*DISCLAIMER: THIS WORK IS THE PROPERTY OF CARA M. MARSHALL.

The purpose of this analysis is to explore the problem of lead paint in the buildings of the five boroughs of New York City. In the 18^th, 19^th, and 20^th centuries paint was made from lead in the form of lead carbonate and lead oxides because it had excellent adhesion, covering, and drying capabilities. In 1978, the federal government banned the use of lead-based paint in residential housing. Since the ban, titanium and other less toxic materials have replaced the lead components in paint, glazing putty, and varnishes.

Lead poisoning is a serious issue that affects people across the country. There is no medical treatment for this disease. The New York City area will be the focus of this paper, as there is such a high concentration of affected buildings in this area. It is estimated that more than 75% of housing units in New York City were built before 1960. There is a concern, particularly for children growing up in pre-1960 apartment buildings and houses, attending schools and visiting playgrounds, where lead particles still reside on walls, floors, and in the air. The proper disposal of these remnants is costly, and can be hazardous to workers and contractors. In this paper, we’ll examine the actions that have been taken to dispose of poisonous lead materials from buildings in the New York City area. We’ll analyze the market and non-market factors, and make recommendations regarding the future actions of all parties involved.

II. Hazards of Lead Poisoning

Lead can be found in paint, soil, drinking water, air, food, and dust. Thus, it is not difficult for a person to become exposed simply by living, breathing, eating and drinking. Exposure to lead elevates a person’s blood lead level (BLL). Since there is no treatment for lead poisoning, the only way to prevent it is by removing lead particles from all pre-1960 buildings (and 1978 buildings that had been renovated using lead-based paint products). A simple blood test can detect BLLs.

A. Health Risks to Children

Lead is most dangerous to children under the age of six because of the risk of interference with the development of the brain and organs. As reported by New York City’s Department of Health, “Lead may be harmful to a child’s cognitive and behavioral development. Some large population-based studies have found a statistical association between adverse effects, such as impaired cognitive development, and blood lead levels as low as 10 mcg/dL. Very severe poisoning (levels of 70 mcg/dL or greater) may be associated with severe health effects, such as seizures, encephalopathy, and, rarely, death.” Due to increased awareness and prevention, it has become rare in the United States to see high-level lead exposure cases. Low-level lead exposure can cause reduced attention span, reduced IQ, hyperactivity, learning disabilities, insomnia, hearing loss, and other health and behavioral effects. (New York City Department of Health Lead Poisoning Prevention Program).

B. Worker Safety

According to the New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health, “Although lead poisoning is one of the oldest known occupational diseases, lead exposure continues to affect workers. More than 100 occupations may involve exposure to lead fumes, mist, or dust. Construction workers, in particular, have a high risk of developing elevated blood lead levels. Excess exposure to lead can cause permanent damage to the nervous system, blood-forming system, digestive system, kidneys, and reproductive system. Employers are required to use control methods to reduce exposures to the Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL). These include appropriate ventilation, respirators, and protective clothing.”

C. Levels of Concern

The most recent levels deemed toxic were recorded in the January 5, 2001 edition of The Federal Register, developed by the Environmental Protection Agency. According to these new standards, “lead is considered a hazard if there are greater than: 40 micrograms of lead in dust per square foot on floors; 250 micrograms of lead in dust per square foot on interior window sills and 400 parts per million (ppm) of lead in bare soil in children's play areas or 1200 ppm average for bare soil in the rest of the yard.” (Source: The Federal Register, January 5, 2001).

The level of lead in blood (measured in micrograms per deciliter and reflective of the 1995 Center for Disease Control standards) that is cause for concern is 10 ug/dl. A level of 15 ug/dl is cause for medical monitoring and/or treatment.

Research has been done to determine how often dangerous levels are found in New York City. There were 1,049 new cases of child lead poisoning reported to the New York City Department of Health in 1997 alone. On the following page, is a map depicting the locations of those cases within the five boroughs of New York City (Source: NYPIRG Lead Poisoning Prevention Campaign, http://www.nypirg.org).

