Alliance,
National Center for Healthy Housing Propose Legislative Agenda to Strengthen
EPA Remodeling and Renovation Rule
The Alliance for Healthy Homes (the Alliance) and the National
Center for Healthy Housing (NCHH) have proposed a legislative agenda for Congress,
which is designed to strengthen the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s
(EPA) recent remodeling and renovation rule. The agenda also aims to ensure
that the rule is adequately enforced.
Specifically, the organizations recommend additional protections
for the remodeling and renovation rule, such as clearance of work areas, the
presence of a certified renovator on site at all times, and the prohibition
of the use of volatile paint strippers in an unventilated interior work area
and dry scraping.
The organizations also propose requiring that EPA review
the federal dust lead hazard standard every two years and revise the standard
whenever necessary to adequately protect public health; mandate renovator reporting
of test results to occupants and property owners; expand target housing to include
zero-bedroom units and prevent renovator opt-out from owner-occupied property
where neither a child nor a pregnant woman resides; and require appropriations
of $120 million in FY09, FY10, and FY11 for compliance assistance to ensure
adequate implementation of the rule.
The EPA issued the final remodeling and renovation rule
on March 31; it was published in the April 22 Federal Register. Sixteen
years late, the rule serves as only a first step toward protecting children
and other residents from lead hazards created or exacerbated during remodeling,
renovation, and painting activities. The focus now turns to Congress to push
for more protective standards and to support the cost of compliance assistance.
CDC
Advisory Committee Weighs in on Lead in Consumer Products; CPSC Continues to
Ignore Consumer/Health Advocates While Courting Industry
The Advisory Committee on Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention
(ACCLPP) of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has called
for an immediate ban on the use of lead in products commonly used or worn by
children that are manufactured, sold, or held for sale in the United States.
In a March 3 letter, ACCLPP noted that current regulatory
limitations in the U.S. apply to lead in paint on toys and other articles intended
for use by children, but children's jewelry made from lead alloys, vinyl products,
and ceramic-glazed objects containing lead are not explicitly prohibited. Noting
that virtually all of the recalled products were produced abroad, the ACCLPP
suggested the federal government work to pursue an international ban on leaded
children’s products, starting by convening an international public health
conference on the topic. Concerned that there are no prohibitions for products
recalled in the U.S. due to lead or other hazards from being resold abroad,
the ACCLPP also called for rules or legislation to prohibit this practice.
The letter was released weeks before the Consumer Product
Safety Commission (CPSC) held a day-long “Roundtable” on May 13
to gather input on the use of lead in consumer products in light of pending
congressional action to lower allowable lead levels (see the March/April 2008
Alliance Alert for more on the legislation). Despite the availability of this
relevant input from CDC’s advisory committee, CPSC allocated no time on
the agenda for the CDC, public health or consumer advocates, or state or local
government officials with experience in enforcing lower lead limits. Rather,
CPSC devoted the entire day to its staff’s summaries of the bills, followed
by presentations from eight industry trade groups who largely denied their products
posed health risks and pushed for minimal regulation.
When criticized for failing to include public health and
advocates in the agenda, former anti-consumer attorney-turned-CPSC Director
of Compliance John “Gib” Mullan responded that the CPSC was aware
of the hazards of lead and needed no further input from public health professionals
or advocates. While slighting advocates at home, CPSC staff made it clear that
the agency is interested in the potential impacts of regulations on foreign
factories: A special closed-door listening session with CPSC staff and representatives
of the Chinese government was scheduled to occur the day after the roundtable.
While the CPSC may be uninterested in feedback, there is
a great deal of potential for positive action in Congress. The Alliance will
be sharing the ACCLPP’s recommendations, along with other suggestions
to improve the safety of our children’s toys and other child products,
with key congressional leaders in the coming weeks.
FEMA
Sets Formaldehyde Limits for Disaster Recovery Housing
After months of denial over the dangers posed by high levels
of formaldehyde in disaster recovery housing, such as the trailers used in the
aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
announced in mid-April that it will take what it calls “extraordinary
precautions” to ensure lower levels of the toxic chemical in future trailers.
FEMA pledged that the trailers it intends to acquire for
future disaster recovery efforts will produce formaldehyde emissions similar
to that of conventional housing. While advocates see this as an important step
forward, they point out that even in conventional housing, there are serious
environmental health concerns surrounding pressed wood, plywood, and furniture,
as they off-gas enough formaldehyde to pose a potential health risk. Formaldehyde
can cause eye and respiratory irritation, can exacerbate asthma symptoms, and
can cause cancer with prolonged exposure.
