999 10:00am | #9

   *Barry,I'm a metal roofing contractor and want to build a new office with an attractive metal roof. I think stone veneer and a lead coated copper roof would be a nice look.I have never heard of the product "Rheinzink". Who makes it and what does it cost?JohnKirk

1. 
   JohnKirk | Jun 12, 1999 10:15am | #10

   *David,Thanks for the advise. Do you think that there is any danger of the lead being absorbed through the skin?I live in central Alabama and don't think there is much acid rain here.I could probably pipe the runoff to go directly in a small stream and therefore would dilute and spread the lead runoff over a large area.JohnKirk

5. 
   Guest_ | Jun 12, 1999 07:02pm | #11

   *
   I happened across an article in a Sunday paper a few years back about a law requiring landlords to provide tennants with a brochure about lead hazards if the building was built before 1978. We have some rental property and looked into it. Seems triple damages (read "millions") have been awarded to renters who have children affected by lead poisoning.

   So what? Just last night I read this short article in the May '99 issue of Qualified Remodeler (p15) that Kevin Zale was kind enough to send me.

   >As of June 1,1999, the Pre-Renovation Lead >Information Rule (PLIR) will take effect, >requiring remodelers to distribute a lead hazard >information pamphlet entitled "Protect Your >Family From Lead in Your Home" to owners of >any pre-1978 homes prior to commencing the >renovation.

   The article goes on to say that you can get copies of the pamphlet by calling (800) 424-LEAD of get multiple copies from the GPO at (202) 512-1800.

   Apparently this is a law now in effect. So even if you don't care about protectring the planet we live on, you might still want to cover your ass. - jb

1. 
   Guest_ | Jun 13, 1999 02:49am | #12

   *JB, I like to think I am exempt from your remark about not caring about the planet. The honest truth is, I do care. However, I don't believe we need to "save the planet". What are we saving it from? Like, as if , it needs saving. Like, you know, we could.Don't you agree that many of the "environmental" regulations are, how should I put this, overzealous? Man, oh man, there has been created an entire growth industry dedicated--maybe--to "saving the planet".Thank you for your time.BTW: A good read is a fiction novel entitled "The Thor Conspiracy", by Larry Burkett ISBN: 0-8407-7801-5. Also, get your hands on the non-fiction "The Death of Common Sense", by Philip K. Howard ISBN: 0-679-42994-8.

1. 
   Guest_ | Jun 13, 1999 08:13am | #13

   *Rich - I am sure there are environmentalists who are passionate about their profession just as you and I are passionate about building. I can easily imagine some stockbroker happening on this site, reading a heated debate about which type of insulation is most effective in artic climates, and thinkin' "man, these guys are off the deep end". And thinking we are "over zealous". So I respect your opinion that environmenalists go "too far". I am sure I do my share of poluting just going about my everyday life. I think it is important for me to do what I can to preserve this environment for my kids, and your kids, and their kids. If you think it's blown out of proportion, that's your right. I certainly don't want to try persuading you. You have every right to live the way you see fit. The dangers of lead have been known for many years. It doesn't make my job (or yours) any easier to deal with it when remodeling old buildings. But I sure am going to make sure folks sign a document stating I gave them that brochure. And I will do my best to insure that no little kids are exposed to any more dust or paint chips than I can help. - jb

1. 
   Guest_ | Jun 13, 1999 09:03am | #14

   *Jim, your last paragraph is right on the mark. In my "brochure receipt", I'm also asking the owner to give the date of construction of their home/business.Whatever one's feelings about the health/environmental aspects of this topic, we, as professionals, must meet the requirements of the law.Steve

1. 
   Guest_ | Jun 15, 1999 02:02am | #15

   *John: Yes there is some risk of absorbtion through the skin, that's why I'd recommend gloves. And that you throw away the gloves at the end of the roofing job. I'm not aware of acid rain being a problem in AL either. I'm not going to get into the whole "the solution to pollution is dilution" thing. You could never get people to agree on the legal, medical, moral, or environmental aspects of it.