III. Analysis of Issue

We can rationalize the cause of geographic variations in reported cases of childhood lead poisoning by examining the average age of buildings in geographic locations. However, by examining the data, there also appears to be variations in the racial and economic demographics, and the level of education of the reported cases of childhood lead poisoning. Below are some graphs depicting the data that researchers have compiled regarding these sociological and economic factors from 1997. (Source: Talbot, Forand, Haley).

We can see that as the percentage of home built pre-1940 increases, the percentage of children with blood lead levels increases. In Upstate New York, the relationship increases at a faster rate than in New York City. As the percentage of blacks increases, the percentage of children with BLLs increases. New York City and Upstate New York have very similar rates for the race factor. As the percentage of high school graduates increases, the percentage of children with BLLs decreases. The relationship is much more apparent for Upstate New York.

To give an idea about the demographics of this problem in the nation as a whole, we’ve developed the following pie charts based on statistics from the Center for Disease Control. They depict the percentage of children with BLLs (Blood Lead Levels) greater than or equal to 10 ug/dl by race/ethnicity and income within the United States from 1991-1994. Units are measured in micrograms per deciliter (ug/dl).

These charts depict the variations among race and class across the United States. The great disparity between the percentage of white children with low-level lead poisoning compared to black children with low-level lead poisoning is alarming. There is an even greater disparity between children with low-level lead poisoning in high verses low economic classes. Perhaps we can hypothesize the notion that the wealthy can afford newer homes (or can afford to hire specialized contractors), which would not contain lead contaminants.

One way to rationalize the correlation of race, economic, and level of education factors with BLL in children, is by examining the geographic locations of these cases and determining the sociological makeup of these regions. We can generalize a conclusion that the geographic areas in which BLL is high, tends to be populated by racial minorities, people who are less educated, and the poor. In all reality, this should come as no surprise to the American public.

IV. The Market and Non-Market Issues

The market environment is made up of contractors, painters, inspectors, risk assessors, and renovators. These are companies hired to inspect and remove the dangerous lead-based paint from the area where it has been identified. The non-market environment is summed up by government institutions and special interest groups that are there to help individuals and educate them about lead-based paint hazards and the best approach to get it removed from their home for their children and their own safety.

A. Government Actions

The government has taken many actions to regulate the evaluation and reduction of lead-based paint hazards. They have funded public awareness programs to recognize and understand the dangers of lead-based paint, especially to children. Two of these governmental institutions are the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) that supports the offices of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control. Another is the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which is dedicated to providing information to the public and to educate them with the National Lead Information Center (NLIC).

The HUD has issued proper regulations to protect young children from lead-based paint in housing that is financially assisted or sold by the federal government. The requirements are based on scientific research, and the experience of the cities and states that have been controlling these hazards in low-income housing through HUD assistance. This new regulation is issued under sections 1012 & 1013 of the Residential Lead-Based

Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, and the Community Development Act of 1992.

The EPA offers the NLIC to provide research and information to the general public and professionals about this topic and its prevention. The NLIC operates under a contract with the EPA. This program sends a general information packet to those that are interested and a toll-free number for additional information and detailed questions that are answered by specialists.

B. Special Interest Groups

The numerous organizations are primarily focused on mass distribution of knowledge to the public of lead-based paint hazards. They offer guidelines for homes that need proper repair and efficient removal from the home or workplace. Some of these groups are the New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG), New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health (NYCOSH), National Health Service Providers’ Listing Systems, and Alliance to End Childhood Lead Poisoning (AECLP).

The NYPIRG is a non-profit advocacy organization focused on environmental preservation, consumer protection, public health issues, and government reform in New York State. A NYPIRG representative is assigned to each of the SUNY and CUNY colleges to educate students about issues of concern and to learn about new areas that should be researched. Much of the research on the lead poisoning issue in New York State has been generated by NYPIRG’s Lead Poisoning Prevention Campaign. NYPIRG’s Lead Poisoning Project offers a map of New York City (presented under Levels of Concern section) with geographic distribution of over 1,000 new cases of childhood lead poisoning reported to the NYC Health Department.