FEMA’s efforts to limit formaldehyde in disaster
recovery housing come in the wake of many months of controversy. Several environmental
organizations including the Sierra Club documented problems with formaldehyde
levels in post-Katrina trailers, and many trailer residents complained of a
variety of health problems related to exposure to high levels of the chemical.
FEMA initially issued a public denial of any problem, though privately, agency
officials expressed consternation with the situation and sought to downplay
its significance in order to avoid litigation. However, after the agency and
the CDC conducted their own tests and verified the environmental groups’
findings, FEMA acknowledged the high levels but continued to insist that trailer
residents were in no danger.
For more information on formaldehyde and efforts to limit
its presence in all types of housing, visit www.sierraclub.org/toxics/.
Important
Changes in 2008 HUD OHHLHC NOFAs
On May 12, HUD published its “SuperNOFA” in
the Federal Register, including announcements for nearly $144 million
in programs administered by the Office of Healthy Homes and Lead Hazard Control
(OHHLHC). The vast majority of funds, $132 million, will fund lead mitigation
and abatement activities in low-income housing. Additional funds are provided
for healthy homes interventions, research, and outreach.
OHHLHC made several substantive changes to this year’s
NOFAs that will strengthen the programs and increase the pool of applicants,
including:
Allowing previous-year recipients of a lead hazard reduction
demonstration or lead hazard control grant to apply for the other type of
grant this year. Previously, cities and states were ineligible for a lead
hazard grant award the year after they won any lead award.
Reducing or eliminating the leveraging and matching
requirements necessary both to apply and to receive the maximum number of
points. (For example, the 2007 lead demonstration grant required a 10 percent
match to qualify and a 100 percent match/leverage to receive the maximum points.
This year, the match may be completely waived upon special application, and
a 35 percent match/leverage earns the most points for all applicants. The
10 percent match to qualify for the outreach grant is eliminated.)
Increasing the scope of the lead outreach grant, allowing
a wider variety of educational activities to be considered under the program.
A number of smaller programmatic
changes were made throughout the NOFAs. In a significant administrative change,
forms for this year’s NOFA will be completed using Adobe Acrobat rather
than the PureEdge viewer familiar from past applicants. Given the history of
grants.gov’s technological challenges, the Alliance strongly encourages
applicants to submit well in advance of the deadlines (July 3 for lead technical
studies and healthy homes technical studies; July 10 for lead hazard control
and LEAP; July 17 for lead hazard reduction demonstration, lead outreach, and
healthy homes demonstration).
Bill Advances in
Congress to Reduce “Environmental Investigation Blood Lead Level”
for Federally Assisted Housing
The U.S. House Committee on Financial Services' Subcommittee
on Housing and Community Development reported out H.R. 3397 on May 14. The legislation
is designed to lower the blood lead level threshold that triggers certain regulations
affecting federally assisted housing.
HUD's lead-safe housing regulation (24 CFR 35) requires
a risk assessment, and if lead hazards are found, completion of lead hazard
control, in public housing and housing receiving tenant-based rental assistance
and project-based rental assistance in response to a child with an "environmental
investigation blood lead level" (EIBLL), which the regulation defined in
1999 as either a test result of 20 micrograms per deciliter (µg/dL) of
blood or two results of 15 µg/dL.
As amended during mark-up, H.R. 3397 establishes and defines
the EIBLL as the lower of either CDC's "elevated blood lead level of concern"
or 10 µg/dL for a single test. Presently, CDC's level of concern equals
10 µg/dL. The bill facilitates automatic updating of HUD's requirement
when CDC updates the level of concern to a lower value. Rep Keith Ellison (D-MN)
is the sponsor; there are 51 co-sponsors.
EPA Proposes
Tougher Standards for Lead in Air; Scientists and Advocates Say Proposal Doesn’t
Go Far Enough
On May 1, EPA proposed tightening the ambient air standard
for lead, but the proposal fell short of what the agency’s own scientists
had recommended. Advocates noted that the proposed standard does not go far
enough to adequately protect public health.
Lead in the air can come from smelters, mining, jet fuel,
and solid and medical waste incinerators—or even from demolition of buildings
painted with lead-based paint. The United States has not revised its ambient
air standard for lead since the 1970s, and reviews of the standard under the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) program, which are supposed to
occur every five years, have been consistently late. The Bush administration
is under a court order to complete its NAAQS review and issue a revised standard
by September.