2. 
   Guest_ | Jun 15, 1999 02:10am | #16

   *Steve: I agree that testing surrounding properties for lead-containing soils would be a smart move for the landlord. Most lead-in-soil issues I've seen have been regional in nature (due to auto exhaust in urban areas or smelter stack emissions many miles away). Showing your soil to be at "background" concentrations usually eliminates the requirement to dig and dispose of the soil. But the health department or state could restrict your use of the land if it not cleaned up, even though you weren't responsible. Parking lot or industrial use might be allowed but not a residential or day-care center. An amazing number of things can be "fingerprinted" by their chemical or isotopic composition to determine their origin (i.e. auto exhaust vs. stack emmissions vs. lead paint). But that is likely beyond the means of an individual landlord. -DavidNancy: Yes, kids eat dirt. ASTM risk assessment guidelines gives a soil-ingestion rate of 100mg/day for residental property and half that for commercial property. Some states have debated whether that amount (5 pounds in a lifetime) is enough because of geophagic (dirt eating) individuals and cultures. Should they be protective of ALL kids, or just the normal ones? To paraphase Rich, below, "Hey, you! Out of the gene pool!" Lastly to delve into the dangerous topic of poor people and heavy metals: Some people believe that rich white people discriminate against minorities when they site their factories and toxic waste sites. I would argue that poor people would rather be living in Vail, but may only have the choice of living in an industrial area in Louisana, in an old house with peeling paint, along a interstate with its vehicle emissions, and get what protein they can from fishing in a nearby river. In both CA and WA, I noticed many immigrants catching seafood and shellfish from local waters. Fine in moderation, but not to excess or by pregnent or lactating women. Nancy: Could that family have been fishing in the Quabbin? Or a similar stupidly selected reservior? (Boston flooded five towns to make their drinking water reservior. Unfortunately, the local industrial had been the tanning of hides - chromium, etc.) Opps!

3. 
   Guest_ | Jun 16, 1999 06:12am | #17

   *I don't think anyone who lives on this planet is purposely out to destroy it, but we need to use a certain amount of common sense when we pass laws. Maybe its just me, but it seems that most of our laws are passed for political or emotional reasons. We all try to do our part to help our planet along. I think many of these "problems in our environment" are a bit far-fetched. Think about it. For example, in California not too long ago they were talking about relocating a highway or slowing traffic on it to about 20 mph for the Delhi flower sands loving fly or something or other-some stupid insect. Gimme a break, will ya. Think about this- Remember when asbestos was approved by the government to use any and everywhere? Who has to pay now to have it removed because it's bad for our health? How ABOUT lead paint-that was approved, too. Right up until 1976. Now WE have to pay to have it removed. HUD wants it removed out of all their buildings-who the hell pays for that? The taxpayers-you and I. And exactly what will be accomplished? NOTHING. As long as these painted surfaces are kept in- tact and people look after THEIR OWN kids to make sure they are not chewing on window sills, then they can't get lead poisoning. Instead, we're going to have a bizzilion tons of plastic and lead from all the abatement buried in the landfills. Where are all the environmentalists on this one? And, yes, there is a new lead law that went into effect as of June 1 this year. This will open us all up to more lawsuits and guess what?- your liability insurance probably doesn't cover you for it. Another jack-ass law that we didn't need, but had to have. Do I sound mad? You bet I am. It upsets me when people start up with this "save the planet" nonsense to the point that it negates all common sense and logic. Who the hell is going to save us?

4. 
   Guest_ | Jun 16, 1999 06:35am | #19

   *The lead issue gets complicated for all of us. JLC has an article this month about a form from the EPA we're supposed to have a client sign which says he acknowledges recieving a pamphlet from the contractor warning of household lead dangers. I'm not that familiar with it, but it sure sounded like they want EVERY contractor to do this. Has anyone had any experience with this?

6. 
   JohnKirk | Jun 16, 1999 06:35am | #18

   *
   I am considering using lead coated copper for a hand made standing seam roof and was wondering about the hazards in using the lead product.

   Also, would the runoff contaminate the soil?

   Any comments?

   JohnKirk