NYCOSH offers a website and telephone number to find news listings and information about job safety and health to enhance occupational standards. This group works with cases of lead-based paint, protection against asbestos and ergonomics, as well as many others.

The National Lead Service Providers’ Listing System has the “Lead Listing”, which was created to help consumers locate qualified lead service providers. These providers include inspectors, risk assessors, contractors, and renovators. This listing is operated by Quantech and ICF Information Technology, Inc. and is supported by the National Lead Assessment and Abatement Council (NLAAC). The AECLP is dedicated to inform the public of this poison and offers guidelines that will educate the individual for the necessary steps needed to hire contractors and renovators, and how they need to do the job in a safe and efficient manner. They serve as an effective resource to federal agencies, policymakers, grassroots groups, the private sector and the media on the technical and policy issues related to lead poisoning. They have achieved success in shifting the national approach to prevention and expanding these resources. This organization is currently working on an international campaign to accelerate the knowledge of the global phase-out of leaded gasoline.

C. Specialized Contractors

Specialized contractors need to be hired by the potential consumer only if they are experienced and are prepared to take the necessary precautions to remove and discard the material in a safe manner. The AECLP has reported frequently asked questions and respective actions that should be taken by a consumer that needs this service done to their home. To begin, the contractors need to be trained in lead safety that is usually sponsored by many trade groups throughout the United States. Also, the AECLP demands a list of contact names to provide evidence of previous jobs involving lead paint removal. The contractor must also agree to clean-up lead dust and paint chips at the end of a job.

When starting the job these painters and contractors should provide additional information, seal off the work area with a heavy plastic, and take out removable items such as a bed or furniture. Precautionary measures during the job, include keeping pregnant women and children out of the work area, and misting water on paint to control dust.

There are also certain actions the consumer must prohibit to occur in their home. Sanders or grinders should not be used unless they have special HEPA filters and hoods. Open-flame torches and heat guns cannot be over 1,100 degrees. Also, paint strippers with methylene chloride, power washing, and sand blasting on paint are prohibited. These special steps are required by the AECLP. Additional safety precautions are utilized by contractors certified by the EPA, because they have special training and skills.

V. Lead Based Paint Legislation

Several important regulations have been passed that affect lead hazard reduction projects. There have been a large number of federal and state regulations passed throughout the years. The next few pages will discuss the various regulations that have been passed concerning lead-based paint in residences.

A. Federal

On a federal level, there have been numerous regulations passed. These include: The Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, which was passed as part of the Housing and Community Development Act. It calls for the reduction of lead in federally supported housing. It also outlines the federal responsibility towards its own residential units and the need for disclosure of lead in residences, even private residences that were previously owned by the federal government and subsequently sold.

The Toxic Substance Control Act was passed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA has jurisdiction over setting standards for lead abatement and controls the handling and disposal of hazardous waste generated during an abatement project. Through the Toxic Substance Control Act, the EPA established standards of lead hazards, a certification program for abatement contractors and work practice standards for abatement activities.

Another regulation, “The Requirements for Notification, Evaluation and Reduction of Lead Based Paint Hazards in Federally Owned Residential Property and Housing Receiving Federal Assistance”, was issued by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to protect young children from lead based paint hazards in housing that is financially assisted by the federal government. The regulation was published in September 1999 and became effective in September 2000. It posed certain hazard reduction requirements based mainly upon scientific research and practical experience of HUD with other lead based paint structures. Specific requirements of the regulation include:

§ Specific hazard reduction requirements that emphasize reducing lead in house dust.

§ Dust testing after paint is disturbed to ensure the home is lead-safe.

The types of housing affected by this regulation include Federally-owned and public housing. These requirements apply to all housing structures built prior to 1978. As mentioned above, the use of lead-based paint was banned nation-wide in 1978 for consumer use.