Environmental health advocates criticized the administration
for proposing a range of lead levels that exceeds the range proposed by a scientific
advisory panel and EPA's own scientific staff. Both groups said the new standard
should not exceed 0.20 micrograms of lead per cubic meter of air (µg/m3),
and agency staff said it could be set as low as 0.02 µg/m3. The agency
is also soliciting comments on setting the standard higher or lower than the
proposed range, up to 0.50 µg/m3.
Lead in the air is a serious problem and can have healthy
homes implications. Lead is a heavy metal, and as such, it easily precipitates
out of the air. This lead can then contaminate soil, where it can remain and
pose a threat for decades to come. Lead in soil can also be tracked into the
home, where it can quickly build up to levels that can poison children and impact
the health of adult residents.
EPA will accept public comment for 60 days after the proposal
is published in the Federal Register, which is expected soon. The agency
will also hold two public hearings on the proposal on June 12, 2008: one in
St. Louis, MO, and one in Baltimore, MD.
New Jersey
Governor Signs Executive Order to Improve Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention
New Jersey Governor Jon Corzine (D) signed an executive
order April 29 to significantly strengthen efforts to eliminate lead exposure
hazards in the state. The order addresses problems identified in a recent report
by the state’s Public Advocate. Corzine’s executive order requires
state agency officials to review and update lead poisoning prevention and response
policies and procedures in order to better coordinate state and local resources
and expand efforts to prevent lead poisoning, treat lead-poisoned children,
assist affected families, and more effectively remediate lead-burdened housing.
A field investigation conducted by the Public Advocate’s
staff found lead dust levels exceeding the federal standard in 85 of 104 homes
tested in five of the New Jersey cities with the highest concentration of lead-poisoned
children: Trenton, Camden, Newark, East Orange, and Irvington.
Most of the addresses tested had already been subject to
lead inspections and/or abatements and had been cleared for occupancy. Investigators
also found shoddy abatement and clean-up work and interviewed families of children
whose blood lead levels were higher after the lead problem in their homes had
supposedly been cleaned up.
In FY 2005, more than 4,000 New Jersey children were diagnosed
with levels of lead in their blood at or above the federal level of concern
of 10 micrograms per deciliter (µg/dL), mostly from ingesting lead-based
paint chips or lead dust from deteriorating paint in their homes.
Texas Attorney
General, Galveston County Quash Right to Know about Lead Hazards in Housing
The Texas Attorney General and the Galveston County Health
District have quashed the public’s right to know about lead hazards in
housing owned by 12 landlords on Galveston Island. The decision cited Texas
and federal law on patient confidentiality.
The Texas case stems from a request filed by the Galveston
Daily News; it is the latest example of confusion over medical privacy laws
such as the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).
However, as the Alliance noted in June 2004, “A documented lead-based
paint hazard or code violation in a given property is a physical condition that
exists in the property completely independently of the property’s occupancy
or the health status of its occupants. As such, data pertaining...to physical
conditions in a property do not qualify as protected health information when
cited or released apart from health data. For example, a list of addresses of
properties that have been cited for code violations or found to contain lead
hazards does not constitute protected health information—regardless of
whether the agency that documented the problem is a covered entity or not and
regardless of the impetus for the inspection. Similarly, covered entities can
release the names of the owners of such properties without impediment from the
Privacy Rule.”
A March 2006 opinion by the Ohio Supreme Court interpreted
HIPAA quite differently. In that case, the court ordered the Cincinnati Health
Department to release lead hazard citations to the Cincinnati Enquirer. That
court noted that the Cincinnati Health Department had improperly restricted
access to lead hazard citation records under an incorrect interpretation of
HIPAA. While not binding on Texas courts, the Ohio decision could be a factor
if the Galveston Daily News decides to pursue the matter further.
Lead
Poisoning Study that Exposed Poor Residents to Biosolids Stirs Controversy
A study of lead in soil conducted in East Baltimore earlier
this decade has stirred intense controversy because scientists used biosolids
to dilute lead-in-soil concentrations and help grow grass as a barrier to exposure
to bare soil in lead-contaminated yards.
The study by the Kennedy Krieger Institute and the Johns
Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health involved spreading highly
treated sewage waste, or biosolids, on yards with bare soil that was heavily
contaminated with lead. The scientists discovered that the biosolids reduced
lead levels in the soil by up to 70 percent, and they also theorized that if
children were to accidentally ingest the treated soil, most of the lead would
be bound to the biosolids and would pass through the children’s bodies
without entering their bloodstreams. All of the treated yards were in areas
of Baltimore that have experienced both high levels of lead contamination in
soil and high rates of poverty. A similar study was conducted in East St. Louis,
IL.