One of the most recent official regulatory guidelines issued were set by the EPA in January 2001. These new standards were issued with children’s safety as a top priority. This is the first of lead based paint regulations that provide homeowners, school and playground administrators, childcare providers and others with a standard of care to protect children from hazards caused by lead.

Under these new standards issued by the EPA, federal agencies, including HUD, as well as, state and local governments have new uniform benchmarks on which to base remedial actions taken to safeguard children and the public from lead dangers. Under this new standard, lead is considered to be a hazard if there are more than 40 micrograms of dust found per square foot on floors; more than 250 micrograms of lead in dust per square foot on interior window sills, and 400 parts per million of lead in bare soil in children’s play areas. (Source:http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-TOX/2001/January/Day-05/t84.pdf)

In addition to legislation concerning residential structures, there have been regulations passed concerning construction standards. For example, the Regulation of Lead in Construction Standards was issued by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) of the Department of Labor in 1993. This regulation addresses worker safety, training and protective measures. The basis for the regulation is partly that environmental air sampling has shown that unhealthy amounts of lead dust are generated by various activities.

The standard identifies responsibilities that must be carried out before, during and after an abatement activity. For example, an exposure assessment must be done before the project begins, along with a written compliance plan, a medical surveillance and specialized training. These precautionary measures are required to attempt to protect the workers.

B. State Laws

State environmental and public health agencies have the authority to regulate the removal and transportation of lead based paint and the generated waste. The majority of state laws are to protect children from harmful exposure to lead. One law, enacted in June 1999 in New York City, set stricter work regulations for landlords during the removal of lead paint and it required repairs to be made more quickly. Basically, the law required landlords to visually inspect apartments built before 1960 when a child under six lived there, and specified that the city would take over repairs if the landlord failed to make them. Also, it required landlords to supervise and certify their own repairs and gave tenants the responsibility for reporting suspected hazards. This law was recently overturned in October 2000. The judge faulted the City Council for not performing a required review of the law’s environmental impact. (Source: NY Times, October 14, 2000).

VI. The News Media

This issue of lead paint poisoning is newsworthy for New York City for several reasons. First, more than 75% of housing units in New York City were built before 1960. Many people will be either positively or negatively affected by it. Second, a wave of major lawsuits, modeled after the tobacco litigation, have just been filed against health maintenance organizations and the makers of lead paint. Rhode Island filed suit against a handful of companies that used to manufacture lead paint. The state, led by Attorney General Sheldon Whitehouse, is after a multi-million-dollar windfall; other states, including California, are considering their own suits. Sensing the power of the tobacco blueprint, the state has hired Ness, Motley, Loadholt, Richardson & Poole, the South Carolina law firm flush from its tobacco heist and on the prowl for its next contingency fee.

The issue also has plenty conflict and controversy, which media often focus on. First, a bill intended to clarify the city's laws protecting children from lead paint poisoning, one that has the support of City Council Speaker Peter F. Vallone and Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, came under vehement attack in June, 1999 by Council Democrats, who said it favored landlords and the city over children. Normally, a bill supported by the two leaders would sail easily to passage. But, at a raucous public hearing that began in the morning and lasted nearly 10 hours, the Democrats attacked the legislation, carrying out an unusually loud challenge to their Speaker. They said the measure would allow landlords and city regulators too much time to correct hazardous lead violations and would place too much responsibility on the city's poorest residents to report suspicions of

lead contamination. The bill was intended by Mr. Vallone, a Democrat, and Mr. Giuliani, a Republican, as a bipartisan effort to comply with a judge's orders that New York City either rewrite its lead law or begin fully enforcing the existing statute, which is considered outdated.

Then, criticized by landlords as too strict, by tenant groups as too lenient and by co-op and condominium experts as too vague, the new regulations on lead-based-paint that went into effect Nov. 12 as New York City's Local Law 38 of 1999 affect the vast majority of dwellings in the city. While the law has drawn much criticism, there is one thing all interested parties agree upon: The new requirements are significantly different from the requirements of Local Law 1, the lead-paint law that has been in place since 1982. ''This new law will change the way every owner, manager, building employee and contractor in apartment buildings does business in New York City,'' said Dan Margulies, executive director of the Community Housing Improvement Program, an advocacy group for landlords of mid-sized buildings in New York. The law, which is more complex than Local Law 1, basically affects every residential dwelling in the city, and creates numerous new requirements for owners of multiple dwellings that were constructed before 1960.

Later, in September 2000, the EPA notified New York City officials that it believes changes made in the city's lead-paint law last year are critically flawed. It said the law is now likely to result in more lead poisoning of children and called on the city to close the loopholes. The agency acted after pleas from health experts and tenant groups who opposed the city's revisions as dangerous to children, who can suffer mental, physical and emotional impairment and sometimes even death from ingesting lead dust and paint chips. Under EPA rules, work to remove lead paint completely in residences must be done by specially trained workers, and after its completion, a test must be conducted to ensure that no lead dust or other contamination remains. The city law, which deals with lead-control work other than full removal, does not require trained workers or follow-up tests. The federal agency's rules do not cover such work, although the agency is considering extending its regulations.

VII. Conclusion

Lead is a heavy metal used in many materials and products. When absorbed into the body, it is highly toxic to many organs and systems. Lead is a natural element and does not break down in the environment. Once lead has been dispersed and redeposited in the environment, it will remain to poison generations of children unless it is controlled or removed. Even very limited exposures to lead are hazardous to children.

Lead poisoning can cause permanent damage to the brain and many other organs and can result in reduced intelligence and behavioral problems. Lead can also harm unborn children. More than 800,000 children younger than six years old living in the United States have lead in their blood that is above established levels of concern. A large portion of these children are in families of low incomes and are living in old homes with heavy concentrations of lead-based paint.

We have discussed the hazards of lead exposure, as well as, the effects lead based paint has on the market and non-market environments. We have also outlined various special interest groups that have formed over the years and federal and state legislation that has been passed to mitigate the risks associated with lead exposure. While large strides have been made in recent years to protect children and workers from exposure to harmful levels of lead, much more work is needed going forward.

The government has passed many successful laws throughout the years that have mitigated some of the risks associated with lead based paint in architectural structures. We do, however, feel that more state involvement is needed to protect children and workers in New York. We have found that too much responsibility is placed in the hands of the residents of the contaminated homes. Considering that a large majority of occupants affected by lead based paint are from low income families, chances are that these individuals would be hesitant to report unsafe living conditions in fear that they would be asked to move. Since moving to a new location would be costly and unaffordable for low income families, they would be more inclined to remain silent about unsafe living conditions.

Laws that have been proposed in New York in recent years have been supported by many in the hope and belief that young children would be protected. However, many against the legislation have gone on record saying that the costs for the City are to high to endure. Costs for the first year of implementing lead based paint legislation are estimated to be approximately $40 million. A study by the HUD estimates that proper regulations will protect more than two million children from exposure to lead during its first five years. The estimated net benefits from the first five years are $2 billion, mostly from increased lifetime earnings, but also including reductions in medical and special education costs. Additional benefits that have not been estimated in dollar terms include reduced family time and anxiety involved in caring for lead-poisoned children, increased stature and hearing ability, reduced hypertension in later life and reduced juvenile delinquency and crime.

Reducing and controlling lead hazards can be successfully accomplished without destroying the character-defining features and finishes of historic buildings. Federal and state laws generally support the reasonable control of lead-based paint hazards through a variety of treatments, ranging from modified maintenance to selective removal. The key to protecting children, workers and the environment is to be informed about the hazards of lead, to control exposure to lead dust and lead in soil and to follow existing regulations. In all cases, methods that control lead hazards should be selected that minimize the impact to historic resources while ensuring that housing is lead-safe for children.

Our feeling, based upon the research we have done on this subject, is that this topic is one that gains most of its attention through the media. Therefore, it is more emphasized when a large number of cases are reported or a serious level of lead has been uncovered in occupied NYC structures. Since this is the case, as with anything else, minimal steps will be taken by state legislatures until more publicity is attained. We believe that more involvement by activist groups may add pressure to legislative bodies to pass a viable piece of legislation to protect children and workers from lead exposure.