Researchers involved in the study defended their methods
as sound. They said that all residents were informed of the experiments that
were to be carried out, and the scientists noted that all residents gave their
consent. The researchers also claimed that the treated biosolids, a commercially
available compost, were safe. A Kennedy Krieger press statement issued on May
1 said that researchers were “not aware of any research before or at the
time of the study—and indeed today—to suggest that the general use
compost used in this study poses known risks to humans.” The press statement
also noted that the compost was widely used in the region, including at the
White House and the Naval Observatory (the residence of the vice president).
Some scientists unaffiliated with the study were more skeptical.
Several decried the study’s methods because biosolids, even when treated,
can contain other heavy metals, traces of pharmaceuticals, and other chemicals
that could pose a health risk.
Civil rights leaders were also concerned that the study
was conducted without any required health monitoring of the participants. They
also pointed out that since the study appeared to be directed at testing the
effects of composted biosolids on lead contamination of soil, not on how well
they prevented lead absorption into the human bloodstream, researchers could
have used empty lots in Baltimore neighborhoods contaminated with high levels
of lead instead of residential yards.
A U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing
this summer will examine the Baltimore study and others where federally funded
researchers introduced composted biosolids and fertilizers into soils.
New
Study Links Pesticide Exposure to Parkinson’s Disease
A study published in late March in BioMed Central links
a certain type of pesticide exposure to an increased likelihood of developing
Parkinson’s disease. Though the study examined the effects on farm families
that directly apply pesticides to their crops, the study, like several others
before it, may have implications for pesticide application and exposure in and
around the home.
The study’s authors found that those who directly
apply pesticides are significantly more likely to develop Parkinson’s
disease. They also linked the frequency and duration of exposure, as well as
cumulative exposure, to disease risk, with higher frequency, duration, and cumulative
exposure indicating an increased chance of developing Parkinson’s.
The study did not examine the impacts on those who apply
pesticides in and around the home and the impacts of resident exposure. However,
two of the classes of pesticides—organochlorines and organophosphates—that
were found in the study to increase the risk of Parkinson’s disease are
still commonly used in and around the home. Specific research is needed to see
if home-based exposures also increase the risk of Parkinson’s.
Review
of Studies Indicates that Cleaning and Education Alone Are Ineffective at Reducing
Blood Lead Levels
A recent review of several studies indicates that common
childhood lead poisoning prevention strategies, including intensive cleaning
and parental education, are not effective in reducing blood lead levels in children.
The review, published April 16 in the Cochrane Database
of Systematic Reviews, looked at studies that examined the effects of intensive
household cleaning, a number of educational methods, and soil remediation. The
researchers found that education and intensive cleaning alone do not result
in a significant decline in children’s blood lead levels. They did not
have adequate data to evaluate the impact of soil remediation or the combined
effect of these strategies.
The Alliance is concerned that the phrasing of the paper,
especially in its abstract, may imply it reviewed a greater range of interventions
than were actually included. The abstract states that “dust control measures”
are ineffective. However, as used in the review, this refers to intensive cleaning,
generally by trained individuals with a HEPA vacuum. More intensive remediations,
such as the treatment of damaged paint and friction surfaces and lead abatement,
were not included in the review. There is ample evidence, excluded from this
review, that modern lead hazard control interventions that actually address
the hazards, as opposed to cleaning up after them, are effective in preventing
lead poisoning and reducing children’s blood lead levels.
The Cochrane finding—that efforts to clean lead dust
without addressing its source and efforts to educate parents without addressing
environmental factors do not result in decreased blood lead levels—is
not a surprising result. The paper is helpful in providing, however, an important
reminder that interventions must be focused on eliminating sources and pathways
of lead exposure.
The full citation for the article is Yeoh B, Woolfenden
S, Wheeler D, Alperstein G, Lanphear B. “Household interventions for prevention
of domestic lead exposure in children.” Cochrane
Database Syst Rev. 2008 Apr 16;(2):CD006047. The abstract is available at www.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab006047.html.
ELI Updates
State Indoor Air Quality Law Database
The Environmental Law Institute recently updated a database
that summarizes a broad cross-section of state indoor air quality laws. The
online tool now contains information on laws enacted through the end of December
2007.