Based upon studies that have been done to determine costs and benefits of implementing necessary legislation, it seems as though the benefits outweigh all of the costs associated with passing and implementing legislation. We feel that legislation needs to place more responsibility on property owners and provide for funding from the city and state where it is necessary for abatement projects. With the proper legislation and supervision by federal and state legislatures, we feel that positive strides can be made and living and working conditions can be improved, and our children can be protected from unnecessary lead exposure. After all, the children are the future and we must do as much as possible to protect our future.

VIII. References

Center for Disease Control – Preventing Lead Poisoning in Your Children, 1991

http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/lead/guide/1997/pdf/chapter3.pdf

Housing Urban Development

http://www.hud.gov/local/nyn/

Alliance to End Childhood Lead Poisoning

http://www.aeclp.org/2/

Office of Lead Hazard Control

http://www.hud.gov/offices/lead/

National Lead Clearinghouse – EPA

http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/lead/nlic.htm

National Lead Assessment and Abatement Council

http://www.leadlisting.org/

Environmental Protection Agency Federal Register 40 CFR Part 745– January 5, 2001- Vol. 66, No. 4 / Friday, January 5, 2001 / “Lead; Identification of Dangerous Levels of Lead; Final Rule”

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-TOX/2001/January/Day-05/t84.pdf

New York City Dept of Health

http://www.ci.nyc.ny.us/html/doh/pdf/chi/chi17-2.pdf

New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health

http://www.nycosh.org/

NYPIRG Lead Poisoning Prevention Campaign

http://www.nypirg.org/nyc_lead_council.htm

Talbot, Forand, Haley

http://cisat.isciii.es/ea/pdf/ea_lead.html

(NICHCY) National Information Center for Children and Youth with Disabilities, Fact Sheet Number 7 (FS7), January 2001

http://www.nichcy.org/pubs/factshe/fs7txt.htm

Lead Paint Bill Is Attacked By Democrats; David M. Herszenhorn; New York Times, New York, N.Y.; Jun 22, 1999; Late Edition (East Coast); pg. B.1

$4 Million Added to the Fight Against Lead Poisoning; Elsa Brenner; New York Times, New York, N.Y.; Feb 21, 1999; Late Edition (East Coast); pg. 14WC.1

MARKET'S NEW WORRY: LAWSUITS ANALYSTS BELIEVE WAVE OF LITIGATION JUST BEGINNING; [Third Edition]; Steven Syre and Charles Stein, Globe Staff; Boston Globe, Boston, Mass.; Oct 20, 1999; pg. E.1

Trial Lawyers' Next Target: The Paint Industry; By Judyth Pendell; Wall Street Journal, New York, N.Y.; Oct 18, 1999; Eastern edition; pg. A.49

Courts new arena for lead poisoning fight; Deborah L Shelton; American Medical News, Chicago; Aug 16, 1999; Vol. 42, Iss. 31; pg. 1, 2 pgs.

Toxic purity: The progressive era origins of American's lead paint poisoning epidemic;

Christian Warren; Business History Review, Boston; Winter 1999; Vol. 73, Iss. 4; pg. 705, 33 pgs Lead poisoning: A major public health concern; Katherine L Cason; Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, Alexandria; 1999; Vol. 91, Iss. 1; pg. 76, 4 pgs

E.P.A. Says Lead-Paint Law May Increase Risks to Children; Bruce Lambert; New York Times, New York, N.Y.; Sep 29, 2000; Late Edition (East Coast); pg. B.6

New Rules Governing Lead Paint; Jay Romano; New York Times, New York, N.Y.; Dec 5, 1999; Late Edition (East Coast); pg. 115

*DISCLAIMER: THIS WORK IS THE PROPERTY OF CARA M. MARSHALL.

Table of Contents

II. Hazards of Lead Poisoning……………………………………………………….3

A. Government Actions

B. Special Interest Groups

C. Specialized Contractors

VI. The News Media