The database includes summaries of and citations for laws
that address indoor air quality generally, as well as those addressing radon
and mold. Certain types of laws that may have an impact on the indoor environment
are not included; for example, the database does not cover laws dealing with
assessment and cleanup of sites contaminated with hazardous waste or substances.
Similarly, the database does not compile state building codes or state occupational
safety and health codes. Laws that address "green building" are included
if they cover school facilities. With respect to individual pollutants, the
database does not include laws governing lead, asbestos, environmental tobacco
smoke, and pesticides.
Asthma
Regional Council Releases Alliance-authored IPM Policy Paper
Alliance Housing Policy Director Jane Malone presented
a new paper on integrated pest management (IPM) at the "Getting the Bugs
Out: Pest Control Strategies for Affordable Housing" conference sponsored
by the New England Asthma Regional Council (ARC) in Boston on April 17.
IPM is a set of basic property maintenance and repair practices
designed to prevent and eliminate habitat for rodents and insects, as well as
the targeted use of lower-toxicity substances. IPM has been increasingly adopted
in schools and other public facilities and is receiving more attention from
pest control companies, but policies to encourage and require the use of IPM
in housing are relatively rare.
The paper was commissioned by ARC and the Boston Public
Health Commission for the Healthy Pest Free Housing Initiative, which works
with housing, health, advocacy, and academic institutions to reduce pest infestation
and pesticide use in public housing in Boston. The paper reviews the policies
that already exist and discusses promising potential housing-centered IPM policies.
The primary types of policy levers that will effectively
advance IPM in all housing are:
1. Housing maintenance and construction codes that prohibit
infestations and require IPM;
2. State and federal statutes and regulations requiring
that pesticide applicators be trained in and use IPM strategies in occupied
buildings and prohibiting or limiting spraying, fogging, or other broadcast
applications of toxic pesticides;
3. Pesticide registration policies that limit access to
toxic pesticides in liquid form; and
4. State and federal guidance on proper training of contractors
and the importance of using IPM instead of traditional extermination.
Alliance Executive Director Patrick MacRoy traveled to
Rhode Island during the first days of May to present two keynote talks. He discussed
how to apply lessons learned from lead poisoning toward healthy homes policy
at the Rhode Island Healthy Homes Conference on May 1. On May 2, he addressed
the "Power of Place Summit," sponsored by Grow Smart Rhode Island,
on the connection between public health and the built environment.
* * * * *
The Alliance's other staff have also been busy touring
the country to support partnering organizations. Ralph Scott, Community Projects
Director, visited Grand Rapids, MI, and Jane Malone visited Quincy, IL, to help
build local capacity to improve lead poisoning prevention policy and increase
availability of lead-safe work practices. If you'd like more information on
how the Alliance can partner with your program to help build capacity, contact
Patrick MacRoy at pmacroy@afhh.org
or call 202-347-7610.
* * * * *
If you appreciate the news and information in the Alliance
Alert, please consider making a tax-deductible donation to the Alliance! We
rely on donations from individuals and organizations to allow us to do policy
work in Washington and across the country. You can make a one-time donation
or sign up to make a recurring monthly or quarterly donation on our website
at www.afhh.org.
We thank you for your support!
* * * * *
Sign up to receive updates from the Alliance! To receive
the Alliance Alert in your inbox and to subscribe to our listservs (Leadnet
and Healthyhomesnet), visit www.afhh.org/forms/alert_subscribe.asp.
And look for the Alliance Alert to return to its regular monthly publication
schedule starting in July!
Upcoming Conferences
and Trainings
On June 3-5, the Ohio Department of Health and the U.S.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will host the Ohio Lead and Healthy
Homes Conference 2008 in Columbus. The goal of the conference is to educate
health care and environmental professionals, parents, and community leaders
about the current medical, environmental, and programmatic issues of childhood
lead poisoning prevention and the healthy home in Ohio. For more information,
visit www.odh.ohio.gov
or e-mail Melody Sexton at Melody.Sexton@odh.ohio.gov.
HUD, CDC, and the EPA will co-sponsor Building a Framework
for Healthy Housing: 2008 National Healthy Homes Conference from Sept. 15-17
in Baltimore, MD. The conference will focus on key themes that together build
the framework necessary to make homes safe, healthy, and efficient for everyone:
Building Capacity to Deliver Healthy Housing; Mainstreaming Healthy Housing
Principles; Creating Healthy Housing through Research; Developing Enforcement
and Regulatory Strategies; Marketing Healthy Housing; and Educating the Public
and Practitioner. For more information, visit www.hud.gov/offices/lead/2008NHHC.cfm.
